Triple Alliance TL

[abc123]

Originally Posted by yourworstnightmare

No, I don't think Alex II would want a Constitution, even though he was a reformer he wouldn't want to limit the power of the monarch that much. He'd still want Russia to be an autocracy.

Autocracy yes- but written in Constitution. After all, it is a wierd that one eurpean country and a great power has no constitution in 1880...

[lukedalton]

Originally Posted by abc123

Can you explain that?

That the melinkov move of expanding the secret police and worsen the penalty for political crime, without any political reform, is just a band aid, a temporary solution for the political problem. Good in the short term but in the long can cause more problem and bring more people to the rebel/reformist/opposition than a little.

[abc123]

Originally Posted by lukedalton

That the melinkov move of expanding the secret police and worsen the penalty for political crime, without any political reform, is just a band aid, a temporary solution for the political problem. Good in the short term but in the long can cause more problem and bring more people to the rebel/reformist/opposition than a little.

Political reform ( some sort ) will follow...

[abc123]

Minister of Interior Count Loris-Melikov was finaly ready to present to the Czar second part of his task, a political reform. It wasn't a easy taksk to accomplish a consensus of ministers about how to give a people more say in governing of Russia, so at the end a watered-down proposal was made.

Essentially Russia will remain absolutist monarchy with Czar as a supreme ruler with executive, legislative and judicial authority.
On behalf of Czar, execution will lead a Council of Ministers led by Imperial Chancellor of Russian Empire. All Ministers and Chancellor will be named by Czar and will answer only to him.


Yelagin Palace, home of Imperial Chancellor and Council of Ministers

A novel was that old institution of Zemsky Sobor ( National Assembly ) will be reinstated. At first, she would only have a advisory role.
It will be composed by 500 members elected by heads of peasant's families, owners of real estate in cities and by clergy and nobility.
All laws, budget and naming of ministers should be submitted to Sobor to get a advisory opinion.
The term length of Sobor was to be 4 years.


Tauride Palace, seat of Zemsky Sobor


Another legislative institution was State Council. State Council was to be reformed so that it includes:

- all Grand princes of Romanov family ( older than 21 year )
- heads of princely families that once ruled Russian Empire or some smaller countries that now are a part of Russia ( e.g. Bagration, Gediminas, Loris-Melikov, Lazarov... )
- all princes ( knyaz ) over age of 30
- equal number of counts and barons elected by Assemblies of Nobility
- equal number of members appointed by Czar for life
- all archbishops of Orthodox church, 12 bishops and 12 monks appointed by Czar

All laws, budget, naming of ministers etc. should come before State Council to get a opinion.


Mariinsky Palace, seat of State Council

But, ultimate responsability for governing the Empire still was in Czar's hands.

[yourworstnightmare]

So, some reforms, ultimately not enough for the reformers of course, but a Czar of All the Russias (appointed by God) would never give more (in this era anyways).

[abc123]

Originally Posted by yourworstnightmare

So, some reforms, ultimately not enough for the reformers of course, but a Czar of All the Russias (appointed by God) would never give more (in this era anyways).

Something like that.

But, under a smart Czar, a lot of things can be made even with only a consultative assembly.

Legislative proces is:

- laws can be proposed by Czar or by at least 10% of members of Sobor or State Council

- in practice, a law will be first proposed by a Minister, after that it will go at Council of Ministers, after that it will be sent to the both houses for opinions, after that ouncil of Ministers will prepare a final draft of the law ( if amended it will be sent again to the both houses for opinion ) and after that it will be sent to the Czar for final ratification.

if a law is proposed by members of some house, it will be discussed by members of that house, Council of Ministers will give it's opinion, after that it will be sent to the other house, and after all of that ( if both houses agreed ), Council of Ministers will give it's final opinion, and then a law will be sent to the Czar for final ratification.

[yourworstnightmare]

Originally Posted by abc123

Something like that.

But, under a smart Czar, a lot of things can be made even with only a consultative assembly.

Legislative proces is:

- laws can be proposed by Czar or by at least 10% of members of Sobor or State Council

- in practice, a law will be first proposed by a Minister, after that it will go at Council of Ministers, after that it will be sent to the both houses for opinions, after that ouncil of Ministers will prepare a final draft of the law ( if amended it will be sent again to the both houses for opinion ) and after that it will be sent to the Czar for final ratification.

if a law is proposed by members of some house, it will be discussed by members of that house, Council of Ministers will give it's opinion, after that it will be sent to the other house, and after all of that ( if both houses agreed ), Council of Ministers will give it's final opinion, and then a law will be sent to the Czar for final ratification.

But the Czar still can deny to ratify any laws he doesn't want. It's a good step none the less. I think what's needed for further reforms, is a reform friendly Czar, who's quite weak, one the reformist factions in the Sobor can dominate.

[Mr. BoJangles]

subscribed

[abc123]

Originally Posted by yourworstnightmare

But the Czar still can deny to ratify any laws he doesn't want. It's a good step none the less. I think what's needed for further reforms, is a reform friendly Czar, who's quite weak, one the reformist factions in the Sobor can dominate.

Yup, the Czar can allways refuse any bill he doesn't want. Also he still has the right to use Imperial Decree to do something without opinion of Sobor/State Council.

About the weak Czar, hard to expect, especially in Russia where Czar was quasi-semi Deus. At least while Alex II is alive IMHO.
Later, maybe...

[abc123]

Since we now hawe a Zemsky Sobor in Russia ( albeit only a consultative one ) in your opinion what political parties will emerge in Russia? First elections will be soon, what do you mean that these partier will have as a programme and how many votes will they get?

[abc123]

After ending of Great Eastern Crisis sucessfully for Germany Bismarck was aware of emergence of socialist parties in Germany. He decided that he need's to do something to contain them and the best way was to try to solve some of real problems for workers so that workers do not seek help by woting for socialists.

Bismarck decided to implement the world's first welfare state in the 1880s. He decided to work closely with big industry and aimed to stimulate German economic growth by giving workers greater security. A secondary concern was trumping the Socialists, who had no welfare proposals of their own and opposed Bismark's. Bismarck especially listened to Hermann Wagener and Theodor Lohrmann, advisers who persuaded Bismarck to give workers a corporate status in the legal and political structures of the new German state. On 20 March 1882, Bismarck declared:

The real grievance of the worker is the insecurity of his existence; he is not sure that he will always have work, he is not sure that he will always be healthy, and he foresees that he will one day be old and unfit to work. If he falls into poverty, even if only through a prolonged illness, he is then completely helpless, left to his own devices, and society does not currently recognize any real obligation towards him beyond the usual help for the poor, even if he has been working all the time ever so faithfully and diligently. The usual help for the poor, however, leaves a lot to be desired, especially in large cities, where it is very much worse than in the country.

Bismarck’s idea was to implement welfare programs that were acceptable to the conservatives without any socialistic aspects. He was dubious about laws protecting workers at the workplace, such as safe working conditions, limitation of work hours, and the regulation of women's and child labor, because he believed that such regulation would force workers and employers to reduce work and production, and thus harm the economy.
Bismarck opened debate on the subject on 17 November 1881 in the Imperial Message to the Reichstag, using the term practical Christianity to describe his program. Bismarck’s program centered squarely on insurance programs designed to increase productivity, and focus the political attentions of German workers on supporting the Junker's government. The program included health insurance, accident insurance, disability insurance, and a retirement pension, none of which were then currently in existence to any great degree.
Based on Bismarck’s message, The Reichstag filed three bills designed to deal with the concept of Accident insurance, and one for Health Insurance. The subjects of Retirement pensions and Disability Insurance were placed on the back burner for the time being. The social legislation implemented by Bismarck in the 1880s played a key role in the sharp rapid decline of German emigration to America. Young men considering emigration looked at not only the gap between higher hourly 'direct wages' in the United States and Germany but also the differential in 'indirect wages,' that is, social benefits, which favored staying in Germany. The young men went to German industrial cities, so that Bismarck's insurance system partly offset low wage rates in Germany and furthered the fall of the emigration rate.

[abc123]

Map of Europe in 1881



Link:
http://www.dumpt.com/img/viewer.php?...li4tctb3m9.png

( larger image )

[abc123]

Tunisia at the time of Congress of Berlin was area under Ottoman suizeranity but was ruled by domestic ruler Sadik Bey. He was a reformer, but to make the reforms he took big amount of money from western, primarly French, Italian and British creditors.
In Tunisia lived a sizable Italian community ( about 100 000 ), and Italy had some big investments there. On the other hand, Tunisia bordered with French Algerea and France wanted to turn him into a colony.

At the Congress of Berlin a deal couldn't be made, because Germany, A-H and Russia supported Italy, and Britain supported claim of France.
So, the issue had to be solved by bilateral agreement of intrested parties.
So, in 1879 representatives of France, Italy and UK ( UK was chosen to be a mediator ) meeted in London.


Jules Ferry, Foreign Minister of France


Agostino Depretis, Foreign Minister of Italy

There a compromise was made.

Tunisia will become a French- Italian Condominium.
They agreed that a protectorate was to be imposed on Sadik Bey and Tunisia. So, each country will name Resident-General and two Resident-Generals will act as joint-governors of country. They also will be a Foreign Ministers of Tunisia.
A french general will be named as a Minister of War of Tunisia and French and Italian military forces will occupy Tunisia.
A Italian national will be named as Finance Minister of Tunisia, responcible for paying of debt.

Britain did get a promise that niether side will not make any naval base in Tunisia.
The reason of this compromise is because France and especially UK were aware that Italy isn't happy by situation after Congress of Berlin and that one day she can become a valuable ally against Germany and Russia. Also, French were aware that Italians have irredentist claims on some their territories and figured that it's better to direct Italians on Austro- Hungary and Balkans.

Italy also did get a promise that Libya ( at that time still under Ottoman rule ) is their sphere of influence. So, with this Treaty of London, great powers decided the fate of Tunisia.

Now only a pretext fo implement all of that to Tunisia was to be found. In northwest Tunisia the Khrumir [Khmir] tribe episodically launched raids into the surrounding countryside. In Spring of 1881 they raided across the border into French Algeria. France responded by invading Tunisia, sending an army of about 36,000. Their advance to Tunis was rapidly executed. Italy on the other hand send their navy and army to take Tunis and Biserta. The Bey was soon compelled to come to terms with the French- Italian occupation of the country, in the first of a series of treaties. So, by signing of Treaty of Bardo ( in essence copy of Treaty of London ) Tunisia became a French- Italian Protectorate.


Paul Cambon, first French Resident- General in Tunisia


Andrea Starabba, Marchese di Ruddini, first Italian Resident- General

[lukedalton]

Well even if neither side had obtained all the desired objective is still a fair compromise.
UK and France had now made some great move on getting Italy on their side and London had the assurance that no naval base (who can give her problem in controlling Suez by closing the Sicily Strait).
Rome even if must divide the control of Tunisi with Paris had not lost the investment and Tunisia is still a viable place for immigration, this and the gradual raprochment with France butterfly away the trade wars between Italy and France and giving the former a better economic situation, this will probably had consequence in a different and maybe lessened italian diaspora.
The Emperors League is probably too distracted by internal matters to see that as a first step for an alliance against them, but i had the feeling that things will change.

The succes of Tunisia can make Italy bolder in her colonial effort, but she will almost certain mantain the policy of economical penetration of the current prime minister than one of outright military conquest (in OTL the Slap of Tunisi- Schiaffo di Tunisi discreted that kind of effort and shift the method to a more direct military aggression like the first invasion of Abyssinia)

[abc123]

Originally Posted by lukedalton

Well even if neither side had obtained all the desired objective is still a fair compromise.
UK and France had now made some great move on getting Italy on their side and London had the assurance that no naval base (who can give her problem in controlling Suez by closing the Sicily Strait).
Rome even if must divide the control of Tunisi with Paris had not lost the investment and Tunisia is still a viable place for immigration, this and the gradual raprochment with France butterfly away the trade wars between Italy and France and giving the former a better economic situation, this will probably had consequence in a different and maybe lessened italian diaspora.
The Emperors League is probably too distracted by internal matters to see that as a first step for an alliance against them, but i had the feeling that things will change.

The succes of Tunisia can make Italy bolder in her colonial effort, but she will almost certain mantain the policy of economical penetration of the current prime minister than one of outright military conquest (in OTL the Slap of Tunisi- Schiaffo di Tunisi discreted that kind of effort and shift the method to a more direct military aggression like the first invasion of Abyssinia)

Yes, I do think that it's a fine compromise.
About effect of these trade wars between Ityla and France, I'm not expert on that issue, can you tell me more about that, so that I can decide about influence of that on italian economy? About emigration, maybe somewhat reduced, but IMO not in big terms, Italy had to much problems to be solved so quickly.

About Italian colonial efforts, I certainly see Libya as part of Italy in the future, and Somalia and Eritrea too, but Ethiopia, not in my opinion...

About reactions of Dreikaiserbund, IMO they didn't react out of 2 reasons:

a) they are in a middle of reforms at home, so they need time to consolidate their position

b) they were afraid that their meddling only makes Italy, France and UK closer...

[yourworstnightmare]

Hmm, France could easily secure an alliance with Italy if they give Tunisia to the Italians. I don't thin a dual protectorate would last in the long run. Conflicts between French and Italian interests within Tunisia are bound to emerge.

[lukedalton]

Yes, I do think that it's a fine compromise.
About effect of these trade wars between Ityla and France, I'm not expert on that issue, can you tell me more about that, so that I can decide about influence of that on italian economy? About emigration, maybe somewhat reduced, but IMO not in big terms, Italy had to much problems to be solved so quickly.

The economic warfare between France and Italy was a battle between an economic Goliath (Paris) against David (Rome), the agricolture crisis of the 80's was greatly exacerbated by the French tariff, South Italy was the great loser in this war because had and almost exclusive agricoltural economy exacerbating their structural problem and basically destroying every change for a more correct development and get more people to leave Italy (export goes from 405 to 116 million of lire from 1887 to 1897). From the industrial pow the French investment were soon substitued by Germans, so no great change here but a lot of people lost a great deal of money in Tunisia with the French invasion, so even here there is a little economic gift for a developing industrial nation like Italy.
In a political sense Tunisi and this economic war greatly empowered the nationalistic parties

[lukedalton]

Originally Posted by yourworstnightmare

Hmm, France could easily secure an alliance with Italy if they give Tunisia to the Italians. I don't thin a dual protectorate would last in the long run. Conflicts between French and Italian interests within Tunisia are bound to emerge.

Probably but if the Three emperors league become an official alliance, Italy had a greater problem than France aka the A-H Empire now with German and Russian friends, so if she want to liberate the irredente land and get her zone of influence in the balkans, hell if she want to avoid an invasion and the dismember of the nation she will attach to Paris and London, the compromise about Tunisi is a good patch and the avoided trade war really smooth things, thing will not be perfect but there is a lot less animosity now with France than with the A-H empire (for a comparisation of OTL with TTL)

[yourworstnightmare]

Originally Posted by lukedalton

Probably but if the Three emperors league become an official alliance, Italy had a greater problem than France aka the A-H Empire now with German and Russian friends, so if she want to liberate the irredente land and get her zone of influence in the balkans, hell if she want to avoid an invasion and the dismember of the nation she will attach to Paris and London, the compromise about Tunisi is a good patch and the avoided trade war really smooth things, thing will not be perfect but there is a lot less animosity now with France than with the A-H empire (for a comparisation of OTL with TTL)

Yes, but Italy need Tunisia more than France do, and a handover would secure the Alliance.

[lukedalton]

Originally Posted by yourworstnightmare

Yes, but Italy need Tunisia more than France do, and a handover would secure the Alliance.

Maybe in the future if Italy pay some compensation to France