The voluntary withdrawal from NATO and the American kicking out of NATO are two completely different concepts.? The voluntary withdrawal means that you, De Gaulle, don’t want to hang out with NATO at all, and you are determined to part ways with NATO. This shows that all the previous things were done by you, in order to achieve the goal of withdrawing from NATO. In this way, the Americans can fight back and push all the problems to De Gaulle.

But if De Gaulle does not voluntarily withdraw from NATO, and just keeps talking and lets you handle it, what can you do? For the United States, if De Gaulle is foolish, there is really no good countermeasure. Either kick France out of NATO, or endures disgust, agrees that France will continue to stay in NATO.

But no matter which choice it is, it will be extremely painful for the United States. To drive away Gaul *** de Gaulle, it will naturally put the blame on the United States. He can announce: "France has not withdrawn from NATO and does not have the idea of ​​staying away from allies. We are willing to stay in NATO to play a role. The petty Americans insist on driving us away. They just don't allow Europe to have their own opinions, but they just can't stand Europe's good!"

Even more sensational, Charles de Gaulle could say this: "France has always been one with European allies and always stands with European allies. Even if it is driven out of North Vietnam, France is still willing to advance and retreat with its allies!"

It can be imagined that if Charles De Gaulle said this, all the pressure on public opinion would be transferred to the United States, such as hegemony, driving away all his allies, and being arrogant would be all put on the United States. At that time, international public opinion would be very bad, at least Eisenhower could not stand this result.

Then if you don’t drive away the French, just pretend that you didn’t see these bastards? This is not impossible, but it hurts too much, which means that the French have taken advantage of it. Americans don’t like this as a result.

So what choice did the Americans make? The Americans chose the second approach, temporarily tolerating France to stay in NATO, but gave a new warning: "What France did was completely betrayal of NATO. The reason why France did not expel France from NATO was that the US government believed that the mistake was only a very small politician and had nothing to do with the people of the broad country. The US government, which advocated freedom and was willing to maintain freedom and peace, even if it was offended and betrayed, would not forget its responsibility to safeguard democracy and freedom. Therefore, we are willing to protect the French people, and we also believe that the French people will soon see through the true faces of those despicable politicians and understand the greatness of the US government!"

To be honest, this is meaningless, that is, Americans only help themselves verbally find some face. As for whether the French people will appreciate it, it is really hard to say, at least most of them seem to be unwilling to appreciate it for the time being.

De Gaulle was also quite proud of this result. After this confrontation, he achieved his goal almost completely, received more generous assistance from the Soviet Union at a lower cost, expelled the British and American forces in France, and raised the approval rating to a new level. Moreover, with the passage of the new constitution, his power as the president was greatly strengthened. To be honest, he is now the French poisoner.

De Gaulle was finally able to show his strength. After he gained a firm foothold, he immediately began to liquidate the old accounts left by the Fourth Republic, severely attacked the national congressmen who were only able to talk, and reactivated the French state machine.

However, there are still many problems facing Charles de Gaulle, such as Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria. His response to this is to gradually withdraw troops and allow these former colonies to be autonomous or independent. Although this approach has been attacked by many French colonists, the people do not have much objection to this, because these three colonies consume too much financial resources. After giving up them, France's finances were liberated and more money can be invested in social welfare projects, and the people are most concerned about this.

About half of these saved military expenditures were thrown into social welfare projects, one-third were allocated to scientific research institutions, and all the remaining ones were exempted. Therefore, the French people felt that their welfare had been improved and their tax burdens were reduced. Even because military enterprises received more funds, employment opportunities were increased. Do you think they would not welcome such adjustments?

Anyway, De Gaulle did not take much effort to resolve the resistance of those colonialists. His approval rating was rising all the way, and the president's status was becoming increasingly stable.

This is absolutely bad news for Americans. When De Gaulle announced his withdrawal from North Africa, American think tanks generally believed that this would detonate the French politics. De Gaulle would be quickly ousted and everything would return to normal. However, not only did he not step down, his status was becoming increasingly consolidated, which was like a thorn in the throat for Americans.

Yes, France became a nasty fish bone. Within NATO, France just didn't follow the pace of the United States. Almost everything the Americans said they had to oppose it. The Americans wanted to force their weapons standards to NATO, but the French disagreed. Even Britain surrendered to the relevant agreement and passed it. But France just refused to fulfill it, and with a firm statement, it would never accept the standards imposed by the Americans, which made the Americans angry and hated.

After France brought this bad news, the Netherlands, Belgium and Italy were not so obedient, which made the United States have to pay a greater price to win them over. In short, the Americans hated De Gaulle to death.

Eisenhower was furious: "I have to give that bastard some color!"

Why is Eisenhower so angry? The reason is very simple. At NATO's gun caliber selection conference, France said no to NATO's new standard 39 times the caliber 155mm gun, but the French insisted on doing their own. Moreover, on the issue of the Soviet Union, the French also said with a tough attitude that they would not follow the tough American policies, advocated ease of confrontation in Europe, and demanded a peace policy.

These are things that Eisenhower, who actively advocates external expansion, cannot bear, so the President has made up his mind to give the French a little color!

"Reclaim the batch of m48 tanks and don't rent them to the French again!"

Some comrades may find it strange, what happened to this m48 tank? It turns out that after the end of World War II, France, which joined the NATO camp, should undertake military tasks within the NATO framework, which required France to establish a decent armored force. But we know that France's tank industry stopped completely in 1940. Although it was only interrupted for only five or six years, these five or six years were the fastest five or six years of tank exhibition. The technology and design of 1940 were outdated, let alone 1946 and 1944. Moreover, after the war, France's economy was in a tight position and could not provide a large amount of funds to display its armored power, so the only way to catch up with the world's advanced level in a short period of time is to introduce tanks.

After some investigation, France decided to introduce the US m47/m48 tank in 1951. It’s not that the performance of this tank is so ideal, it’s mainly because it’s not expensive. These tanks were rented to France for free, but in fact they are equivalent to military aid. France used these m47/m48 tanks to display a armored force that looked like.

However, now the United States and France have had a stumble. As mentioned earlier, these tanks were only leased by the United States to France for use. In other words, the ownership is still in the hands of the United States. Now that the French are not honest, the Americans decided to give France an eye drop. Therefore, the US government quickly notified France and demanded or ordered the reclaim of the tanks in advance.

How could Charles de Gaulle not know that this is an American retaliation measure. To be honest, he thinks that the Americans are pretty useless. The loan agreement that has just been reached is about to be torn apart. This is not a waste of tricks. And Charles de Gaulle is also a tough person. If you don’t give it to the tank, do you think this will make me surrender? Return all these m47/m48, and I don’t want your trash.

More than 100 m47 tanks that had just arrived in France were returned to the United States within half a year. The ones that were also returned were also a batch of m4 medium-sized tanks given to France by the Americans after the victory in 1945. The meaning of Charles de Gaulle is very simple. Don’t you Americans want to get bored? Okay, I don’t want your trash, I will exchange them all for you, and we’ll break up!

Of course, Charles Charles de Gaulle is tough, but the French armored forces still have to live a life. So, does France have a tank used for publication at this time? To be honest, there is no one. At this time, the only tank that France can produce itself is the am-13 tank with a swing turret. The defense of this thing is almost zero, and it is more like a self-propelled anti-tank gun rather than a serious tank.

Anyway, the effectiveness of this thing is very limited. Not to mention confronting the Soviet armored torrent head-on, it is probably quite dangerous to face the iron flow of the Nazis in World War II. In short, this is a stopgap measure, a thing that France made up for numbers without designing and producing medium-sized tanks.

In fact, the French also knew that their effectiveness was limited, so they originally expected to use the US m47/m48 to slowly expand their medium tanks. But now the Americans have to tear up the agreement, which has forced the French armored department to make adjustments to their major plans.

According to the armored department's estimates, France could not create its own medium tank around 1955. During this period, there must be a three to five-year window period. If you don't want to run naked, you can only introduce it from abroad.

De Gaulle accepted this suggestion and it was inevitable to introduce a small number of medium-sized tanks. The next key question is where to introduce them. The United States definitely doesn’t need to think about it. Even if the United States agrees to sell tanks, De Gaulle will not buy it. He is a strong person!

After excluding the United States, there are only a handful of countries with relatively advanced medium-sized tanks. In fact, there is only one within the framework of NATO. That is the United Kingdom. At this time, the British captain of the 100-man team had already been put into production, and even had improved the mk3 model, which is a mature shelf product.

If France wants to buy it, the problem should not be big. As long as you have money to make money, the British are happy to make a deal. Of course, to be honest, Charles de Gaulle has a certain resistance to introducing British tanks. First, he does not want to be looked down upon by Churchill, and the old guy will definitely laugh at him behind his back. He does not want to encourage the British's "arrogance" arrogance. Secondly, he has a bad sense of British tanks. The low iron turtle is far from the armored thinking that Charles de Gaulle and France advocate at this time (the French admire tanks with strong firepower and better mobility, which is the so-called thinking of using maneuvers for defense). It has to be said that these two thinking is so out of place, even if there is no other choice, Charles de Gaulle does not like British tanks.

But in the end, Charles de Gaulle endured it. Anyway, these tanks were only used to transition emergency responses, and the number of purchases would not be large. Let’s talk about it first!

So France and Britain quickly started negotiations, and both sides were willing to sell and the other were willing to buy. The deal should have been done. But soon unexpected situations occurred. The Americans came forward to disrupt the situation. They put a lot of diplomatic pressure on the UK and forced the UK to terminate the deal, otherwise they would refuse to give Britain more economic aid. Under such huge diplomatic pressure, Churchill had to surrender. He could only regretfully tell Charles de Gaulle that the deal failed.

You can imagine how angry De Gaulle was. It would be fine if you American took back the tanks you helped, but your business of buying tanks for me was ruined. You thought this would be stumped. Do you know if you are looking for embarrassment?

Why did Charles De Gaulle say that Americans are looking for embarrassment? The reason is very simple. As mentioned earlier, France has few channels for purchasing tanks. Only Britain is within the NATO framework. However, after the NATO framework, it is not impossible for anyone to provide first-class tanks. The Soviet Union is completely OK!

In fact, I heard that after the United States and France had a falling out due to tank issues, the Soviet Union soon came to the door to sell its own tanks, and the price was very favorable. However, Charles de Gaulle temporarily politely rejected the Soviet Union's suggestions for political reasons. Now that the United States is forced to do so, he has also made a desperate attempt to not give me m48 or buy a captain of a hundred people. Then I will go directly to the Soviet Union to buy a T55. It depends on where your American face is put!

Soon, at the instruction of Charles de Gaulle, the rumor was released, and the whole of NATO was in full bloom. NATO countries really admire Charles de Gaulle's imagination. How much does it take to do such a thing?

Anyway, the Americans immediately expressed the strongest protests and condemnations, accusing France of betraying NATO. If France does not stop immediately, then the United States and NATO will never sit idly by and will definitely give France the most serious punishment...8
Chapter completed!