More than 50 years after the passing of the hero of Free France, is Europe having a de Gaulle moment? The question echoes in the tumult sparked by President Trump’s approach to ending the Ukraine war. Talk of Europe’s rearmament — and autonomy — leads the Times’ Ross Douthat to suggest that it’s time to “revisit Charles de Gaulle’s bid to maintain more French independence within the Western alliance,” and “recognize that he was right.”

It’s a terrific column, even if we’ve had our innings with de Gaulle. Mr. Douthat sees in de Gaulle a precursor to a conservative who could “give America what it needs from Europe” — to lead France, and neighbors, “out of decadence.” De Gaulle resonates all the more today as Europe scrambles to boost its security infrastructure to meet the threat of Russia. “Who can believe that today’s Russia will stop at Ukraine?” President Macron asks.  

De Gaulle’s successor avers that “Europe’s future does not have to be decided in Washington or Moscow.” Monsieur Macron has opened up what he calls a “strategic debate” in respect of France’s nuclear deterrent to aid the “protection of our allies on the European continent.” That echoes de Gaulle’s move to stake out a greater strategic autonomy for France, especially, but not only, in terms of nuclear weaponry, during the Cold War.

De Gaulle envisioned this independent “force de frappe” as far back as 1959, when he took the French fleet out of the umbrella of the North Atlantic Treaty. In 1962 Secretary McNamara threw down the gauntlet when he derided the French nuclear program as “dangerous, expensive, prone to obsolescence and lacking in credibility.” By 1966 de Gaulle said that he was leading France out of NATO’s military structure.

De Gaulle died in 1970, though, and after that there was a fair degree of backsliding as far as the élan vital of the once-formidable French military — in tandem with the other shrunken armies of Western Europe. Within a few decades analysts were mocking their militaries as “bonsai armies.” That’s partly because, as Vice President Vance put it, “the American security blanket has allowed European security to atrophy.” 

Mr. Trump’s policy shift, though, could yet spur what these columns have called “Reveille in Europe.” In that event, one imagines, the French military could end up playing a leading role. Mr. Douthat sees this as a positive development, because “it was not actually in America’s long-term interests to make Europe our full dependent.” That’s in part because “vassaldom encourages weakness,” which in turn “reduces the value of the alliance.”

The Financial Times’ Gideon Rachman is among those savoring what he sees as the irony of Mr. Trump sparking a continental renewal — “making Europe great again,” as he puts it. Mr. Rachman even suggests that Mr. Trump, in part for fostering a defense renaissance, could be “a strong contender for the Charlemagne prize,” an award handed out annually to “the person who has made the greatest contribution to European unity.”

“The only way for Europe to make this transition is for its great nations to reassert themselves,” Mr. Douthat reckons, and “the only great nation capable of that assertion right now is France.” He points to Michael Shurkin’s appraisal of France’s military as “the most capable in Western Europe.” What a vindication for General de Gaulle, who famously spoke of his conception of national glory by explaining that “All my life, I have had a certain idea of France.”