Yes, I think that Charles de Gaulle was an effective leader of France, because he brought France to the forefront and made France a force to be reckoned with. History remembers him well, and he has the adoration of his people now and throughout history. He did a lot for France, and it was because of his leadership skills and knowledge.
Does the question ask if he was a great war leader or great president? As a war leader, he was the heart and soul figurehead of the French resistance movement, and was a good and competent leader of soldiers. As a politician, the results are more mixed, though he did represent the interests of his people.
In spite of inheriting a ruined country after World War II, he led them quite admirably, and with a level of nationalism bordering on fanaticism. His boldness worked, however. Unlike many other countries, such as Korea, Germany, or even the UK to an extent, de Gaulle's stalwart conviction to return France to "major power" status worked. They evolved into a major player in international politics, and developed the Nuclear Bomb under de Gaulle's leadership. I'm not sure anyone else could have been tactfully as pompous. This makes him an effective leader.
Yes, I think he was a very influential leader for France, and contributed a lot to the well being of France as it stands today. He had several ideas that helped to push France to prosperity, and helped to give many freedoms to French citizens that they did not have before.
When Charles de Gaulle lead France, he was a terrible leader by most measurements. He enacted unpopular policies and did not make many friends in the government. He was not popular with the population, and he did not deserve to lead the great country of France for as long as he did.