What did Napoleon plan to do with Russia after invading it?

Did he plan to divide a part between his allies and break the rest up into several puppet regimes, as he planned to do in Portugal? Did he plan to oust the Czar and replace him by one of his family members, as he did in Spain? Or maybe leave it mostly as it is with some concessions while forced to be an ally of France, a la Austria and Prussia?
 
He wanted it to be brought back into the Continental System and be turned into a junior member of an alliance. He wanted a few concessions and the like but severely underestimated just how much Russia wanted out of the alliance.
 
So in the eventuality of a successful French invasion of Russia, Russia's status would essentially be the same as Austria's and Prussia's. Correct?
 
So in the eventuality of a successful French invasion of Russia, Russia's status would essentially be the same as Austria's and Prussia's. Correct?

Probably. With forcing the independence of the Duchy of Warsaw/Poland down the Czar's throat in addition.
 
Probably. With forcing the independence of the Duchy of Warsaw/Poland down the Czar's throat in addition.

Not sure if that would have happened. Napoleon certainly talked a great deal regarding the Poles, but it's very unlikely that he would have supported their independence over his alliance with Russia.
 
Originally posted by DAv
Not sure if that would have happened. Napoleon certainly talked a great deal regarding the Poles, but it's very unlikely that he would have supported their independence over his alliance with Russia.

I think this time, being victorious over Russia and all, he would have. Duchy of Warsaw might become somewhat larger (probably with Vilnius) and is renamed as Kingdom of Poland, or something like that. The goal for creating stronger Poland would have been to have a loyal French watchdog in the east. DoW had already proven to be one (war against Austria in 1809), while Russia had proven to be not exactly reliable as an ally - after all, this was what the war was all about.
Poles made the largest non-French contingent of Le Grande Armee and Napoleon called invasion of Russia "the second Polish war". Stronger Poland with its border farther eastward (so closer to Moscow and Petersburg) might keep Russia in check and serve as base, if Russia needs to be brought back to heel again. Not to mention using Poland as a threat to Russia: "disobbey again and I will give Poles all the lands they had lost!". Sentiments and French interests are in this case the same.
So yes, if Napoleon had been victorious and had dictated terms, I think Poland would have been bigger and "promoted" back to rank of a kingdom. Of course he wouldn't have recreated the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but stronger and loyal ally in the region was something France would have needed and I believe Napoleon would have seen it.
 
Originally posted by DAv


I think this time, being victorious over Russia and all, he would have. Duchy of Warsaw might become somewhat larger (probably with Vilnius) and is renamed as Kingdom of Poland, or something like that. The goal for creating stronger Poland would have been to have a loyal French watchdog in the east. DoW had already proven to be one (war against Austria in 1809), while Russia had proven to be not exactly reliable as an ally - after all, this was what the war was all about.
Poles made the largest non-French contingent of Le Grande Armee and Napoleon called invasion of Russia "the second Polish war". Stronger Poland with its border farther eastward (so closer to Moscow and Petersburg) might keep Russia in check and serve as base, if Russia needs to be brought back to heel again. Not to mention using Poland as a threat to Russia: "disobbey again and I will give Poles all the lands they had lost!". Sentiments and French interests are in this case the same.
So yes, if Napoleon had been victorious and had dictated terms, I think Poland would have been bigger and "promoted" back to rank of a kingdom. Of course he wouldn't have recreated the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, but stronger and loyal ally in the region was something France would have needed and I believe Napoleon would have seen it.

Napoleon was boderline delusional about Russia's worth as an alliance. This was a man who wasted time in Moscow for weeks on end because he thought that the Tsar would totally see sense any day now. Anything that was going to disrupt the alliance as he believed exited wouldn't have been done. If there's a peace, it's only to try and bring Russia back into the fold, restoring Poland at the expense of Russia would have destroyed that.
 
I have my doubts. Waiting in Moscow for the tsar to restart French-Russian alliance can be explained with Napoleon realizing he would not beat the Russians in the field since after Borodino they avoided battle. Tsar Alexander giving up and willing to negotiate was Napoleon's last hope for success. If he was victorious and able to dictate the terms, he might have acted differently. He knew the tsar was not to be trusted anymore.
Also in 1809, after the war with Austria, Duchy of Warsaw regaind a large part of Austrian occupied territories (including Cracow) which didn't stop Napoleon from marrying Marie Louise (daughter of Habsburgs) in 1810 and improving relations with Austria (at least officially). Granted, Russia would have needed some boon to swallow a loss of territory.
IMO Napoleon would have been guided more by France's interest than by his personal sentiments. But who knows what was really in his head? You might be right after all.
 
If he was smart he'd realize Russia could never be worked with and further expanded Polish lands, from what I understand the poles adored him at the start of the war and they where probably the most loyal satellite state in all of Europe.
 
If he was smart he'd realize Russia could never be worked with and further expanded Polish lands, from what I understand the poles adored him at the start of the war and they where probably the most loyal satellite state in all of Europe.

I agree. Napoleon was a man of honour. He would not screw over his most loyal and trusted ally. Furthermore, Poland had some of the best fighting soldiers in all of Europe. His best course of action would have been a Poland-Austria alliance against Prussia and Russia. France would offer a defensive alliance with Austria against further Russian, Prussian and Turkish aggression in exchange for Austrian recognition of Republican France and Poland.
 
I agree. Napoleon was a man of honour. He would not screw over his most loyal and trusted ally. Furthermore, Poland had some of the best fighting soldiers in all of Europe. His best course of action would have been a Poland-Austria alliance against Prussia and Russia. France would offer a defensive alliance with Austria against further Russian, Prussian and Turkish aggression in exchange for Austrian recognition of Republican France and Poland.

Napoleon is such a man of honour that when an ally suffered a military rebellion he called his ally and his heir to him and forced them to renounce their crown and instead make him King of Spain.
 
I agree. Napoleon was a man of honour. He would not screw over his most loyal and trusted ally. Furthermore, Poland had some of the best fighting soldiers in all of Europe. His best course of action would have been a Poland-Austria alliance against Prussia and Russia. France would offer a defensive alliance with Austria against further Russian, Prussian and Turkish aggression in exchange for Austrian recognition of Republican France and Poland.


What does Austria get out of it?

If Nappy is patronising an independent Poland, she can't expand that way, nor can she expand west unless he is willing to give up part of his conquests in Germany and/or Italy, which isn't particularly likely.

So Austria's only potential gains are in the Balkan peninsula, most of which is worthless, and she mightn't even get that if Nappy takes a fancy to Constantinople.
 
What does Austria get out of it?

If Nappy is patronising an independent Poland, she can't expand that way, nor can she expand west unless he is willing to give up part of his conquests in Germany and/or Italy, which isn't particularly likely.

So Austria's only potential gains are in the Balkan peninsula, most of which is worthless, and she mightn't even get that if Nappy takes a fancy to Constantinople.

Austria gets a defensive alliance against Prussia, Russia and the Turks. That is valuable. It, and Poland, gets any potential territories from them in case of war. Austria had too many enemies surrounding it so it might as well reduce its enemies list by turning France and Poland into allies.
 
Napoleon is such a man of honour that when an ally suffered a military rebellion he called his ally and his heir to him and forced them to renounce their crown and instead make him King of Spain.

We've had this discussion multiple times on this site. Yes, in hindsight Napoleon was an idiot with Spain, but at the time it did make since. Carlos IV and Fernando VII were at each others throats and establishing Spain, so removing them both seemed like a smart idea. Enthroning Bonaparte relatives had been successful in Italy, Holland and Germany, so there was no reason to think that it wouldn't work in Spain. Napoleon just underestimated the Spanish attachment to the Bourbons.

If he had understood the situation better he probably would have enthroned another Bourbon instead, like Infante Carlos or Infante Francisco de Paula. The later would probably have been the best choice. Make Francisco King, marry him to a Bonaparte relative (Marie Letizia Murat or Charlotte Bonaparte would be good picks) and leave an army to support him. Then he can get on with the invasion of Portugal. Problem solved. A shame, for Napoleon at least, that things didn't work out this way.
 
It made sense from a POV that it seemed an opportune moment to take over. However, it was a pure greed move. There was really no need to take it over, and absolutely it was a backstab move (which was the point of the comment about Nap's lack of honor). The rulers of Spain (Godoy and the two competing kings) weren't all that capable as leaders, but the true destabilizing force in Spain was France demanding they do bidding that they weren't really capable of.
 
It made sense from a POV that it seemed an opportune moment to take over. However, it was a pure greed move. There was really no need to take it over, and absolutely it was a backstab move (which was the point of the comment about Nap's lack of honor). The rulers of Spain (Godoy and the two competing kings) weren't all that capable as leaders, but the true destabilizing force in Spain was France demanding they do bidding that they weren't really capable of.

Godoy Spain was never a a trusted ally of Napoleonic France like Poland was. Godoy planned to attack France while it was at war with Prussia. Napoleon's swift victory over Prussia after Jena caught Spain by surprise and with its pants down. It was forced to back down but Napoleon, quite rightly, never forgave Godoy for his planned treachery. Add in all the backstabbing going on in the Spanish court (Ferdinand apparently asked Napoleon for help in overthrowing Godoy) that was destabilizing Spain; so Napoleon decided to remake Spain into a true ally of France. A tragedy really because Godoy was the best leader that Spain had at the time because he was willling to bring unpopular but much-needed reforms to his country in order to return it to its former glory but the Spanish people never accepted him nor did Napoleon although the latter could not be blamed.
 
Godoy Spain was never a a trusted ally of Napoleonic France like Poland was. Godoy planned to attack France while it was at war with Prussia. Napoleon's swift victory over Prussia after Jena caught Spain by surprise and with its pants down. It was forced to back down but Napoleon, quite rightly, never forgave Godoy for his planned treachery. Add in all the backstabbing going on in the Spanish court (Ferdinand apparently asked Napoleon for help in overthrowing Godoy) that was destabilizing Spain; so Napoleon decided to remake Spain into a true ally of France. A tragedy really because Godoy was the best leader that Spain had at the time because he was willling to bring unpopular but much-needed reforms to his country in order to return it to its former glory but the Spanish people never accepted him nor did Napoleon although the latter could not be blamed.

In this case id say it would have been more worthwhile to just side with the poles in entirety from a pragmatic standpoint. The Russians will never accept the continental system in it's entirety, and a restored Poland will probably act as "the France of the east" in terms of maintaining French interests.
 
Godoy Spain was never a a trusted ally of Napoleonic France like Poland was. Godoy planned to attack France while it was at war with Prussia. Napoleon's swift victory over Prussia after Jena caught Spain by surprise and with its pants down. It was forced to back down but Napoleon, quite rightly, never forgave Godoy for his planned treachery. Add in all the backstabbing going on in the Spanish court (Ferdinand apparently asked Napoleon for help in overthrowing Godoy) that was destabilizing Spain; so Napoleon decided to remake Spain into a true ally of France. A tragedy really because Godoy was the best leader that Spain had at the time because he was willling to bring unpopular but much-needed reforms to his country in order to return it to its former glory but the Spanish people never accepted him nor did Napoleon although the latter could not be blamed.

Napoleon betrayed the ruler and his heir of an allied nation and installed his own family on the throne of Spain.

Exactly who in Spain did Napoleon not betray?
 
Did he plan to divide a part between his allies and break the rest up into several puppet regimes, as he planned to do in Portugal? Did he plan to oust the Czar and replace him by one of his family members, as he did in Spain? Or maybe leave it mostly as it is with some concessions while forced to be an ally of France, a la Austria and Prussia?

He started this war over the Duchy of Warsaw. If he had won the war he was taking away Russia's Polish territory

Godoy Spain was never a a trusted ally of Napoleonic France like Poland was. Godoy planned to attack France while it was at war with Prussia. Napoleon's swift victory over Prussia after Jena caught Spain by surprise and with its pants down. It was forced to back down but Napoleon, quite rightly, never forgave Godoy for his planned treachery. Add in all the backstabbing going on in the Spanish court (Ferdinand apparently asked Napoleon for help in overthrowing Godoy) that was destabilizing Spain; so Napoleon decided to remake Spain into a true ally of France. A tragedy really because Godoy was the best leader that Spain had at the time because he was willling to bring unpopular but much-needed reforms to his country in order to return it to its former glory but the Spanish people never accepted him nor did Napoleon although the latter could not be blamed.

Godoy was smart but not wise. He knew what to do but how to do it. He got in a position of power from where he could launch reform, but then pissed off the court.

If Napoleon wanted to put anyone in charge it was Franceso de Paula. Francesco de Paula was closest one of the lot to Charles III of Spain. Francesco would have done the necessary reforms while keeping happy.

Napoleon betrayed the ruler and his heir of an allied nation and installed his own family on the throne of Spain.

Exactly who in Spain did Napoleon not betray?

The liberals who joined the French side in the Civil War that is called the Peninsular War
 
Top