raharris1973
Well-known member
What if during the 'War in Sight' Crisis of 1875 when Bismarck, disturbed at France's quick recovery from the Franco-Prussian War and rebuilding of its military and purchase of horses provoked press speculation about preemptive war against France, was coupled with fruitful private talks with Russian Chancellor Gorchakov?
The essence of their agreement would be that Germany, a partner with Russia in the "Three Emperor's League" of 1873 would be absolutely free to take any measures she felt needed to her west vis-a-vis France to ensure the security of her western border, from the point of view of St. Petersburg.
Reciprocally, from the point of Berlin, Russia would be absolutely free to take any measures she felt need to her south in the direction of Romania, the Ottoman Empire, and the Black Sea to ensure the security of her Black Sea littoral.
Both powers would absolutely respect the territorial integrity of the third Emperor, Franz-Joseph of Austria-Hungary, but he need not be consulted on further details. As Bismarck helpfully clarifies it for Gorchakov, 'should emergencies dictate Russian occupation of Ottoman lands in the Balkans or partitions any Ottoman territory, so lonf as Russia consults with Austria-Hungary, respects her territorial integrity, and offers her a share in partition that St. Petersburg deems appropriate for Austrian security and level of effort, Germany will be satisfied with any territorial configuration Russia chooses.
In late summer 1875, Germany invades France over the common border. In the campaign of 1875-1876, Germany defeats the not completely rebuilt French Army, occupies the not refurbished French fortresses, and advances through northern France, getting in a position to impose terms.
Countless other European powers offer mediation. Britain offers mediation, along with some undisguised criticism. But no country will ally with France. In Britain's case, largely because they do not have a sizeable army, and do not want to do it alone, even though public opinion turns very anti-German. Russia, is exceptionally silent, only mouthing platitudes that 'peace is a good thing'. Austria-Hungary is equally taciturn.
In spring 1876, as the Bosnian and Bulgarian revolts, and Ottoman suppression efforts, escalate, Russia mobilizes for and declares war on the Ottoman Empire, dragooning Romania into an alliances, while gathering Serbia and Montenegro as enthusiastic and willing allies.
Ottoman atrocities, and British preoccupation with the destroyed balance of power in western Europe, leave Britain surprisingly passive and accepting of the Russian declaration of war and offensive campaign at first. However, brave Turkish resistance at Plevna, and time for the Conservative press to revive anti-Russian jingoism of the times, begins to turn British opinion against the Russians and in favor of the Turks.
While this is going on Bismarck reveals the fundamentals of his Bismarck-Gorchakov pact to the Austrians, to avoid having Austria object to Russian gains and implicate Germany in embarassments. Bismarck adds that if Austria finds itself on the end of inveterate Italian hostility, Vienna can expect understanding from Berlin on what it may have to do. Accordingly, the Austro-Hungarians go along to get along and occupy Bosnia, Sanjak of Novi Pazar, Kosovo, and Albania.
Meanwhile, the Russians and Romanians, and Bulgarian rebel army, along with Serbian detachments, close in on Constantinople. Britain faces the loss of another important bulwark on the route to India.
Britain, for the second year, is faced with a strategic reality it dreads, but here also has no good military options and no strong, willing allies on the continent.
All things being equal, Britain in circa 1876 is an economic/industrial near superpower, and has a navy second to no one. But it doesn't have an Army to casually throw on the European mainland that can compete with the armies of continental great powers.
What is up next for British strategy now that their traditional balance of power approach has failed, being bypassed by Germany and Russia conducting near simultaneous aggression. What terms does Germany impose on France to end the war? What terms does Russia impose on the Ottomans in the Balkans and Caucasus?
How do the Germans and Russians relate to each after the ending of their respective wars? What directions will European diplomacy and warfare go in over the next couple decades?
The essence of their agreement would be that Germany, a partner with Russia in the "Three Emperor's League" of 1873 would be absolutely free to take any measures she felt needed to her west vis-a-vis France to ensure the security of her western border, from the point of view of St. Petersburg.
Reciprocally, from the point of Berlin, Russia would be absolutely free to take any measures she felt need to her south in the direction of Romania, the Ottoman Empire, and the Black Sea to ensure the security of her Black Sea littoral.
Both powers would absolutely respect the territorial integrity of the third Emperor, Franz-Joseph of Austria-Hungary, but he need not be consulted on further details. As Bismarck helpfully clarifies it for Gorchakov, 'should emergencies dictate Russian occupation of Ottoman lands in the Balkans or partitions any Ottoman territory, so lonf as Russia consults with Austria-Hungary, respects her territorial integrity, and offers her a share in partition that St. Petersburg deems appropriate for Austrian security and level of effort, Germany will be satisfied with any territorial configuration Russia chooses.
In late summer 1875, Germany invades France over the common border. In the campaign of 1875-1876, Germany defeats the not completely rebuilt French Army, occupies the not refurbished French fortresses, and advances through northern France, getting in a position to impose terms.
Countless other European powers offer mediation. Britain offers mediation, along with some undisguised criticism. But no country will ally with France. In Britain's case, largely because they do not have a sizeable army, and do not want to do it alone, even though public opinion turns very anti-German. Russia, is exceptionally silent, only mouthing platitudes that 'peace is a good thing'. Austria-Hungary is equally taciturn.
In spring 1876, as the Bosnian and Bulgarian revolts, and Ottoman suppression efforts, escalate, Russia mobilizes for and declares war on the Ottoman Empire, dragooning Romania into an alliances, while gathering Serbia and Montenegro as enthusiastic and willing allies.
Ottoman atrocities, and British preoccupation with the destroyed balance of power in western Europe, leave Britain surprisingly passive and accepting of the Russian declaration of war and offensive campaign at first. However, brave Turkish resistance at Plevna, and time for the Conservative press to revive anti-Russian jingoism of the times, begins to turn British opinion against the Russians and in favor of the Turks.
While this is going on Bismarck reveals the fundamentals of his Bismarck-Gorchakov pact to the Austrians, to avoid having Austria object to Russian gains and implicate Germany in embarassments. Bismarck adds that if Austria finds itself on the end of inveterate Italian hostility, Vienna can expect understanding from Berlin on what it may have to do. Accordingly, the Austro-Hungarians go along to get along and occupy Bosnia, Sanjak of Novi Pazar, Kosovo, and Albania.
Meanwhile, the Russians and Romanians, and Bulgarian rebel army, along with Serbian detachments, close in on Constantinople. Britain faces the loss of another important bulwark on the route to India.
Britain, for the second year, is faced with a strategic reality it dreads, but here also has no good military options and no strong, willing allies on the continent.
All things being equal, Britain in circa 1876 is an economic/industrial near superpower, and has a navy second to no one. But it doesn't have an Army to casually throw on the European mainland that can compete with the armies of continental great powers.
What is up next for British strategy now that their traditional balance of power approach has failed, being bypassed by Germany and Russia conducting near simultaneous aggression. What terms does Germany impose on France to end the war? What terms does Russia impose on the Ottomans in the Balkans and Caucasus?
How do the Germans and Russians relate to each after the ending of their respective wars? What directions will European diplomacy and warfare go in over the next couple decades?