Buckingham Palace - and people in both Britain and Canada - expressed their outrage earlier this week after France snubbed the Head of State of both those two nations - the Queen - over next week's D-Day commemorations.
Aides said senior royals had repeatedly made clear their eagerness to support the historic 65th anniversary events in Normandy, which involved 83,000 British and Canadian troops.
But French officials admitted they had never had any plans to invite members of the British Royal Family.
They said President Nicolas Sarkozy was focused on the 'main event' of hosting U.S. President Barack Obama.
The failure to invite the Queen - who is head of state of both Britain and Canada - will be seen as an insult to the memory of the 17,556 British and 5,316 Canadian troops who died to free France and are buried there.
The figure does not include many airmen and sailors whose bodies were never found.
Presidents Obama and Sarkozy will attend the main international events at St Mere Eglise - the first town liberated by U.S. paratroopers - and Utah Beach, one of the two American landing sites.
France's equivalent of BBC1 plans blanket coverage in a day-long programme called Barack Obama On The Invasion Beaches.
Publicity for it makes no mention of British or Canadian troops.
It says: 'Surrounded by French and American veterans, the presidents Obama and Sarkozy will pay homage to the thousands of Americans who lost their lives on the Normandy beaches in their fight for liberty.'
The French president has been branded 'Sarko the American' over his attempts to curry favour with Washington. Relations with the White House have soured in recent weeks, and many believe he is pinning his hopes of repairing them on the D-Day celebrations.
It's bad enough Hollywood movies giving credit to Americans for things that other people did.
The Great Escape? On screen, it's a bunch of brave Yanks plus a few plucky Brits. In reality, not a single American was involved.
Most famous of all is Saving Private Ryan, Spielberg's D-Day epic, which presents the Normandy landings as a U.S.- only affair, without a Brit or Canadian in sight.
It was the same with the film U-571. On screen, American heroes capture a U-boat, find the crucial code-breaking machine and win the war.
In reality, the British had captured the machine and were cracking the code before America had even entered the war, while U-571 was sunk by the Australians (the screenwriter did have the grace to apologise).
They've been at it again at this month's Cannes Film Festival where Quentin Tarantino has rewritten the story of BRITAIN'S Jewish commandos and made them American for his new film, Inglourious Basterds.
But this affair is something else.
No matter that the Queen is the ONLY head of state alive who served in uniform during that war (her husband is also a WWII veteran - and many foreigners think the Royals have done nothing for Britain). No matter that her father's British and Canadian troops stormed three out of the five Normandy beaches - codenamed Sword, Juno and Gold - while the Americans invaded two - Omaha and Utah.
Saving France cost the lives of 17,556 British and 5,316 Canadian servicemen.
The Queen also travels light compared to most world leaders. She is, for example, the only head of a major industrialised nation NOT to have her own jet. She does not (unlike US presidents) come surrounded by hundreds of men with suits, sunglasses, guns and talking cufflinks. It would not be difficult to accommodate her logistically.
But now it seems as if the French have had a change of heart, but the Queen will still not attend.
NO member of Royal family to attend D-Day 65th anniversary because they did not receive official invite, says Palace
By Matthew Hickley and Matt Sandy
28th May 2009
Daily Mail
This insult to the Queen - the only living head of state in the world who actually served in the war - ROBERT HARDMAN: This insult to the Queen - the only living head of state who actually served in the war | Mail Online
What did YOUR dad do in the war Sarkozy? (He fled TO Germany as the Third Reich collapsed) - So what did YOUR dad do in the war Sarkozy? (He fled TO Germany as the Third Reich collapsed)| Mail Online
Neither the Queen nor any other member of the Royal family will attend the D-Day commemorations in France next week, Buckingham Palace said today.
The announcement comes after the French belatedly bowed to British anger yesterday and announced that the Queen was 'naturally welcome' at the 65th anniversary.
But the statement fell well short of a formal invitation, and today Buckingham Palace confirmed that neither the Queen nor any other Royal will be present because they have not been officially invited.
The Queen extends hospitality to France's President Sarkozy in March 2008. She had only been given nine days' notice to attend their D-Day events
In any case, members of the Royal Family normally take up to six months to prepare for such an event abroad, with every detail of the schedule, security and official protocol worked out.
A spokeswoman said: 'Neither the Queen nor any other members of the royal family will be attending the D-Day commemorations on June 6 as we have not received an official invitation to any of these events.
Princess Elizabeth served with the Auxiliary Territorial Service during World War II. The Queen is the only living Head of State to serve during the war.
Prince Philip, the Queen's husband, took part in the Battle of Crete and the invasion of Sicily
'We would like to reiterate that we have never expressed any sense of anger or frustration at all, and are content with all the arrangements that are planned.'
Prime Minister Gordon Brown will now represent the UK at events in Normandy on June 6 to mark the 65th anniversary of the landings.
The news that the Queen will now not be attending the ceremony will disappoint many British D-Day veterans who yesterday said that they would be thrilled if any senior member of the Royal family could attend.
With the average age of D-Day veterans now nearing 85, next weekend's 65th anniversary will mark the last major gathering of British survivors of the battle to liberate France.
The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh visit the Bayeux Cemetery on the 50th anniversary of the D-Day landings
William Feller, 83, from Hull, told the Mail: 'To me, the Queen should be there. She is our sovereign, our head of state and she has attended the other anniversaries.
We would all much prefer the Queen to be there rather than Gordon Brown.'
The dramatic 11th-hour U-turn left Downing Street and the Palace both insisting that Her Majesty's possible absence from the high-profile commemorations was not their fault.
Gordon Brown faced mounting criticism as MPs and veterans accused him of being out of step with the public mood and failing to sort out the issue with the French months ago.
The Prime Minister's spokesman insisted that during months of discussions with Paris and Buckingham Palace, he had believed all along that the Royal Family were 'content' not to be involved in the plans.
But Palace officials maintained that no formal invitation to Normandy had ever been received and that protocol and security considerations made it impossible for the Royal Family to invite themselves or turn up on the beaches unannounced.
As President Sarkozy kicked the ball firmly into Britain's court, Downing Street was left with a growing political headache and officials were scrambling to find a last-minute compromise.
The Queen meeting British war veterans in Normandy during the 60th anniversary to commemorate the D-Day landings
Until the Daily Mail's campaign on behalf of the veterans earlier this year, government ministers and officials had stuck to the mantra that only the 25th, 50th, 60th and 100th anniversaries of major battles were given official sponsorship and support.
They repeatedly insisted that the 65th anniversary was simply not significant enough and refused the veterans' requests for financial help.
Faced with a public backlash, Gordon Brown reversed his position, signalling that he would attend in person and offering help to the veterans.
It was noted, however, that he changed his mind only after it became clear that U.S. President Barack Obama would travel to France to represent his country at the commemoration.
During the 60th anniversary events in 2004, the Queen and Prince Charles were in Normandy, and 1,200 British veterans marched proudly past the Queen.
Enlarge
On Tuesday President Sarkozy's officials had made clear they had never planned to invite the Queen, and provoked intense anger by describing the entire commemoration as 'very much a Franco-American occasion'.
But yesterday Elysee Palace spokesman Luc Chatel said the Queen had been 'naturally welcome all along'.
He claimed it was up to the British to say who they wanted to attend the various events, adding: 'It is not for France to designate British representation.'
Tory defence spokesman Gerald Howarth said: 'Given Britain's massive contribution to the liberation of Europe it is scandalous the British government has failed to secure a place for the Royal Family.
'It is an insult to the 83,000 British and Canadian troops who landed on D-Day --alongside 73,000 Americans - and the hundreds of thousands who followed.
Falklands War veteran Simon Weston said: 'Mr Brown just seems to miss the point when it comes to the military, and anything to do with veterans seems to be a grudging afterthought.'
********************************
A diminutive egomaniac, the stain of Nazi collaboration and why the French can't forgive us for saving them in the War
By Stephen Glover
28th May 2009
Small-minded: French President Nicolas Sarkozy has ignored Britain's and Canada's sacrifice
The French government's decision not to invite the Queen to next week's
commemorations of the 65th anniversary of D-Day was an unbelievable insult to her.
It will also appall and sadden the surviving British veterans of one of the most momentous days in British and world history.
The partial rowing back by the French government yesterday, and its graceless statement that the Queen would be 'welcome', hardly undoes the damage that has been done. Even now it is far from clear whether France really wants Her Majesty to attend the celebrations.
Who is to blame for this incredible farce? Gordon Brown and No10 bear a good deal of the responsibility.
The Prime Minister and ministers had refused to treat the 65th anniversary as a major event until shamed into doing so by this newspaper earlier in the year. That he should have needed reminding of its importance was a very black mark against him.
Now he is scheduled to take part in next week's celebrations in Normandy, but it does not seem to have occurred to him or anyone else in the Government that, as Head of State, the Queen had a much greater claim to attend.
She is our representative and, as someone who actually served in the war, her presence in Normandy would carry extra significance for veterans and the rest of the country.
Perhaps the Palace should have pushed a little harder for the Queen to be included in the celebrations, but there is only so much one can do to secure an invitation that has not been proffered, and it was No 10's responsibility to make the French government understand the enormity of its lapse. Only an outcry by the Press has had any impact on French thinking.
The biggest culprit is Nicolas Sarkozy, the half-French, half-Hungarian President of France.
Along with his wife Carla Bruni, whose chief interest in life appears to be showing off her body to the best possible advantage, ideally in a state of undress, this diminutive egomaniac is increasingly becoming an embarrassment to his countrymen, and a laughing stock to the rest of Europe.
Sarkozy was not born when some 156,000 Allied servicemen launched their epic assault on Nazi-occupied Europe on June 6, 1944.
Soldiers land on the French beaches on June 6, 1944
Nonetheless, he should know that British and Canadian troops stormed three out of five Normandy beaches on that day, and that together they comprised more than 50 per cent of the invading forces.
It is not too much to say that without the involvement of this country there would have been no invasion of France. Had Britain not won the Battle of Britain, and stood alone for 18 months while America sat on the sidelines and France lay beaten and humiliated by the Nazis, there could have been no invasion of Normandy, and no liberation of Europe.
Saving France cost the lives of 17,556 British and 5,316 Canadian servicemen.
Sarkozy, of course, is well aware of the British sacrifice but, by failing to offer a personal invitation to the Queen, he has deliberately chosen to ignore it. He has, however, asked President Barack Obama to attend as the Head of State of Britain's major partner in the invasion.
As an enthusiastic pro-American - not a preference shared by many recent French Presidents - he is keen to be pictured standing shoulder to shoulder with the leader of the free world. Britain's role as the co-saviour of France is conveniently forgotten.
One would like to pin all the blame on Sarkozy, but I am afraid his crass behaviour is symptomatic of a deeper national psychosis about the war on the part of the French State.
That is not to say that previous French presidents would necessarily have behaved as he has done - only that his rewriting of history is a familiar feature of post-war official French thinking.
The rapid capitulation of the French army to the Germans in May and June 1940 was the biggest shock in modern French military history - more momentous than the country's defeat in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 to 1871, more traumatic, in terms of national pride, than her terrible losses in World War I.
If the humiliation of France, and her realisation that she was a very puny power by the side of Germany, were bad enough, they were overshadowed by subsequent events.
Germany set up a puppet government in Vichy France which collaborated with the Nazis. Its worst crime among many was the deportation of 76,000 French Jews to Nazi Germany, of whom just 2,500 ever returned.
It was only earlier this year, nearly 64 years after the end of the war, that the Council of State in Paris finally ruled that France was legally responsible for this appalling betrayal of French citizens. The reluctance to accept France's collaborationist role has been a blemish on the country's post-war history.
Admittedly, there was the Resistance, though its activities were perhaps not as extensive nor as effective as some French people like to maintain. And there were the Free French based in London, under the leadership of Charles de Gaulle, whose troops were allowed by the Allies to enter Paris first as liberators in 1944, though they had played a negligible role in the freeing of their country.
Humiliated by the Nazis, tarnished by collaboration, France was nonetheless encouraged by the Americans and the British to resume her role as a world power after 1945, with a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, and all the rights and responsibilities of a victorious country - which was, of course, exactly what she had not been.
Not that the French State ever showed much gratitude towards Britain for this indulgence. Charles de Gaulle, who had been nurtured by Britain during our darkest days, later responded by blocking our membership of what was then known as the Common Market. Some may not regard this as a terrible deprivation, but it was certainly intended by De Gaulle to be so.
One aspect of the wholesale rewriting of the history of the war by the French State has been to underplay or even to forget the role of Britain as one of the country's two main liberators.
President Sarkozy's snubbing of the Queen should be interpreted within this ignoble tradition. It is as though France can never forgive Britain for saving it.
What can also be said with some confidence, though, is that most French people, inasmuch as they know about the war, do not share this churlish and ungrateful attitude towards this country.
Especially in Normandy, there remains a widespread appreciation of the role of British soldiers as liberators. Veterans who travel there are always welcomed by the French, who, unlike their government, do not suffer from selective amnesia.
President Sarkozy is a small man in more ways than one who likes to play politics.
Like Hollywood, which evidently believes that D-Day was an all-American enterprise, he chooses to forget the sacrifices of British soldiers.
Not asking the Queen - though let's hope that she or Prince Charles may still be prevailed upon to attend - was an insult to her and to the veterans and this country. In the end, though, it should not matter too much to any of us.
These now elderly men must know the inestimable gift they and their fallen comrades bestowed in saving France and Europe.
When President Sarkozy is long forgotten, they will still be remembered and honoured.
He may not care, and Gordon Brown may sometimes fail to understand, but this country will never forget them.
dailymail.co.uk
Aides said senior royals had repeatedly made clear their eagerness to support the historic 65th anniversary events in Normandy, which involved 83,000 British and Canadian troops.
But French officials admitted they had never had any plans to invite members of the British Royal Family.
They said President Nicolas Sarkozy was focused on the 'main event' of hosting U.S. President Barack Obama.
The failure to invite the Queen - who is head of state of both Britain and Canada - will be seen as an insult to the memory of the 17,556 British and 5,316 Canadian troops who died to free France and are buried there.
The figure does not include many airmen and sailors whose bodies were never found.
Presidents Obama and Sarkozy will attend the main international events at St Mere Eglise - the first town liberated by U.S. paratroopers - and Utah Beach, one of the two American landing sites.
France's equivalent of BBC1 plans blanket coverage in a day-long programme called Barack Obama On The Invasion Beaches.
Publicity for it makes no mention of British or Canadian troops.
It says: 'Surrounded by French and American veterans, the presidents Obama and Sarkozy will pay homage to the thousands of Americans who lost their lives on the Normandy beaches in their fight for liberty.'
The French president has been branded 'Sarko the American' over his attempts to curry favour with Washington. Relations with the White House have soured in recent weeks, and many believe he is pinning his hopes of repairing them on the D-Day celebrations.
It's bad enough Hollywood movies giving credit to Americans for things that other people did.
The Great Escape? On screen, it's a bunch of brave Yanks plus a few plucky Brits. In reality, not a single American was involved.
Most famous of all is Saving Private Ryan, Spielberg's D-Day epic, which presents the Normandy landings as a U.S.- only affair, without a Brit or Canadian in sight.
It was the same with the film U-571. On screen, American heroes capture a U-boat, find the crucial code-breaking machine and win the war.
In reality, the British had captured the machine and were cracking the code before America had even entered the war, while U-571 was sunk by the Australians (the screenwriter did have the grace to apologise).
They've been at it again at this month's Cannes Film Festival where Quentin Tarantino has rewritten the story of BRITAIN'S Jewish commandos and made them American for his new film, Inglourious Basterds.
But this affair is something else.
No matter that the Queen is the ONLY head of state alive who served in uniform during that war (her husband is also a WWII veteran - and many foreigners think the Royals have done nothing for Britain). No matter that her father's British and Canadian troops stormed three out of the five Normandy beaches - codenamed Sword, Juno and Gold - while the Americans invaded two - Omaha and Utah.
Saving France cost the lives of 17,556 British and 5,316 Canadian servicemen.
The Queen also travels light compared to most world leaders. She is, for example, the only head of a major industrialised nation NOT to have her own jet. She does not (unlike US presidents) come surrounded by hundreds of men with suits, sunglasses, guns and talking cufflinks. It would not be difficult to accommodate her logistically.
But now it seems as if the French have had a change of heart, but the Queen will still not attend.
NO member of Royal family to attend D-Day 65th anniversary because they did not receive official invite, says Palace
By Matthew Hickley and Matt Sandy
28th May 2009
Daily Mail
This insult to the Queen - the only living head of state in the world who actually served in the war - ROBERT HARDMAN: This insult to the Queen - the only living head of state who actually served in the war | Mail Online
What did YOUR dad do in the war Sarkozy? (He fled TO Germany as the Third Reich collapsed) - So what did YOUR dad do in the war Sarkozy? (He fled TO Germany as the Third Reich collapsed)| Mail Online
Neither the Queen nor any other member of the Royal family will attend the D-Day commemorations in France next week, Buckingham Palace said today.
The announcement comes after the French belatedly bowed to British anger yesterday and announced that the Queen was 'naturally welcome' at the 65th anniversary.
But the statement fell well short of a formal invitation, and today Buckingham Palace confirmed that neither the Queen nor any other Royal will be present because they have not been officially invited.
The Queen extends hospitality to France's President Sarkozy in March 2008. She had only been given nine days' notice to attend their D-Day events
In any case, members of the Royal Family normally take up to six months to prepare for such an event abroad, with every detail of the schedule, security and official protocol worked out.
A spokeswoman said: 'Neither the Queen nor any other members of the royal family will be attending the D-Day commemorations on June 6 as we have not received an official invitation to any of these events.
Princess Elizabeth served with the Auxiliary Territorial Service during World War II. The Queen is the only living Head of State to serve during the war.
Prince Philip, the Queen's husband, took part in the Battle of Crete and the invasion of Sicily
'We would like to reiterate that we have never expressed any sense of anger or frustration at all, and are content with all the arrangements that are planned.'
Prime Minister Gordon Brown will now represent the UK at events in Normandy on June 6 to mark the 65th anniversary of the landings.
The news that the Queen will now not be attending the ceremony will disappoint many British D-Day veterans who yesterday said that they would be thrilled if any senior member of the Royal family could attend.
With the average age of D-Day veterans now nearing 85, next weekend's 65th anniversary will mark the last major gathering of British survivors of the battle to liberate France.
The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh visit the Bayeux Cemetery on the 50th anniversary of the D-Day landings
William Feller, 83, from Hull, told the Mail: 'To me, the Queen should be there. She is our sovereign, our head of state and she has attended the other anniversaries.
We would all much prefer the Queen to be there rather than Gordon Brown.'
The dramatic 11th-hour U-turn left Downing Street and the Palace both insisting that Her Majesty's possible absence from the high-profile commemorations was not their fault.
Gordon Brown faced mounting criticism as MPs and veterans accused him of being out of step with the public mood and failing to sort out the issue with the French months ago.
The Prime Minister's spokesman insisted that during months of discussions with Paris and Buckingham Palace, he had believed all along that the Royal Family were 'content' not to be involved in the plans.
But Palace officials maintained that no formal invitation to Normandy had ever been received and that protocol and security considerations made it impossible for the Royal Family to invite themselves or turn up on the beaches unannounced.
As President Sarkozy kicked the ball firmly into Britain's court, Downing Street was left with a growing political headache and officials were scrambling to find a last-minute compromise.
The Queen meeting British war veterans in Normandy during the 60th anniversary to commemorate the D-Day landings
Until the Daily Mail's campaign on behalf of the veterans earlier this year, government ministers and officials had stuck to the mantra that only the 25th, 50th, 60th and 100th anniversaries of major battles were given official sponsorship and support.
They repeatedly insisted that the 65th anniversary was simply not significant enough and refused the veterans' requests for financial help.
Faced with a public backlash, Gordon Brown reversed his position, signalling that he would attend in person and offering help to the veterans.
It was noted, however, that he changed his mind only after it became clear that U.S. President Barack Obama would travel to France to represent his country at the commemoration.
During the 60th anniversary events in 2004, the Queen and Prince Charles were in Normandy, and 1,200 British veterans marched proudly past the Queen.
Enlarge
On Tuesday President Sarkozy's officials had made clear they had never planned to invite the Queen, and provoked intense anger by describing the entire commemoration as 'very much a Franco-American occasion'.
But yesterday Elysee Palace spokesman Luc Chatel said the Queen had been 'naturally welcome all along'.
He claimed it was up to the British to say who they wanted to attend the various events, adding: 'It is not for France to designate British representation.'
Tory defence spokesman Gerald Howarth said: 'Given Britain's massive contribution to the liberation of Europe it is scandalous the British government has failed to secure a place for the Royal Family.
'It is an insult to the 83,000 British and Canadian troops who landed on D-Day --alongside 73,000 Americans - and the hundreds of thousands who followed.
Falklands War veteran Simon Weston said: 'Mr Brown just seems to miss the point when it comes to the military, and anything to do with veterans seems to be a grudging afterthought.'
********************************
A diminutive egomaniac, the stain of Nazi collaboration and why the French can't forgive us for saving them in the War
By Stephen Glover
28th May 2009
Small-minded: French President Nicolas Sarkozy has ignored Britain's and Canada's sacrifice
The French government's decision not to invite the Queen to next week's
commemorations of the 65th anniversary of D-Day was an unbelievable insult to her.
It will also appall and sadden the surviving British veterans of one of the most momentous days in British and world history.
The partial rowing back by the French government yesterday, and its graceless statement that the Queen would be 'welcome', hardly undoes the damage that has been done. Even now it is far from clear whether France really wants Her Majesty to attend the celebrations.
Who is to blame for this incredible farce? Gordon Brown and No10 bear a good deal of the responsibility.
The Prime Minister and ministers had refused to treat the 65th anniversary as a major event until shamed into doing so by this newspaper earlier in the year. That he should have needed reminding of its importance was a very black mark against him.
Now he is scheduled to take part in next week's celebrations in Normandy, but it does not seem to have occurred to him or anyone else in the Government that, as Head of State, the Queen had a much greater claim to attend.
She is our representative and, as someone who actually served in the war, her presence in Normandy would carry extra significance for veterans and the rest of the country.
Perhaps the Palace should have pushed a little harder for the Queen to be included in the celebrations, but there is only so much one can do to secure an invitation that has not been proffered, and it was No 10's responsibility to make the French government understand the enormity of its lapse. Only an outcry by the Press has had any impact on French thinking.
The biggest culprit is Nicolas Sarkozy, the half-French, half-Hungarian President of France.
Along with his wife Carla Bruni, whose chief interest in life appears to be showing off her body to the best possible advantage, ideally in a state of undress, this diminutive egomaniac is increasingly becoming an embarrassment to his countrymen, and a laughing stock to the rest of Europe.
Sarkozy was not born when some 156,000 Allied servicemen launched their epic assault on Nazi-occupied Europe on June 6, 1944.
Soldiers land on the French beaches on June 6, 1944
Nonetheless, he should know that British and Canadian troops stormed three out of five Normandy beaches on that day, and that together they comprised more than 50 per cent of the invading forces.
It is not too much to say that without the involvement of this country there would have been no invasion of France. Had Britain not won the Battle of Britain, and stood alone for 18 months while America sat on the sidelines and France lay beaten and humiliated by the Nazis, there could have been no invasion of Normandy, and no liberation of Europe.
Saving France cost the lives of 17,556 British and 5,316 Canadian servicemen.
Sarkozy, of course, is well aware of the British sacrifice but, by failing to offer a personal invitation to the Queen, he has deliberately chosen to ignore it. He has, however, asked President Barack Obama to attend as the Head of State of Britain's major partner in the invasion.
As an enthusiastic pro-American - not a preference shared by many recent French Presidents - he is keen to be pictured standing shoulder to shoulder with the leader of the free world. Britain's role as the co-saviour of France is conveniently forgotten.
One would like to pin all the blame on Sarkozy, but I am afraid his crass behaviour is symptomatic of a deeper national psychosis about the war on the part of the French State.
That is not to say that previous French presidents would necessarily have behaved as he has done - only that his rewriting of history is a familiar feature of post-war official French thinking.
The rapid capitulation of the French army to the Germans in May and June 1940 was the biggest shock in modern French military history - more momentous than the country's defeat in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 to 1871, more traumatic, in terms of national pride, than her terrible losses in World War I.
If the humiliation of France, and her realisation that she was a very puny power by the side of Germany, were bad enough, they were overshadowed by subsequent events.
Germany set up a puppet government in Vichy France which collaborated with the Nazis. Its worst crime among many was the deportation of 76,000 French Jews to Nazi Germany, of whom just 2,500 ever returned.
It was only earlier this year, nearly 64 years after the end of the war, that the Council of State in Paris finally ruled that France was legally responsible for this appalling betrayal of French citizens. The reluctance to accept France's collaborationist role has been a blemish on the country's post-war history.
Admittedly, there was the Resistance, though its activities were perhaps not as extensive nor as effective as some French people like to maintain. And there were the Free French based in London, under the leadership of Charles de Gaulle, whose troops were allowed by the Allies to enter Paris first as liberators in 1944, though they had played a negligible role in the freeing of their country.
Humiliated by the Nazis, tarnished by collaboration, France was nonetheless encouraged by the Americans and the British to resume her role as a world power after 1945, with a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, and all the rights and responsibilities of a victorious country - which was, of course, exactly what she had not been.
Not that the French State ever showed much gratitude towards Britain for this indulgence. Charles de Gaulle, who had been nurtured by Britain during our darkest days, later responded by blocking our membership of what was then known as the Common Market. Some may not regard this as a terrible deprivation, but it was certainly intended by De Gaulle to be so.
One aspect of the wholesale rewriting of the history of the war by the French State has been to underplay or even to forget the role of Britain as one of the country's two main liberators.
President Sarkozy's snubbing of the Queen should be interpreted within this ignoble tradition. It is as though France can never forgive Britain for saving it.
What can also be said with some confidence, though, is that most French people, inasmuch as they know about the war, do not share this churlish and ungrateful attitude towards this country.
Especially in Normandy, there remains a widespread appreciation of the role of British soldiers as liberators. Veterans who travel there are always welcomed by the French, who, unlike their government, do not suffer from selective amnesia.
President Sarkozy is a small man in more ways than one who likes to play politics.
Like Hollywood, which evidently believes that D-Day was an all-American enterprise, he chooses to forget the sacrifices of British soldiers.
Not asking the Queen - though let's hope that she or Prince Charles may still be prevailed upon to attend - was an insult to her and to the veterans and this country. In the end, though, it should not matter too much to any of us.
These now elderly men must know the inestimable gift they and their fallen comrades bestowed in saving France and Europe.
When President Sarkozy is long forgotten, they will still be remembered and honoured.
He may not care, and Gordon Brown may sometimes fail to understand, but this country will never forget them.
dailymail.co.uk
Last edited:
