The Austrian government, aside from calling on both sides to remain calm, took no real action and behaved as if the situation had nothing to do with them. The condemnations from other European countries likewise stayed at the level of empty words. After all, very few nations in these times dared to provoke Russia. It was fine to shout slogans, but when it came to actual intervention, everyone preferred to stay out of it. Such fearless international spirit was something most countries simply could not afford. In London, the British government had just begun to celebrate the initial success of its “Plan to Divert the Trouble East” plan when grim news arrived that Russian troops were ravaging France. Prime Minister Robert Cecil was furious. If the Russians were allowed to continue, France, already clinging to life, would soon be finished. Were it not for his self-restraint, Robert Cecil would have ordered the Royal Navy to the Baltic to blockade and intercept the Russian convoys carrying French laborers. But a blockade would have little effect. Even if the Baltic were sealed, the Russians could still move through the Mediterranean or use the Holy Roman Empire’s railway network. For the sake of the broader strategy, Robert Cecil had to hold back. Escalating tensions with Russia at this moment would destroy the plan to divert the trouble eastward. The international situation was clear: once the Holy Roman Empire turned its attention from the continent to the seas, Britain would face its greatest challenge. If Britain did not weaken Russia first, it would be in grave danger. Competing with the Holy Roman Empire at sea while fighting Russia on land over India was a terrifying prospect. Even so, restraint could not extinguish Robert Cecil’s anger. Without France, who could Britain use as a buffer or a pawn? The Russians? Just look at the Austro-Russian alliance which previous leaders had spent decades trying to dismantle. Robert Cecil even more so did not believe he could drive them into conflict. If Britain and the Holy Roman Empire truly came to blows, the Russian government would be far more likely to move south toward India than to march west into Europe. What about Spain? It was not that Robert Cecil looked down on them, but the Spanish Empire had long since faded. Without an empire, Spain was little more than a dish on someone else’s table. Even if drawn in, it would only serve as an extra course for the enemy. Those options were impossible. It would also make no sense to rely on Sardinia, Belgium, or Switzerland, small countries with little influence. As a capable politician, Robert Cecil was no dreamer. The idea that “one call would rally all heroes” belonged to fiction. Even at the height of its power, Britain lacked that kind of influence, and in the present day, it was utterly unrealistic. Simply put, the word “geopolitics” alone decides the matter. Those fence-sitting minor states on the European continent could never stand up to the Holy Roman Empire. If anything, they might be swept up by the Holy Roman Empire and declare war on Britain on its behalf. A similar scene already happened in the earlier anti-French war. To pad their numbers, the Austrian government used a mix of threats and bribes. The only three neutral countries escaped only because they did not border France and so could not affect the broader situation. The present Holy Roman Empire is not the same as the “new Holy Roman Empire” of old. Back when the Austrian government was already in decline, it could still rally a troop of small allies to beat up France. Now that is unthinkable. If the continent stays peaceful, the Holy Roman Empire can marshal resources from Asia, Europe, and Africa. Faced with such an opponent, even a Britain that rules the waves would be at a loss. Times have changed. Britain’s old policy of crushing whoever grew strong is gone. Robert Cecil’s goal has been reduced to something more modest which was to keep the situation stable. The rival is more powerful than ever. If Britain can merely keep its maritime supremacy, that will already be an achievement. Robert Cecil no longer dares to ask for more. “Are we really going to just stand by while the Russians run wild, and the Austrian government, called Europe’s gendarme, does nothing?” The title “Europe’s gendarme” sounds impressive, but applied to the Austrian government it is no compliment. At the 1815 Congress of Vienna, Metternich steered the proceedings by diplomacy, confined the Russians to Eastern Europe, and pushed Britain out of continental affairs. He then stitched together the Holy Alliance to preserve monarchies and the continental balance, and Austria briefly earned the nickname “Europe’s gendarme.” Yet that high point lasted only a moment. In the years that followed, old-style Austria went into decline. Weak Austria could not bear being the target of every attack. To avoid becoming the focus of blame, the Austrian government diverted trouble east, shifting that provocative title onto the Russians. Austria would not accept it, but the Russian government liked it. From 1848 on, the Russian Empire enjoyed the flattering name “Europe’s gendarme.” Putting the label back on Austria would simply mean hoping the Austrian government follows the same downward path. Foreign Secretary Cameron said, “It is very regrettable, Prime Minister. Despite our efforts to stir public opinion, with even King Carlos camping daily outside the Hofburg Palace, yet the Austrian government remains unmoved. It is clear they are determined to suppress France, and their resolve is unshakeable. Not even concerns about international reputation will budge them. From the signs we see, the Russians have likely struck a political bargain with Austria, and France is the sacrifice. The Russian government used the repression of France as a bargaining chip to win Austria’s acquiescence for building the Trans-Siberian Railway, and at the same time solved the labor problem needed for the railway. The most direct proof is that the logistical support for the Russian forces in France is now being provided by the Austrian government. If this inference is correct, then while we focus on the Holy Roman Empire, we must also raise our vigilance toward the Russian government. This was a failure of our previous work. We underestimated Russian cunning, and they have taken advantage of us.” For Britain, how exactly Russia and Austria stitched their arrangement together is not the point. The key fact is the outcome: the Austrian government is indeed supporting Russian actions. Everything else can be spun, but the fact that the Austrian government is supplying the Russian army cannot be denied. After cooling off, Robert Cecil waved his hand and said, “This is not your fault. We all underestimated the Russian government. No one expected the damned Russians to play politics with such ruthless skill. If they had always had this ability, the balance of power in Europe would not look the way it does now.” Diplomacy has always been seen as Russia’s weak suit. The image left by the Russian government in Europe has been that if they can use force, they will not be bound by niceties. Even Alexander III, praised as the tsar who best understood diplomacy, mostly managed only to smooth relations with the European powers and to make the Russian Empire more acceptable to them. His greatest diplomatic achievement was probably to further cement the Austro-Russian alliance, binding Russia and the Holy Roman Empire together economically and removing the threat on the western front. That is no small achievement. By tying their economies together, the interests of Russia and the Holy Roman Empire became intertwined. If one falls, the other will suffer as well. Other European states must fear the rise of the Holy Roman Empire, while the Russian government can largely ignore them. The two countries are so economically entangled that if the Holy Roman Empire were to wage war on Russia, the first blow would be felt at home. No sane state likes self-harm. Until the two economies are separated, the Russian government need not fear threats from Europe and can confidently move south or east. Given the situation, beyond consoling themselves, there is little the British government can realistically do. Only by abandoning its plot against the Russian Empire and halting the Trans-Siberian Railway project could Britain change course. That is plainly impossible. Do not be fooled into thinking the Holy Roman Empire is Britain’s only great threat. In fact, the Russian Empire is Britain’s most immediate danger. This is not contradictory. The Holy Roman Empire is powerful, but its navy still has a long way to go before surpassing the Royal Navy. Even if it did overtake Britain at sea, that would not necessarily bring the two powers to war immediately. So long as Britain does not strike first, the Holy Roman Empire’s likeliest path is a long, attritional contest, aimed at gradually bringing Britain down. Only a reckless adolescent would launch an all-or-nothing gamble the moment they gained a slight edge. A mature state does not bet its destiny blindly. Compared with the long-range threat posed by the Holy Roman Empire, the Russians are the present problem. The Central Asian railway will open in only three to four years. Given the pattern of each Russian tsar launching foreign wars after ascending the throne, Robert Cecil needs no imagination to know where Russian aims lie. Britain already has its hands full dealing with a monstrous foe in the Holy Roman Empire. Cecil simply does not have the resources to play a “friendly match” with Russia in India. Better to divert the danger eastward. Whether or not the Far East can truly trap and crush the Russians, the British government must try in order to keep itself safe. Chancellor of the Exchequer Powell said, “Our plan to bleed Russia of its resources through the Trans-Siberian Railway project has already failed by one third. We cannot afford for the remaining two thirds to fail. In any case, we must first ensure the Russians begin construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway. French laborers can reduce the Tsar’s manpower input, but financial and material commitments will still be necessary. With a major railway project dragging on, Russia will at least be unable to march south and contest India with us for several years. At the same time, we must increase support for anti-Russian forces: French resistance groups, the Polish revolutionary parties, Bulgarian independence movements, Russian revolutionary factions, and Afghan guerrillas. Whether or not they succeed, any trouble they cause will still drain Russia of its strength. If we can delay until the Trans-Siberian Railway is completed, the Russians will gain a second strategic option and the situation will be entirely different.” Reality is cruel. Since France is already lost, Britain may as well abandon it. Selling out an ally is not new, and in this case the ally being sold is France. (Author's Note: In Britain the finance office has a first and a second chancellor. The prime minister serves as first chancellor, while the second chancellor is the one who actually performs the day-to-day duties.)
[Previous | Table of Contents | Next]
Comments
Post a Comment