Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-pkds5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-27T20:41:22.976Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Creation of the Monnet Plan, 1945–1946: A Critical Re-Evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2017

LUC-ANDRÉ BRUNET
LUC-ANDRÉ BRUNET*
Affiliation:
Department of History, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, United Kingdom; luc-andre.brunet@open.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Drawing on an extensive range of French archival sources as well as Jean Monnet's papers, this article challenges several commonly held views regarding the establishment of the Monnet Plan by re-examining the domestic political context in post-war France. It reveals that the distinctive ‘supra-ministerial’ structure of the Monnet Plan was developed only after, and in direct response to, the October 1945 legislative elections in which the French Communist Party won the most seats and subsequently gained control of France's main economic ministries. Furthermore, Monnet managed to convince communist ministers to surrender important powers from their ministries to Monnet's nascent planning office on false premises, a finding that challenges the usual depiction of Monnet as an open and honest broker.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Contemporary European History , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , February 2018 , pp. 23 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

†

The original version of this article was published with the incorrect author name. A notice detailing this has been published and the error rectified in the online and print PDF and HTML copies.

References

1 Two important studies that situate the development of the Monnet Plan in the broader economic history of France in the twentieth century are Kuisel, Richard, Capitalism and the State in Modern France. Renovation and Economic Management in the Twentieth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981)Google Scholar and Margairaz, Michel, L'Etat, les finances et l’économie. Histoire d'une conversion, 1932–1952 (Paris: CHEFF, 1991)Google Scholar. A more thorough study of the development of the Monnet Plan is provided in Mioche, Philippe, Le Plan Monnet. Genèse et élaboration 1941–1947 (Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne, 1987)Google Scholar.

2 Milward, Alan, The Reconstruction of Western Europe, 1945–51 (London: Routledge, 1984)Google Scholar; Bossuat, Gérard, L'Europe occidentale à l'heure américaine, 1944–1952 (Brussels: Complexe, 1992)Google Scholar; Lynch, Frances, France and the International Economy. From Vichy to the Treaty of Rome (London: Routledge, 1997)Google Scholar.

3 Wall, Irwin, The United States and the Making of Postwar France 1945–1954 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hitchcock, William, France Restored. Cold War Diplomacy and the Quest for Leadership in Europe, 1944–1954 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1998)Google Scholar.

4 Fontaine, Pascal, Jean Monnet l'inspirateur (Paris: Jacques Grancher, 1988)Google Scholar; Duchêne, François, Jean Monnet: The First Statesman of Interdependence (London and New York: Norton, 1994)Google Scholar; Roussel, Eric, Jean Monnet (Paris: Fayard, 1996)Google Scholar; Wells, Sherrill Brown, Jean Monnet: Unconventional Statesman (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2011)Google Scholar.

5 Monnet, Jean, Mémoires (Paris: Fayard, 1976), 347Google Scholar. Translations are the author's. On economic planning under Vichy, see Kuisel, Richard, ‘Vichy et les origines de la planification économique (1940–1946)’, in Le mouvement social, 98 (Jan.–Mar. 1977), 77–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Nord, Philip, France's New Deal (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010)Google Scholar.

6 Under the Provisional Government (1944–1946), the president was both head of state and head of government. Under the Constitution of the Fourth Republic, approved in October 1946, these roles were separated and the CGP remained accountable to the head of government, namely the President of the Council (often translated as ‘Prime Minister’).

7 Monnet, Mémoires, 347.

8 Wells, Jean Monnet, 247.

9 Quoted in Ducheˆne, Jean Monnet, 352.

10 ‘Lettre du Groupe des 27 Députés Communistes Français à Messieurs les Présidents du Comité National de la Libération Nationale’, 17 Aug. 1943, CFLN 620, Archives diplomatiques (MAE), La Courneuve.

11 ‘Note à l'attention de M Joxe’, 28 Aug. 1943, CFLN 620, MAE. This assessment was made by René Massigli, then Commissioner for Foreign Affairs.

12 The best study of the CNR programme remains Andrieu, Claire, Le programme commun de la Résistance. Des idées dans la guerre (Paris: Editions de l'Erudit, 1984)Google Scholar. See also Woloch, Isser, ‘Left, Right and Centre: the MRP and the Post-War Moment’ in French History 21, 1 (2007), 85–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 For the origins of economic planning in France, see Mioche, Le Plan Monnet; Margairaz, L'Etat, les finances et l’économie; Richard Kuisel, ‘Vichy et les origines de la planification économique, 1940-1946’ and Philip Nord, France's New Deal.

14 See Hitchcock, 25–9 and Kuisel, Capitalism and the State, 198.

15 Lynch, Frances, ‘Resolving the Paradox of the Monnet Plan: National and International Planning in French Reconstruction’, Economic History Review, 37, 2 (May 1984), 229–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 234 and Duchêne, François, Jean Monnet: The First Statesman of Interdependence (London: Norton, 1994), 149Google Scholar. Similar arguments are made by Kuisel, Capitalism and the State, 228; Roussel, Eric, Jean Monnet (Paris: Fayard, 1996), 434–6Google Scholar; and Hitchcock, France Restored, 28–9.

16 Monnet, Mémoires, 328. This episode is faithfully recounted in much of the literature; see Duchêne, Jean Monnet, 145 and Roussel, Jean Monnet, 427.

17 Bossuat, Gérard, L'Europe occidentale à l'heure américaine, 1944–1952 (Brussels: Complexe, 1992)Google Scholar.

18 Monnet, Mémoires, 347.

19 ‘Note pour le Colonel Vallon’ by Cusin, 2 July 1945, 3 AG 4 25, Archives nationales (AN), Paris.

20 ‘Communication du Ministre de l'Economie Nationale sur la réorganisation des Services du Ministère de l'Economie Nationale’, 28 Sept. 1945, F 60 900, AN.

21 Of the 586 seats in the National Assembly, 150 were won by the Christian democrats (MRP) and 146 by the Socialists (SFIO).

22 de Gaulle, Charles, ‘Allocution à la radio, le 17 novembre 1945’ in Mémoires de guerre. Le salut: 1944-1946 (Paris: Plon, 1959), 517Google Scholar.

23 The classic formulation of this argument describes how the Communist Party seizes control of the ‘major instruments of power’ such as the Ministry for the Interior and subsequently sets up a powerful secret police that allows the party to remodel the structure of the state along the Soviet model. This was first advanced in Friedrich, Carl J. and Brezinski, Zbigniew K., Totalitarian Dictatorship and Autocracy (New York: Praeger, 1956), 296–7Google Scholar and has more recently been reiterated in Applebaum, Anne, Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944–1956 (London: Allen Lane, 2012)Google Scholar. For a revisionist interpretation, see Molly Pucci, Security Empire: Building the Secret Police in Communist Eastern Europe, 1944–1952, unpublished PhD thesis, Stanford University, 2015.

24 De Gaulle, Mémoires de guerre. Le salut, 327.

25 These three parties ruled in a tripartite coalition from 1944 until May 1947, when the communist ministers were expelled from government, a development commonly associated with the onset of the Cold War in France. See Buton, Philippe, ‘L’éviction des ministres communistes’ in Berstein, Serge and Milza, Pierre, eds., L'Année 1947 (Paris: Presses de Sciences Po, 2000)Google Scholar.

26 François Billoux claimed that the armaments portfolio was ‘one of the Defence ministries’ and that appointing a PCF member to this amounted to ‘de Gaulle back[ing] down’. In his detailed study of the PCF during this period, on the other hand, Philippe Buton confirms that the party's inability to secure one of these three portfolios amounted to a failure for the PCF. See Billoux, Quand nous étions ministres (Paris: Editions sociales, 1972), 66–7 and Buton, Les lendemains qui déchantent. Le Parti communiste français à la Libération (Paris: FNSP, 1993), 206–11.

27 ‘Note. Objet: Dissolution du CO du sel’, 31 Oct. 1945, F 12 10028, AN.

28 Paul ultimately dissolved all remaining Comités d'organisation and related Vichy-era industrial bodies in April 1946.

29 On the purge that took place during this period see Cointet, Jean-Paul’s Expier Vichy: l’épuration en France 1943–1958 (Paris: Perrin, 2008)Google Scholar and Bergère, Marc, ed., L’épuration économique en France à la Libération (Rennes: Presses universiatires de Rennes, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the actions of industrialists under Vichy, see Luc-André Brunet, ‘Patrons résistants? French Industrialists during the Second World War’, in French History, forthcoming.

30 ‘Note de MM Billoux et Tillon sur les projets de nationalisation soumis par Monsieur le Ministre de l'Economie Nationale’, 3 Mar. 1945, 3 AG 4 26, AN.

31 ‘Memorandum’, 22 Nov. 1945, 3 AG 4 25, AN.

32 On the strategy behind the PME, see Frances Lynch, France and the International Economy.

33 ‘Mémorandum sur le Plan de Modernisation et d'Equipement’, 13 Dec. 1945, AJ 80 1, AN. The first version of this memorandum was presented to de Gaulle on 4 December 1945.

34 See Shennan, Andrew, De Gaulle (London: Longman, 1993), 49–50Google Scholar.

35 Fondation nationale des sciences politiques, La France en voie de modernisation, 1944–1952 (Paris: FNSP, 1981). Palewski's views have occasionally been noted in subsequent studies, but his claim has not been investigated. See Philippe Mioche, Le Plan Monnet, 91 and, in a footnote, Shennan, Andrew, Rethinking France: Plans for Renewal 1940–1946 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 248Google Scholar.

36 ‘Note pour le Général de Gaulle’ by Palewski, 13 Dec.1945, 3 AG 4 55, AN.

37 ‘Discours prononcé à Bayeux’, 16 June 1946, in de Gaulle, Charles, Discours et messages. Tome 2: Dans l'attente (Paris: Plon, 1970), 10Google Scholar.

38 ‘Telegram from the Ambassador in France (Caffery) to the Secretary of State’, 21 Jan. 1946, FRUS 1946, Volume V, 402–3. See also Berstein, Serge, Histoire du Gaullisme (Paris: Perrin, 2001), 95–7Google Scholar.

39 ‘Telegram from the Ambassador in France (Caffery) to the Secretary of State’, 18 Jan. 1946, FRUS 1946, Volume V, 400–1.

40 Commissions de modernisation were established for each of France's key industries. Under the Monnet Plan, they were responsible for providing accurate data on each industry and for helping draw up a viable production programme under the auspices of the CGP.

41 In his memoirs covering his time as minister, Billoux points to the creation of similarly composed comités d'entreprise in key sectors of the economy as a victory for the PCF. Interestingly, he makes no mention of the Monnet Plan whatsoever and instead attributes the revival of French industry to the policies of communist ministers. See Billoux, Quand nous étions ministres, op.cit., 87–8.

42 Thorez, Maurice, Renaisance, démocratie, unité. Rapport du Comité central au Xe Congrès, V, 21 (Paris: Editions sociales, 1963), 99Google Scholar.

43 ‘Simplification de la réglementation économique’, 24 Jan. 1946, AMF 1 6, Fondation Jean Monnet pour l'Europe (FJME), Lausanne.

44 In their memoirs, both Monnet and Hirsch attribute the idea of this structure to the British model. See Monnet, Mémoires, 342 and Hirsch, Etienne, Ainsi va la vie (Lausanne: Fondation Jean Monnet pour l'Europe, 1988), 89Google Scholar. On Nathan's influence, see Kuisel, Capitalism and the State, 230 and Wells, Jean Monnet, 98–101.

45 Buton, Philippe, ‘Le parti communiste français et le stalinisme au lendemain de la Seconde Guerre mondiale’ in Journal of Modern European History, 2 (2004), 58–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pons, Silvio, ‘Stalin and the European Communists after World War Two (1943–1948)’ in Past and Present 210 (2011), 121–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 ‘Compte-rendu de la séance du vendredi 14 décembre 1945. Organisation du Commissariat au Plan’, Comité Economique Interministériel, 14 Dec. 1945, F 60 901, AN.

47 Untitled document by Monnet beginning with ‘Les raisons pour lesquelles je considère qu'il n'est pas possible de rattacher le Plan à l'Economie nationale sont les suivants’ (sic), 12 Feb. 1946, AMF 1 3, FJME.

48 ‘Compte-rendu de la séance du vendredi 14 décembre 1945’, F 60 901, AN.

49 An early draft, including ten ministers, was produced by Monnet in December, while the addition of the Ministers for Transportation and for Public Works in January raised the number to twelve. ‘Conseil du Plan’, 6 Dec. 1945, AMF 1 2, FJME.

50 ‘Note pour MM. Marjolin-Hirsch. Agenda des choses à faire avant le Conseil du Plan’, 13 Jan. 1946, AMF 1 0, FJME. The author has been unable to find any reference to this secret document and the burst of activity it precipitated in the existing literature on the Monnet Plan.

51 Etienne Hirsch, Ainsi va la vie, 89. In their respective memoirs, neither Hirsch nor Marjolin makes any reference to this flurry of activity between 13 and 20 January. See Hirsch, Ainsi va la vie and Marjolin, Robert, Le travail d'une vie (Paris: Robert Laffont, 1986)Google Scholar.

52 De Gaulle, Mémoires de guerre. Le salut, 1944–1946, 334. ‘Leaving the Palais Bourbon [the National Assembly] the evening of 1 January [1946], I had already made up my mind to resign. All that remained to do was to choose the date.’

53 ‘Note pour MM. Marjolin-Hirsch. Agenda des choses à faire avant le Conseil du Plan’, 13 Jan. 1946, AMF 1 0, FJME.

54 ‘Mémorandum sur le Plan de Modernisation et d'Equipement’, 13 Dec. 1945, AJ 80 1, AN.

55 Note de Blum-Picard à Marcel Paul, 18 Jan. 1946, F 12 10028, AN.

56 See, for example, ‘Etudes d'A. Philip sur les Comités mixtes de production’, F 60 895, AN.

57 ‘Lettre de Monnet au Président’, dated 7 Feb. 1946, AMF 1 3, FJME.

58 Ibid.

59 Brunet, Luc-André, Forging Europe: Industrial Organisation in France, 1940–1952 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 Untitled document by Monnet beginning with ‘Les raisons pour lesquelles je considère qu'il n'est pas possible de rattacher le Plan à l'Economie nationale sont les suivants’, 12 Feb. 1946, AMF 1 3, FJME.

61 ‘Note sur l’élaboration et l'exécution du Plan, ainsi que sur les questions qui doivent y concourir’, 23 Apr. 1946, AMF 5 2, FJME.

62 This is the explanation advanced by Monnet in his Mémoires, 347. Frances Lynch calls this ‘the official “myth” of the plan [which is] a distortion of reality’. See Lynch, ‘Resolving the Paradox of the Monnet Plan’, 235.

63 The tendency of technocrats to seemingly use their specialist knowledge as a form of legitimacy in order to ‘claim the greatest possible share of power’ at the expense of elected officials is discussed in Jacques Lagroye, ‘Introduction’ in La Question technocratique, 16.

64 ‘Textes des accords signés à Washington’, 28 May 1946, AMF 4 4, FJME.

65 While Léon Blum led the delegation, Monnet was chiefly responsible for the negotiations. See Margairaz, Michel, ‘Autour des Accord Blum-Byrnes: Jean Monnet entre le consensus national et le consensus atlantique’ in Histoire, Economie et Société, 3 (1982), 439–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Bossuat, Gérard, La France, l'aide américaine et l'unité de l'Europe (Paris: CHEFF, 1992)Google Scholar.

66 Monnet, Mémoires, 347.

67 See Wells, Jean Monnet, 247.

68 Procès-verbal de la séance de la Commission des Affaires Economiques, Assemblée Nationale, séance du 4 mars 1947, C/15329, AN.

69 Ibid.

70 According to Hirsch, Mendès France had never forgiven Monnet for successfully implementing a national economic plan, as this had been Mendès France's ambition. See Fourquet, François, Les Comptes de la puissance (Paris: Recherches, 1980), 223–6Google Scholar.

71 Interestingly, the national leader who would obstruct European Community affairs most during Monnet's lifetime was Charles de Gaulle as President of the Fifth Republic, most dramatically during the Empty Chair Crisis of 1965–66.

72 On Monnet's tactics during the negotiations for the creation of the ECSC, particularly his strategy of sidelining French steel industrialists from the process, see Brunet, Luc-André, Forging Europe: Industrial Organisation in France, 1940–1952 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.