No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 January 2025
On 7 March 1966, when President Charles de Gaulle announced France's withdrawal from the military, leadership of NATO, he also called for the removal of American troops from French soil. To this the American Secretary of State retorted, ‘and those in French cemeteries as well?’ The United States saw de Gaulle's action as an insulting and traitorous rebuff of Allied commitments forged during and after the war. For the French, however, the move was considered a justifiable assertion of national sovereignty, having little to do with the Allied ‘Liberation’ of France some twenty years earlier. In this article, I explore French and American perceptions of the Liberation using French anthropologist Marcel Mauss's pathbreaking 1923 work, The Gift. How can applying Mauss's ideas at the transnational level make sense of the meanings, (mis)interpretations, and implications of the Liberation for state actors on both sides of the Atlantic?
1 Dean Rusk as told to Richard Rusk. In: As I Saw It, Daniel S. Papp, ed. (New York: Norton, 1990), 271.
2 Marcel Mauss, trans. W.D. Halls, The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies [Essai sur le don: Forme et raison de l’échange dans les sociétés archaïques] (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2000).
3 Aafke Elisabeth Komter, ‘Gratitude and Gift Exchange,’ in The Psychology of Gratitude, eds. Robert A. Emmons, and Michael E. McCullough (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 195–212. See also the bibliography of work produced by the MAUSS collective: La Revue du M.A.U.S.S. (Mouvement anti-utilitariste dans les sciences sociales). https://www.revuedumauss.com.fr/.
4 Volker M. Heims, Christine Unrau, and Kristine Avram, ‘Gift-Giving and Reciprocity in Global Society: Introducing Marcel Mauss in International Studies,’ Journal of International Political Theory 14, no. 2 (2018): 126–44. See also Harry Liebersohn, The Return of the Gift: European History of a Global Idea. First paperback edition (with corrections) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). ‘Part I. History of a Political Idea: Gifts, Trusts, Reparations, and Other Fetishes of International Solidarity.’
5 Figures for number of American troops from Elodie Dervaux-Desbiens, ‘Le départ des troupes américaines, mars 1967’, website of the Fondation Charles de Gaulle, 2018. https://enseigner.charles-de-gaulle.org/le-depart-des-troupes-americaines-mars-1967/ (consulted 17 May 2021).
6 The ‘nadir’ of French-American relations was for de Gaulle a ‘zenith’. Martin, Joseph Garret, General de Gaulle's Cold War: Challenging American Hegemony, 1963–68 (New York: Berghahn Books, 2013), 97Google Scholar.
7 Dominique de Villepin, then French Minister of Foreign Affairs, made a celebrated speech before the UN Security Council, denouncing a risky military operation based on questionable data, without first going through the proper diplomatic channels of an international organisation created for that very purpose. Villepin speech to the UN Security Council, 14 Feb. 2003. For the English text of the speech, see ‘Statement by France to Security Council,’ The New York Times, 14 Feb. 2003.
8 According to historian Frédéric Bozo, the impact of de Gaulle's withdrawal from the military command of NATO has been much exaggerated; the symbolic impact of de Gaulle's decision far outweighed its practical ramifications. France continued to play a vital role in the Alliance. Frédéric Bozo, ‘De Gaulle, l'Amérique, et l'alliance atlantique. Une relecture de la crise de 1966’, in Vingtième siècle 43: July–Sept. 1994: 55–68. France returned to NATO in full force in 2009. Maurice Vaïsse and Clémence Sebag, ‘France and NATO: A History,’ Politique étrangère, 2009/5 Hors série | pages 139 à 150. https://doi.org/10.3917/pe.hs3.0139.
9 Dean Rusk as told to Richard Rusk. In: As I Saw It, 271.
10 Mendel's addendum to the report of the Committee on Armed Services, Hearings, Reports and Prints of the House Committee on Armed Services, issues 66–89, U.S. Government Printing Office, Jan. 1966, 10387–88.
11 In the addendum noted above, Mendel made a series of recommendations: ‘I would add also that the very minimum the U.S. citizens have a right to expect from the U.S. negotiators is that a position of absolute firmness prevail in their demands that France reimburse the United States and its allies for any cost occasioned by our forced removal from France.’ He also called for ending scientific collaborations, sales of technical equipment, and the sharing of intelligence. Ibid., 10388–89.
12 There was a lengthy and spirited discussion of de Gaulle's announcement on the floor of the French Senate on 27 Apr. 1966. Journal Officiel de la République française, Débats Parlementaires, Sénat (hereafter Journal Officiel).
13 Despite objections from some members, de Gaulle's move garnered general approval in parliament. Martin, Joseph Garret, General de Gaulle's Cold War: Challenging American Hegemony, 1963–68 (New York: Berghahn Books, 2013), 99Google Scholar.
14 M. Louis Jung, Journal Officiel, 27 Apr. 1966, 304.
15 A passing utterance came from an unnamed senator on the left, who cried out during the debate: ‘there is talk of evicting the dead!’ [Un sénateur à gauche. On expulserait les morts!] Journal Officiel, 27 Apr. 1966, 307. All translations mine unless otherwise noted.
16 M. Guy de La Vasselais, Journal Officiel, 27 Sept. 1966, 286, emphasis added. He was not affiliated with any political party at the time. https://[email protected].
17 M. Edouard Le Bellegou, Journal Officiel, 27 Sept. 1966, 297, emphasis added.
18 M. Jean de Broglie, secrétaire d'Etat aux affaires étrangères, Journal Officiel, 27 Sept. 1966, 307, emphasis added.
19 Delaney, Kate, ‘The Many Meanings of D-Day,’ European Journal of American Studies 7, no. 12 (2012): [1–9]CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the occasion of the D-Day commemorations in 2019, French President Emmanuel Macron invoked the key themes of memory, gratitude, and indebtedness in just two sentences: ‘Today, France does not forget,’ Mr. Macron said, adding, in English: ‘We know what we owe to you veterans: our freedom. On behalf of my nation, I just want to say thank you.’ ‘D-Day Remembrance: Trump Mixes Solemnity with Swipes at Mueller and Pelosi,’ The New York Times, 6 June 2019.
20 In this issue, see Ludivine Broch, ‘Emotional Relations in the Early Cold War: Power, Politics and the French Gratitude Train to Americans, 1948–49.’
21 Mark Worthington, Natalie Thiesen, and Geoffrey Bird, ‘The D-Day Commemoration Committee and its Contribution to Commemoration,’ Geoffrey Bird, Sean Claxton and Keir Reeves, eds., Managing and Interpreting D-Day's Sites of Memory: Guardians of Memory (New York: Routledge, 2016), 19–32.
22 ‘M. André Armengaud. When one knows the American temperament, there is no doubt that for them it is a terrible wound of pride. [Quand on connaît le tempérament des Américains, il ne fait pas de doute que c'est pour eux une terrible blessure d'amour-propre.]’, Journal Officiel, 27 Apr. 1966, 302.
23 Acheson served as Secretary of State in the Truman administration and advisor to Lyndon Johnson. ‘Dean Acheson's Statement to the Jackson Committee: The Need for Unity,’ The Washington Post, 28 Apr. 1966 in Hearings, Reports and Prints of the House Committee on Armed Services, issues 66–89, U.S. Government Printing Office, 10615.
24 Letter from US President Lyndon B. Johnson to President Charles de Gaulle, 22 Mar. 1966, Le Centre virtuel de la connaissance sur l'Europe (CVCE), www.cvce.eu.
25 Gardner, Lloyd, ‘Lyndon Johnson and de Gaulle,’ in De Gaulle and the United States: A Centennial Reappraisal, eds. Paxton, Robert O. and Wahl, Nicholas (Oxford: Berg, 1994), 257–78, 262Google Scholar.
26 ‘This is to say that it in no way means a rupture, but a necessary adaptation,’ de Gaulle press conference of 21 Feb. 1966, as quoted in the Report of Special Subcommittee Visiting American Military Installations and NATO Bases in France, 12 Sept. 1966, in Hearings, Reports and Prints of the House Committee on Armed Services, issues 66–89, U.S. Government Printing Office, 10422.
27 ‘Interview with M. Maurice Couve de Murville, French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Regarding the NATO Question, Broadcast over the French Television Network on 17 Mar. 1966,’ in Hearings, Reports and Prints of the House Committee on Armed Services, issues 66–89, U.S. Government Printing Office, 10617.
28 ‘Interview with Secretary Rusk by Paris-Match for publication in the 16 Apr. [1966] issue of that magazine,’ in Hearings, Reports and Prints of the House Committee on Armed Services, issues 66–89, U.S. Government Printing Office, 10605.
29 ‘Interview with M. Maurice Couve de Murville,' 10617.
30 William H. Stoneman, ‘The Man Who Should Remember; Stubborn de Gaulle Forgets Friends,’ Chicago Daily News, 10 June 1965 in The Congressional Record, Senate, Vol. 111, Part 10, 14 June 1965, 13485.
31 ‘Republican Factfinding Mission to Paris on NATO,’ 30 June 1965 in The Congressional Record, House of Representatives, Vol. 111, Part 11, 30 June 1965: 15308–11.
32 Aglion, Raoul, ‘The Free French and the United States, from 1940–1944,’ in De Gaulle and the United States: A Centennial Reappraisal, eds. Paxton, Robert O. and Wahl, Nicholas (Oxford: Berg, 1994), 33–48Google Scholar.
33 ‘Some feared (and others hoped) that the US's perceived lack of gratitude from France and others could have serious implications for the Atlantic order by driving Europe away from the US and into the arms of the Soviets.’ Gustav Schmidt, ‘Divided Europe-Divided Germany (1950–63),’ Contemporary European History, July 1994, Vol. 3, No. 2, Theme Issue: Divided Germany in a Divided Europe (July 1994), 155–92, 164.
34 Address by Hon. George W. Ball, Under Secretary of State, ‘The Larger Meaning of the NATO Crisis,’ 29 Apr. 1966 in Hearings, Reports and Prints of the House Committee on Armed Services, issues 66–89, U.S. Government Printing Office, 10610.
35 Interview with Secretary Rusk by Paris-Match, 10601.
36 Of the fourteen American military cemeteries in Europe (France, Belgium, England, Italy, the Netherlands, Luxembourg), ten are located in France. Five of these are dedicated to the dead of the First World War, and five hold the remains of soldiers killed in the Second World War. Finally, soldiers from both wars are buried in a smaller cemetery in Suresnes, a suburb of Paris. Together they cover a total of almost a square mile of French territory. American Battle Monuments Commission, Sites commémoratifs, booklet, French version, nd., 2.
37 Robin, Ron, ‘Diplomatie et commémoration: les cimetières américains en France (1918–1955)’, Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine 42, no. 1 (Jan.-Mar. 1995): 126–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
38 The importance accorded this commission is reflected in the choice of leadership. General Pershing oversaw the creation of the first spate of cemeteries after the First World War, from 1923–1948. From 1949–1959, the task – and honour – fell to George Marshall. The European headquarters of the ABMC was housed in the US Embassy in Paris. ABMC website, https://www.abmc.gov/about-us/commission.
39 Ron Robin, ‘A Foothold in Europe: The Aesthetics and Politics of American War Cemeteries in Western Europe’, Journal of American Studies 29, no. 1 (Apr. 1995): 55–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021875800026165. See also Ron Theodore Robin, Enclaves of America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016).
40 War tourism in the area has far exceeded the expectations of postwar planners. In 2014, the Normandy beaches attracted five million visitors, 40 per cent of whom were international. Gordon, Bertram M., War Tourism: Second World War France, from Defeat and Occupation to the Creation of Heritage (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2018), 158CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
41 Hulver, ‘Remains in Peace’, 131–35. Families of black soldiers were not offered such visits.
42 The campaign was successful. After the First World War, only 30 per cent of families chose to leave their loved ones buried in France. At the end of the Second World War, 44 per cent opted for permanent burial abroad.
43 AMBC, Sites commémoratifs, 3.
44 Roberts, Mary Louise, What Soldiers Do: Sex and the American GI in World War II France (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013), 40–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
45 Richard A. Hulver, ‘Remains in Peace: American Military Remains and Memory Diplomacy in France, 1918–1972,’ West Virginia University, 2015, 190–91. Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports. 5837. https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/etd/5837.
46 Ibid., 244. Eisenhower also acknowledged the services of French caretakers during the Second Word War.
47 ‘UW students, grave “godfathers” help tell fallen WWII heroes’ stories,’ Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6 Apr. 2014; ‘French Families Adopt U.S. Graves in Normandy,’ National Public Radio, 26 May 2008.
48 ‘Mieux vaut l'allié difficile que la nation satellite’, Journal Officiel, 27 Apr. 1966, 309.
49 M. Louis Jung, Journal Officiel, 27 Sept. 1966, 304.
50 Hall, Todd H., Emotional Diplomacy: Official Emotion on the International Stage (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2015)Google Scholar. See also the work of Barclay, Katie, including ‘State of the Field: The History of Emotions’, History 106, no. 371 (Jan. 2021): 456–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Barclay, Katie, ‘Emotions in the History of Emotions’, History of Psychology 24, no. 2 (2021): 112–15CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.
51 H.R. 1265 was submitted on 13 Mar. 2003. ‘To provide, upon the request of a qualifying person, for the removal of the remains of any United States servicemember or other person interred in an American Battle Monuments Commission cemetery located in France or Belgium and for the transportation of such remains to a location in the United States for reinterment.’ ‘Actions – H.R. 1265 – 108th Congress (2003–4): American Heroes Repatriation Act of 2003.’ Congress.gov, Library of Congress, 26 Mar. 2003, https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/1265/all-actions.
52 Speech of Dominique de Villepin before the UN Security Council, 14 Feb. 2003. It was in this speech that Villepin challenged US assertions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. For the English text of the speech, see ‘Statement by France to Security Council,’ The New York Times, 14 Feb. 2003.
53 Such references to the cycle of indebtedness have a long history, from the debt the US owed to France for Lafayette's support during the War of Independence, to the debt incurred by France for the Liberation and the Marshall Plan. The roles change, the cycle goes on. ‘De la dette à la dépendance,’ in Philippe Roger, L'Ennemi américain. Généalogie de l'antiaméricanisme français (Paris: Editions Points, 2004), 392–438.
54 The tabulations of Second World War deaths in France vary across sources. Most converge around a total in the 560,000 range, with slightly over half of those civilian deaths. The figures for deaths in 1939–40 and the Liberation come from Jean-Paul Barrière, La France au XXe siècle (Paris: Hachette, 2000), 85. ‘For the whole of France, historians estimate that between 150,000 and 270,000 civilians died […] a number equivalent to nearly half the losses of American soldiers of World War Two, but one that until recently has largely been unacknowledged.’ Kate C. Lemay, ‘Gratitude, Trauma, and Repression: D-Day in French Memory,’ in D-Day in History and Memory: The Normandy Landings in International Remembrance and Commemoration, ed. Michael Dolski (Denton, TX: University of North Texas Press, 2014), 173.
55 Hilary Footitt, ‘Liberated and Liberators,’ in War and Liberation in France, ed. Hilary Footitt (London: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2004), 175–92.
56 Ibid., 182–83, 189–90. The most serious grievances of the local populations concerned provisioning and consumption.
57 Ibid., 184–85.
58 Kate C. Lemay, ‘Gratitude, Trauma, and Repression: D-Day in French Memory,’ in Footitt (ed.), D-Day in History and Memory, 159–87.
59 Ibid., 166–67.
60 The implications and complexity of a ‘bodily’ gift are nowhere more evident than in the case of organ donation. Like the sacrifice of lives, the gift of a living organ produces a debt that is impossible to repay. According to Godbout, however, the greater risk to the recipient – even beyond that of the debt – is a loss of identity. Jacques T. Godbout, ‘The Gift Beyond Debt,’ Revue du MAUSS 27, no. 1 (2006), 91–104. This analogy of organ donation to the sacrifice of soldiers’ lives is not as far-fetched as it may seem. Both have profound implications for the identity of the receiver. For a summary of the extensive literature on Mauss's gift and ‘bodily’ donations, see C. Sharp and G. Randhawa, ‘Altruism, Gift Giving and Reciprocity in Organ Donation: A Review of Cultural Perspectives and Challenges of the Concepts,’ Transplantation Reviews 28, no. 4 (2014): 163–68. See also Mary Anne Lamanna, ‘Giving and Getting: Altruism and Exchange in Transplantation,’ Journal of Medical Humanities 18, no. 3 (Fall 1997): 169–92, and Malcolm Voyce, ‘Mauss and Organ Transplants: Ideas of Connectivity between Recipients and Donors and the “Spirit of the Gift”,’ OBM Transplantation 4, no. 4 (2020): 1–9. doi:10.21926/obm.transplant.2004124.
61 Renée C. Fox and Judith Swazey, Spare Parts: Organ Replacement in American Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992). Quoted in Godbout, ‘The Gift Beyond Debt,’ 5.
62 Henry A. Kissinger, ‘The Illusionist: Why We Misread de Gaulle,’ Harper's Magazine 230, no. 178 (Mar. 1965): 69–77, 70, in Henry A. Kissinger papers, part II, box: 277, folder 17, Manuscripts and Archives, Yale University Library, emphasis added. http://yul-fi-prd1.library.yale.internal/catalog/digcoll:564736.
63 The contrasting European and American legacies of the Second World War are richly described by Mary Nolan, The Transatlantic Century: Europe and America, 1890–2010 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 167–71.
64 Nos Amis les Français: Guide pratique à l'usage des GI's [sic] en France, 1944–1945 [Our Friends the French: A Practical Guide for GIs in France], Balbino Katz, ed. (Paris: Le cherche midi, 2003). This is a French translation of the original English-language document. Unfortunately, the publisher provides no information about the source or location of the original document.
65 ‘This little book is intended to help us understand an ally, the French. It is not about “defending” the French, nor is it intended to ridicule those of our compatriots who don't like them. We simply want to try to dispel certain misunderstandings or subjects of irritation.[ …] [T]his little book lists the criticisms or complaints most frequently expressed by our soldiers in Europe whenever the subject of the French comes up.’ Nos Amis les Français, 9.
66 Ibid., 7, emphasis added.
67 Ibid., 31–32.
68 Emphasis added. The expression first aired on the show in 1995. ‘Simpsons quotes enter new Oxford Dictionary,’ The Daily Telegraph, 24 Aug. 2007. See also ‘Wimps, weasels and monkeys – the US media view of “perfidious France”,’ The Guardian, 11 Feb. 2003.
69 Stephanie Anderson applies this same trope but extends it to the European Union. Stephanie Anderson, ‘From “Soft” Power to “Hard” Power: The Gendered Militarization of the European Union,’ in Gender, War, and Militarism: Feminist Perspectives, eds. Laura Sjoberg and Sandra Via (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2010), 30. According to Hilary Footitt, the relationship ‘[took] on the symbolic form of protective foreign soldier and weak young French woman.’ Hilary Footitt, ‘Liberators and Liberated,’ in War and Liberation in France, ed. Hilary Footitt (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 176.
70 ‘[F]eminization is something that can happen to anyone. It is only that we assume it is natural to happen to people identified as women.’ Catherine MacKinnon (1993), as quoted by Laura Sjoberg and Sandra Via in the introduction to their co-edited volume. Laura Sjoberg and Sandra Via, eds., Gender, War, and Militarism: Feminist Perspectives. Foreword by Cynthia Enloe (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2010), 3.
71 Feminist scholars of international relations, geography, history, and cultural studies have produced an impressive body of literature on the gendering of nations. They include Tamar Mayer, ed., Gender Ironies of Nation: Sexing the Nation (London: Routledge, 1999); Ruth McElroy, ‘Introduction: Sexing the Nation – The Spaces of Belonging(s),’ European Journal of Cultural Studies 5, no. 3 (2002): 251–55; Jessica Gienow-Hecht, ‘Nation Branding: A Useful Category for International History,’ Diplomacy & Statecraft 30, no. 4 (Winter 2019): 755–79.
72 ‘France, US will make up, says Colin Powell,’ Al Jezeera News, 26 Apr. 2003. The title of the article was chosen by the editorial staff, again showing the pervasive use of gendered language to describe the two countries and the nature of their relationship.
73 ‘C'est l'histoire d'un couple qui traverse une mauvaise passe. [It's the story of a couple going through a rough patch].’ ‘Paris-Washington, le dessous d'une rupture,’ Le Monde, 26 Mar. 2003.
74 Charles Cogan, ‘The Iraq Crisis and France: Heaven-Sent Opportunity or Problem from Hell?,’ French Politics, Culture & Society, 22, no. 3 (Fall 2004), 120–34.According to Cogan, ‘th[e] oft-stated notion of France as a “feminine” country is in large part traceable to France's court culture, heavily influenced by women, and which has had a deep and lasting effect on French language, wit, and manners…,’ 120.
75 Kevin Cody, ‘Colin Powell in Redondo Beach in 2005 speaks about Iraq, Putin, China, and Palestine,’ Easy Reader, 18 Oct. 2021. Another source quotes Powell: ‘The US and France have been married … for 225 years and we have been in marriage counselling for all of the 225 years.’ ‘France, US will make up, says Colin Powell,’ Al Jazeera News, 26 Apr. 2003.
76 The comment was in response to Bush's post-9/11 ‘axis of evil’ speech.
77 Interview de M. Hubert Védrine, ministre des affaires étrangères, à l’émission ‘L'Invité de Richard Arzt’ de RTL le 20 Feb. 2002, Vie-publique.fr, http://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr, le 22 Feb. 2002.
78 Telegram from the President to the Secretary of State, 18 Jan. 1943, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1917–1972, Volume III, Public Diplomacy, World War II (in preparation), Document 433. https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1941-43/d433.
79 Anna Cornelia Fahey, ‘French and Feminine: Hegemonic Masculinity and the Emasculation of John Kerry in the 2004 Presidential Race,’ Critical Studies in Media Communication 24, no. 2 (2007): 132–50.
80 Dan Amira, ‘Is John Kerry Afraid to Speak French on American Soil?,’ The Intelligencer. New York Magazine, 27 Feb. 2013.
81 Anna Cornelia Fahey, ‘French and Feminine: Hegemonic Masculinity and the Emasculation of John Kerry in the 2004 Presidential Race,’ Critical Studies in Media Communication 24, no. 2 (2007): 138 ff.
82 Alan S. Rosenthal, ‘The Gender-Coded Stereotype: An American Perception of France and the French,’ The French Review 72, no. 5 (Apr. 1999): 897–908.
83 Mary Louise Roberts, What Soldiers Do. Roberts’ work has radically upended notions of the harmonious relations between French and Americans in the Liberation and post-Liberation phase (1944–46). For a study of rape at the end of the Second World War, see Robert J. Lilly, Taken by Force: Rape and American GIs in Europe during World War II (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007).
84 ‘Thirteenth press conference held by General de Gaulle as President of the Fifth Republic in Paris at the Élysée Palace, 21 Feb. 1966,’ Hearings, Reports and Prints of the House Committee on Armed Services (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966), 10650.
85 The novel by Pascal Quignard, L’ Occupation américaine: roman (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1994), depicts the ambivalent response of the French population to the presence of Americans living on the air force base at Châteauroux in central France, from the 1950s until the departure of the Americans at de Gaulle's behest in 1967. For commentary on the novel, see Bruno Thibault, ‘L'Autrefois et le Jadis dans “L'Occupation américaine” de Pascal Quignard,’ French Forum 41, nos. 1–2, Special Issue: RÉSURGENCE/OUBLI (2016): 115–26. Some French welcomed the presence of American bases on French soil. American goods and culture were a source of wonder while the military presence provided jobs that revived the French economy, according to Jean-Marc Gonin, ‘Quand les Ricans étaient là,’ Le Figaro, 4 Apr. 2009.
86 Michel Winock, ‘Les attitudes des Français face à la présence américaine (1951–1967),’ Historical Reflections/Réflexions Historiques 23, no. 2 (Spring 1997): 251–58.
87 President Ronald Reagan – 6 June 1984. D-Day speech at Pointe du Hoc. https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/remarks-united-states-france-ceremony-commemorating-40th-anniversary-normandy.
88 Remarks by President Obama at the 70th Anniversary of D-Day, Omaha Beach, Normandy. ‘Barack Obama's D-day speech. The full text of the US president's address in Normandy,’ The Guardian, 6 June 2014.
89 Richard Kuisel, ‘Coca-cola au pays des buveurs de vin,’ L'Histoire 94 (novembre 1986): 23–28, and Richard Kuisel, The French Way: How France Embraced and Rejected American Values and Power (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011).
90 ‘McDomination’ is defined as ‘the American colonisation of the French food market and, worse yet, the French palate.’ Jennifer Willging, ‘Of GMOs, McDomination and Foreign Fat: Contemporary Franco-American Food Fights,’ French Cultural Studies 19, no. 2 (2008): 200, emphasis added. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957155808089665. See also Rick Fantasia, French Gastronomy and the Magic of Americanism (Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2018).
91 Ulrike Lindner and Dörte Lerp, ‘Introduction: Gendered Imperial Formations,’ in New Perspectives on the History of Gender and Empire Comparative and Global Approaches, eds. Ulrike Lindner and Dörte Lerp (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2018), 1–27; Philippa Levine, ed., Gender and Empire (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007); Julia Clancy-Smith and Frances Gouda, eds., Domesticating the Empire: Race, Gender, and Family Life in French and Dutch Colonialism (Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press, 1998).
92 Bound up with the notion of the American colonisation of France are notions of dependency, inferiority, and most important, indebtedness. Philippe Roger, L'Ennemi américain. Généalogie de l'antiaméricanisme français (Paris: Editions Points, 2004), 392–438.
93 Studies of relationships between wealthy and poor countries bear this out and explain why some needy recipients refuse the largesse of donors. To recalibrate the unequal power relationship between rich donor countries and poor countries on the receiving end, one policy expert proposes a partnership arrangement, giving recipients agency in decision-making, food allocation and distribution. In this way, accepting humanitarian aid would not require recipients to cede their identities as independent actors or to lose a part of themselves in the transaction. Likewise, the US provided some aid to Europe after the First World War indirectly under the auspices of the UNRRA in an effort to create a buffer between benefactors and recipients. In this issue see Elizabeth Piller, ‘(In)gratitude, US Ascendancy and Transatlantic Relations after the First World War,’ Contemporary European History, First View, 1–53, 29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S096077732300053X.
94 ‘I love you. Me neither.’ The expression is commonly used to signify miscommunication in a couple. In Europe, the feeling was mutual. Tuomas Forsberg, ‘The Rise and Fall of Criticism towards the United States in Transatlantic Relations: From Anti-Americanism to Obamania,’ in The Routledge Handbook of Transatlantic Security, eds. Jussi Hanhimäki, et al. (London: Taylor and Francis Group, 2010), 218–30.
95 Simon Koschut, ‘Emotional (Security) Communities: The Significance of Emotion Norms in Inter-Allied Conflict Management,’ Review of International Studies 40 (2014): 533–58. I am indebted to Albertine Bloemendal for this reference.
96 Nos Amis les Français, 37.
97 ‘Barack Obama's D-day speech. The full text of the US president's address in Normandy,’ The Guardian, 6 June 2014. The 9,387 Americans to whom he refers is the number buried in the Normandy American Cemetery at Colleville-sur-Mer.
98 Lauren Provost, ‘François Hollande et les États-Unis: ‘Allié ne veut pas dire aligné,’ HuffPost (French edition), 13 Feb. 2012. The expression has become a sort of diplomatic mantra. Claire Gatinois and Philippe Ricard, ‘Emmanuel Macron visite les Etats-Unis en allié non aligné,’ Le Monde, 30 Nov. 2022. ‘Allied does not mean “aligned,” […] For his visit to be a success, Emmanuel Macron will have to deploy his diplomatic skills, assert his position of “non-alignment” without eroding the confidence of the “American friend” at a time when Russia's invasion of Ukraine is exposing the vulnerability of the European Union.’