[Namsan Ddalggakbari] From Hero to Traitor, 'The Myth of the Resistance Created'

[Asia Economy Reporter Hyunwoo Lee] In November 2018, marking the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I, a heated controversy arose in France over the evaluation of a war veteran. The subject was Henri Philippe P?tain (1856?1951), a hero of World War I and a Marshal of France who made remarkable achievements. French President Emmanuel Macron intended to honor him as a hero on the centenary of the armistice and expressed his opinion on a broadcast.

However, President Macron's intention was thwarted by strong opposition from the French public. The public's backlash was due to P?tain's disappointing actions during World War II. While he was undoubtedly a hero of World War I, during World War II he humiliatingly surrendered to Nazi Germany and became the head of the puppet Vichy government. To put it in Korean terms, his early life was like Admiral Yi Sun-sin who saved the country, but his later life was treated like the traitor Lee Wan-yong.

R?sistance France is a book that tells the stories of people caught on this borderline. Besides General P?tain, many French soldiers and politicians who experienced both World Wars in the early 20th century saw their reputations dramatically change between the two wars. France was occupied by Nazi Germany for only four years during World War II. Yet, during that time, many historical figures fell from heroes to traitors, and some had their pasts whitewashed.

The image shows General P?tain of France, a hero of World War I who humiliatingly surrendered to the Nazis during World War II and wrote a disgraceful chapter as the head of the puppet Vichy government, branded as a traitor to his country.
[Image source=Asia Economy DB]

The author of R?sistance France, Professor Yongwoo Lee, focuses not on settling historical accounts. It is not about simply identifying and punishing traitors. Instead, the author pays attention to how perceptions and views of the R?sistance and the Vichy government have changed from the post-World War II period to the present amid political, social, and cultural shifts. The book reveals how much the government-published textbooks and media such as films have glossed over facts and how that has shaped public perception, often overshadowing the actual activities and truths of individuals.

The book begins with Fran?ois Mitterrand (1916?1996), France’s longest-serving president and the first president from the left-wing Socialist Party. Until then, Mitterrand’s youth was known as having been drafted during World War II, fighting against Nazi German forces, captured, and then escaping to join the R?sistance.

Mitterrand always took pride in his R?sistance background, which was also the foundation of his political base. However, in 1994, French journalist Pierre P?an revealed that contrary to popular belief, Mitterrand was imprisoned in a Nazi German camp for six months, released, and then worked for the Vichy government rather than joining the R?sistance. This revelation made Mitterrand the center of a historical controversy. The fact that the leader of a left-wing party had served as a subordinate in the far-right Nazi-collaborating regime sparked major debate.

Resistance member during World War II
[Image source=Wikipedia]

The irony did not end there. Among the R?sistance fighters, who were always portrayed as predominantly French through textbooks, films, and media, a significant number were actually Jewish or foreign-born, such as from Poland, and the real French participants were fewer than commonly thought. Not all French people were part of or collaborators with the R?sistance. There were Nazi sympathizers, collaborators with the Vichy government, and even double agents, representing a variety of factions. It was newly revealed that only about 1% of the entire French population joined the R?sistance.

After World War II, evaluations of the Vichy government also changed continuously with political shifts. Immediately after the war, public opinion strongly favored the view that the Vichy government’s efforts had allowed France to maintain its independence with minimal casualties. General P?tain, head of the Vichy government, was depicted as a shield, and General Charles de Gaulle (1890?1970), who led France’s independence, as a spear, with both praised as heroes who saved the country. However, when de Gaulle came to power, P?tain was branded a traitor. Ironically, during World War I, P?tain was de Gaulle’s superior, and de Gaulle deeply respected him.

In fact, the Vichy government was not composed solely of traitors and cowards. Its members had personally experienced the massive sacrifices of French youth during World War I. Over 30% of French young men died in the endless attrition of World War I. Among children born around 1914, very few knew their fathers’ faces. Subsequently, France, once the most populous country in Europe, was surpassed by Germany.

The Korean Liberation Army, the regular army of the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea in 1940 [Image source=Uriyeoksanet]

During World War II, the French military leadership and government, burdened by these horrific memories, surrendered quickly. Thanks to this, France suffered fewer casualties than other countries. However, those who collaborated with the Vichy government were completely stigmatized as traitors after the war. Individuals whose wartime actions were unclear all claimed to have joined the R?sistance and fought underground.

People who were double agents, those who survived by repeatedly switching sides, or those who were too young to understand and were forced to adopt certain ideologies?all were simply labeled as “traitors.” All of this happened during the mere four years of Nazi occupation. Compared to this, Korea, which endured 36 years of Japanese colonial rule?nine times longer than the Nazi occupation?inevitably faces a far more complex issue of historical reckoning.

The author argues that we need wisdom to reconsider our own historical reckoning by looking at France, which, though struggling with the difficult legacy of Nazi occupation, is still less complex than ours. He emphasizes that no matter how complicated the issues are, the present moment, when historical debates can still take place, is precious. Myths about distorted historical education are also problematic. Yet, it is even sadder that from this point, when proper reckoning has not even been achieved, the past becomes merely an object of oblivion for future generations.