Chapter 491: France and Russia Draw Closer
In the spring of 1871, the Roman uprising led by Garibaldi and Mazzini ultimately ended in failure, forcing the leaders of the insurgent forces into exile abroad.
Against the backdrop of the impending alliance between Britain, France, and Austria, the British government, to maintain rtions with France, did not grant them political asylum this time.
However, true to their nature as troublemakers, John Bull still managed to send them to the United States of America. This has long been the favorite destination for European revolutionaries seeking political asylum, primarily for two reasons:
On one hand, the United States, being thousands of miles away, is less influenced by the politics of other countries, and the federal government is known for sheltering political refugees, ensuring their safety.
On the other hand, economically, the United States had a robust development and was a nation of European immigrants, providing a source of funding frompatriots.
Purely from a safety standpoint, hiding in the vast, sparsely popted colonies would be more discreet, where one could easily establish a farm in some remote countryside and live a secluded life without issues.
Few people chose to seek refuge in the colonies unless they had done something significant and were being hunted, forcing them to change their identitiespletely.
The end of the Italian revolutionary period marked the stabilization of French rule in the region. After the purges during the war, the anti-French forces in Italy suffered a devastating blow.
The threat from France had always been significant, not in terms of manpower, economy, or industry, but more due to the shadow left by the Napoleonic era.The fact that France was called the world’s strongestnd power, without objection from other European countries, was enough to illustrate this point.
Otherwise, in terms of manpower, Russia and Austria were double that of France; in industry, Britain and Austria were ahead of France; and economically, John Bull far surpassed France.
If we apply the methodology of measuringprehensive national power as used inter times, France would be significantly behind Britain and Austria,parable to the Russian Empire, and even with some differences, it was not too substantial.
However, on the European continent, France posed the greatest sense of crisis to everyone.
Don’t be fooled by Austria’srger territory and poption. In everyone’s impression, the Balkans was a barbard, and Hungary was just a rural backwater.
The Russian Empire was even less respected, with the concept of being barbarians deeply ingrained. Following their defeat in the Russo-Prussian War, people paid even less attention to them.
France, already perceived as immensely powerful, had now annexed the prosperous Italian region, causing widespread anxiety among European nations about French expansion.
There was nothing wrong with this perception. During this period, Italy was considered wealthy. Even Sicily, which would be poor and underdeveloped inter times, was then a prosperous country.
After annexing Italy, France’s poption, economy, and resources were significantly enhanced, making the Greater French Empire even more formidable.
In response, European countries sought to ensure their security through diplomatic means, aiming to avoid conflicts with France or other nations.
As a leader of power politics, Napoleon III’s forced annexation of Italy was understandable. Besides paving the way for his son, it also aimed to stir nationalistic sentiments and strengthen national cohesion.
This was the price that historically strong countries had to pay. As Engels noted, forcibly annexing Italy was the best way to ensure the longevity of the French autocracy. Otherwise, if Napoleon III had just concurrently served as the Emperor of Italy, it would have been more convenient to rule, and the Italian people wouldn’t have been so resistant.
In this respect, France and Austria were somewhat simr, except that Franz had the banner of the Holy Roman Empire to use, providing a strong legal basis, and the annexed German states were not resistant. However, Napoleon III did not have this advantage.
With the establishment of Greater France, Napoleon III had alreadypleted the great undertaking of annexing Italy, even though Lombardy and Via were not included, which wasn’t of much consequence.
Moreover, with two fewer regions, the difficulty of governance was also reduced.
The French were well aware of the cost of forcibly annexing Italy, but they were confident they could suppress the Italians through their own strength. Under such circumstances, a smaller Italian region was more manageable. It would be better to consolidate their gains before considering further expansion.
The previous annexation of the Kingdom of Sardinia had provided a reference for the French. They easily established control there due to their formidable strength. The current bacsh was just from eating too much at once, without having time to digest.
To establish a stable international situation and digest their gains, Napoleon III repeatedly dered that France was a “satisfied” nation and would not continue expanding on the European continent. These assurances did little to alleviate the anxiety of other nations, but they had to ept this stance due to the reality of the situation.
Napoleon III’s greatest fear was istion, as had happened during the Napoleonic Wars where even a powerful France was worn down by enemies on all sides.
To avoid the worst-case scenario, Napoleon III epted the treacherous British into the Franco-Austrian alliance. At the same time, while Britain, France, and Austria were forming an alliance, he sought to ease rtions with the Russian Empire.
Times had changed, and the Russian Empire was no longer a threat to France. To further this goal, calls for a “Franco-Russian alliance” emerged within the French government.
Undoubtedly, Napoleon III ignored these calls, but that did not prevent him from using them as a scare tactic.
The idea of a Franco-Russian alliance was simple to talk about but difficult to achieve. The Austro-Russian alliance and the Anglo-French-Austrian alliance were two significant obstacles.
Unless the Austrian government went mad, they would never allow a Franco-Russian alliance to form. The British were equally unwilling to see such an alliance. After all, they had personally intervened to dismantle the Franco-Austrian alliance.
If there was another Franco-Russian alliance, wouldn’t that be devastating? John Bull did not believe that the countries caught in the middle, like Austria and Prussia, could withstand abined Franco-Russian force. This alliance was far more formidable than the Franco-Austrian one.
At least the Franco-Austrian alliance had significant internal conflicts of interest, making it rtively easy to disrupt. In contrast, a Franco-Russian alliance presented fewer direct territorial disputes, making it much harder to fracture.
Unlike in the original timeline, the current Greater French Empire was the leading power on the European continent, at least on the surface.
After annexing Italy, France’s poption soared to 55 million, its economy surpassed that of Britain, and its industrial output was second only to Britain and Austria, with a very narrow gap.
Militarily, France boasted the world’s secondrgest navy and the strongest army. This level of power was already rming, and the prospect of them allying with Russia was unthinkable.
Even just France and Russia drawing closer caused a sensation internationally. European countries couldn’t stand it, and the Austrian government couldn’t sit still either.
In the Vienna Pce, Franz reassured the anxious crowd, “No need to worry. The British, in their attempt to dismantle the Franco-Austrian alliance, have chosen to join it. We are already allied with both France and Russia. If they form an alliance, we are inherently part of it.
Undermining an alliance from within is much faster than doing so from the outside. Moreover, the French are focused on consolidating their gains, and the Russians are busy with reforms.
Even if they wanted to form an alliance, now is not the time. Besides inciting the apprehension of all European countries, what other purpose would this alliance serve?
To truly form an alliance, they would need amon enemy. The Kingdom of Prussia doesn’t qualify, and it seems we’re not that hated right now, are we?”
Franz could conclude that France and Russia getting closer was a feint, purely based on an analysis of their interests. While the possibility of such an alliance existed, itcked the motivation to be established.
Both France and Russia needed to address their internal issues. Even if they had formed an alliance, they wouldn’t have been able to expand externally at this time, nor could they have gained more benefits from the European continent.
The fact that the Anglo-Franco-Austrian alliance had already divided much of the world’s influence was an established fact. Should France attempt to disrupt this status quo, it would certainly face resistance.
Alexander II was still carrying out internal reforms, leaving him unable to alleviate any pressure on France, and Napoleon IIIcked the confidence to act independently.
It should be noted that Napoleon III had a severe case of anglophobia. Oveing this fear was only possible because of the Franco-Austrian alliance, but deep down, he was still haunted by it.
Without Russian support, it was too much to ask Napoleon III to confront thebined pressures of Britain and Austria alone.
Foreign Minister Wessenberg shook his head and said, “Your Majesty, regardless of how small the possibility is, we must nip this crisis in the bud.
To avoid the worst-case scenario, we need to prepare contingency ns. Negotiations with the British must be expedited, and if necessary, we should also be ready to ally with the Prussians.”
This answer startled Franz. From the map, doesn’t it look like a repeat of the European power structure from the original timeline?
Whatforted him was that Austria was much stronger than in the original timeline, and this potential alliance would be more powerful than the “German-Austrian Alliance.”
The alliance would cover half the Mediterranean, and most of the Balkans, and include Pnd, Brus, Lithuania, and Latvia, while missing three-quarters of Italy.
Overall, the bnce of power would not tilt against them. Of course, this was contingent on Britain staying out of it, as an Anglo-Franco-Russian alliance would be deadly.
Franz quickly dismissed this notion due to its inherent dangers. He, a cautious man, was not willing to take such a risk.
Even if they could win onnd, the sea would be a disaster. The Russo-Prussian War had already crushed Prussia’s naval ambitions, and Austria’s navy going up against Britain and France alone was unrealistic.
Hoping for naval dominance was less feasible than simply destroying the Ottoman Empire and building a railway to the Suez Canal, which had a higher sess rate.
Franz made a swift decision, “We can strengthen rtions with Prussia, but let’s not go too far. France and Russia are only drawing closer, and overreacting could provoke them.
Given the current situation, within the next twenty years, France and Russia are unlikely to expand externally. As long as we instigate a Russo-Prussian War before they form an alliance, the worst-case scenario won’t happen.”
It was clear that Franz’s stance had shifted, and he was preparing for Russia to lose again. Given the ambitions of the Junker nobility, if the Russian government lost again, they might even dare to upy St. Petersburg.
If the Russian government copsed, Austria could exploit the situation, ensuring that Russia wouldn’t rise again for decades, or perhaps forever.
A nce at the map reveals why. After losing the war and forfeiting the fertilends of Eastern Europe, they couldn’t hope to thrive in Siberia.
Currently, the poptions of Russia and Austria are roughly equal. If the Russian government failed again, losing vast territories and poption, Russia would no longer be a threat.
Of course, this strategy had severe repercussions. Prussia would need to be significantly weakened as well, or Austria would be left with another dangerous neighbor.
There was no choice, given that Alexander II decided to provoke Franz at such a sensitive time.
The specter of a world war loomed in Franz’s mind, making him highly wary of a Franco-Russian alliance. This justified his preemptive action, even if it was just a precautionary measure.