Why did Napoleon III need Britain's approval?

[Shtudmuffin]

IOTL, Napoleon III seriously considered having France intervene on the side of the Confederacy in the American Civil War. However, one of the main reasons he didn't was because the British didn't want to.

My question is: why did he need Britain's "green light" to intervene? It's unlikely he'd be risking war, as most people in Britain didn't really care who won (IIRC). Even if Britain cared, he shouldn't have if they did; the two nations did have a rivalry, so there's no reason to care what your rival thinks. He also wouldn't need British support to carry out operations in support of the Confederates. Furthermore, if France intervened for the Confederates, they would be able to further their cause in Mexico. So why didn't Nappy III and France intervene on their own?

[SavoyTruffle]

Napoleon III was an Anglophile + the Brits were the real enforcers of the Monroe Doctrine.

[Mikestone8]

His experiances with the Crimean and Italian wars had left him more cautious than heretofore and he was reluctant to act alone. Alos, he believed that his uncle's failure had been due to the latter's inability to come to terms with Britain, and he was determined to avoid a clash.

In the event, as AJP Taylor noted, he did no better with a British alliance than his uncle had done without one "unless it is better to die in Chiselhurst than in St Helena".

[TheNordicBrit]

Also the fact that, although many became amenable to Napoleon III after the Crimean War, they still worried about the legacy of his uncle and namesake - Napoleon I.

[Maponus]

Because we control the whole world with Rothschild banks, of course.

[mowque]

Because the UK was the real power of the period.

[jkarr]

because napoleon IIIs france relied alot on britian...

theres a reason our patriotic anthem is called Rule Britannia

[Johnrankins]

Another reason was that by 1860 he US was already a regional Great Power with the #2 or #3 industrial power on the planet depending on who you read and was thousands of miles away. As such intervention would have been both costly and risky. The CSA had nothing to offer except cotton. As such he didn't want to take the risk of winding up with thousands of corpses, millions in bills and have nothing to show for it.

[Elfwine]

What John said. One on one, the USA-CSA's industrial power is comparable to France's (I think its slightly behind, but only very, very slightly) as of 1860.

Fighting France on top of the CSA might be bad for the USA, but such an expensive struggle would need some very good returns to justify it.

I don't know if he needed Britain, but Britain would have taken it from uncomfortably close to stacked in the European side's favor.

[CandyDragon]

Because Nappy 3 felt he needed to curry favor with the Brits to avoid a messy end.

[wolf_brother]

I wouldn't see that Napoléon III needed Britain's approval, but he certainly curried their favor; though when it suited him he was certainly willing to go against their wants in favor of his own (see: Senegal, Italy, Vietnam, Mexico).

[Johnrankins]

Originally Posted by Elfwine

What John said. One on one, the USA-CSA's industrial power is comparable to France's (I think its slightly behind, but only very, very slightly) as of 1860.

Fighting France on top of the CSA might be bad for the USA, but such an expensive struggle would need some very good returns to justify it.

I don't know if he needed Britain, but Britain would have taken it from uncomfortably close to stacked in the European side's favor.

Also win or lose France can't occupy the US itself in the long term and thus will have to deal with a very pissed US after the war. A US that will interfere with French plans whenever and wherever it can. By 1860 it was clear it was merely a matter of years or at most decades before the US would exceed France as an industrial power(If it didn't already). The CSA winning will change that by only a matter of months or at most a year or two as the South was an insignifigant contributer to the US industrial power. So it would be only a matter of time before France would have to deal with a US that had greater industrial power and a larger population than it had. Better to have GB as an ally to blunt some of that wrath post-war than deal with it on its own. For example, picture a Franco-Prussian War in which Prussia has the US as an ally!

[Max Sinister]

Originally Posted by Johnrankins

As such he didn't want to take the risk of winding up with thousands of corpses, millions in bills and have nothing to show for it.

He didn't mind in Mexico.

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by Max Sinister

He didn't mind in Mexico.

Did he go into Mexico expecting it to be that ugly?

[Johnrankins]

Originally Posted by Elfwine

Did he go into Mexico expecting it to be that ugly?

Not talking about the fact that Mexico was a stroll in the park compared to a war with the US would be.

[Max Sinister]

Originally Posted by Elfwine

Did he go into Mexico expecting it to be that ugly?

Probably not, but in that case he had wrong expectations.

[Shtudmuffin]

Originally Posted by Johnrankins

Also win or lose France can't occupy the US itself in the long term and thus will have to deal with a very pissed US after the war. A US that will interfere with French plans whenever and wherever it can. By 1860 it was clear it was merely a matter of years or at most decades before the US would exceed France as an industrial power(If it didn't already). The CSA winning will change that by only a matter of months or at most a year or two as the South was an insignifigant contributer to the US industrial power. So it would be only a matter of time before France would have to deal with a US that had greater industrial power and a larger population than it had. Better to have GB as an ally to blunt some of that wrath post-war than deal with it on its own. For example, picture a Franco-Prussian War in which Prussia has the US as an ally!

Sure, the US and French might become eternal enemies. However, this won't affect the French for a while. IOTL, the US took 40ish years to become a power capable of global projection; with a southern victory, it will probably be 50-60 years before the US can get back at the French in any meaningful way, and by then the grudge against the French will most likely have dissipated to some degree.

[Johnrankins]

Originally Posted by Shtudmuffin

Sure, the US and French might become eternal enemies. However, this won't affect the French for a while. IOTL, the US took 40ish years to become a power capable of global projection; with a southern victory, it will probably be 50-60 years before the US can get back at the French in any meaningful way, and by then the grudge against the French will most likely have dissipated to some degree.

It doesn't need GLOBAL power projection as France had colonies in the Western Hemisphere that it can go after first and there are economic means of hampering France. Part of the reason it took so long for it to have global power projection is that it had no real desire to do so. As long as the Western Hemisphere was unofficially acknowledged as its "sphere of influence" it was more or less content. France interfering in its affairs would change that in a hurry. If the #2 or #3 industrial power on the planet wants to have a degree of power projection it can.

[Shtudmuffin]

Originally Posted by Johnrankins

It doesn't need GLOBAL power projection as France had colonies in the Western Hemisphere that it can go after first and there are economic means of hampering France. Part of the reason it took so long for it to have global power projection is that it had no real desire to do so. As long as the Western Hemisphere was unofficially acknowledged as its "sphere of influence" it was more or less content. France interfering in its affairs would change that in a hurry. If the #2 or #3 industrial power on the planet wants to have a degree of power projection it can.

I have a feeling it will be too busy trying to contain the CSA to give France trouble. This problem will only be compounded by the fact that thanks to a Confederate victory distracting the US's attention, Maximilian will take power in Mexico, which will give France an important ally and the US another enemy they have to occupy themselves with.

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by Shtudmuffin

I have a feeling it will be too busy trying to contain the CSA to give France trouble. This problem will only be compounded by the fact that thanks to a Confederate victory distracting the US's attention, Maximilian will take power in Mexico, which will give France an important ally and the US another enemy they have to occupy themselves with.

The problem is that the USA isn't exactly going to be challenged containing the CSA - it has vastly superior resources.

And Max has problems in Mexico simply from the Mexicans, whatever the US can/can't do.

Meanwhile, even Mexico and the CSA put together are more the kind of allies you have to bail out (Italy) than are even a useful distraction (AH).