AHC: Closer Relationship between Russia and Britain

kernals12

Banned
Given that Britain and Russia were on the same side of World War I, it's pretty surprising how lukewarm their relations were during the 19th century, much to London's almost certain regret after the Bolsheviks took over. The British worked to thwart Russia's ambitions in the Balkans where they wanted control over the Bosporous, they had their famous "Great Game" over Afghanistan, and they supported Japan during their war against Russia in 1904, because they didn't want them taking over more of China.
Is there any way Britain could decide to accomodate Russia's ambitions, or were they too scared of this potential rival?
 
Given that Britain and Russia were on the same side of World War I, it's pretty surprising how lukewarm their relations were during the 19th century, much to London's almost certain regret after the Bolsheviks took over. The British worked to thwart Russia's ambitions in the Balkans where they wanted control over the Bosporous, they had their famous "Great Game" over Afghanistan, and they supported Japan during their war against Russia in 1904, because they didn't want them taking over more of China.
Is there any way Britain could decide to accomodate Russia's ambitions, or were they too scared of this potential rival?

It's basically a law of geopolitics that the current dominant power and the most powerful nation contesting the existing system do not get along (The Anglo-American reproachment doesn't fit, as the US wasn't really interested in gaining dominance outside it's hemisphere). The alliance in WW I came about because of the rise of Germany (Kaiser Whilhelm II's very hamfisted diplomacy didn't help them look like not a threat) at the expense of France, and British desire to prevent a single hegemon from rising in Western Europe who could pose a risk to the Home Islands, which required backing France who brought Russia along as baggage. Britain does not want to feed the bear, full stop: even if it's friendly now, it's basic interests press up on yours and if allowed to grow stronger will turn against you at some point
 
Given that Britain and Russia were on the same side of World War I, it's pretty surprising how lukewarm their relations were during the 19th century, much to London's almost certain regret after the Bolsheviks took over. The British worked to thwart Russia's ambitions in the Balkans where they wanted control over the Bosporous, they had their famous "Great Game" over Afghanistan, and they supported Japan during their war against Russia in 1904, because they didn't want them taking over more of China.
Is there any way Britain could decide to accomodate Russia's ambitions, or were they too scared of this potential rival?

Of course, everything could be written off on "not feeding the bear" considerations but quite a few of the reasons were either a pure paranoia or an idea that only Britain is entitled to do whatever it wants and to expand as far as it wants and that everybody else must cave to its wishes (which was, IIRC, Palmerston's opinion). Obviously, not everyone had been agreeing with that view, hence a lot of the bad feelings related to the British and Russian expansionism in the CA.

However, it does not look like the Russians of that period shared the British animosity: the British "researchers" of the CA had been routinely well-received on the Russian territory. But, with the main purpose of the Russian expansion in the area being opening of the new markets for their goods, the British demagoguery about the free trade in the region was mostly ignored. Was area of the today's "stans" of some critical importance for Britain? I doubt it. Were Russians seriously planning invasion of India? It is not even funny unless geography and situation in Afghanistan are completely ignored. Eventually, it proved to be reasonably easy to establish a mutually-acceptable border.

As far as Far East was involved, I can't quite get the reasons for the British fears: it was on a VERY far end of the Russian logistics and the OTL arrangements with China did not noticeably infringe upon the British interests. British support of Japan served Japanese interests but how did it serve the British interests? Russia did not and would not have a serious naval presence on the Pacific, clearly did not plan any attack on the British colonies there and its trade with China had been mostly overland (aka, Brits could do nothing about it and how about the "free trade"?). When it was too late, Britain tried to limit Japanese naval buildup and within less than 4 decades after the RJW it had its colonies attacked by the same Japanese whom they helped to grew up into a major military power. BTW, I'm not sure if the Japanese activities in China (like rape of Nankin) had been beneficial for the British commerce either.

Britain supported unification of Germany under Prussia (how about not feeding the "Prussian bear"? Berlin, not Moscow or St-Petersburg has it on its coat of arms), and we know his this ended.

Britain spent a big part of the XIX century preventing disintegration of the Ottoman Empire and then had to spend a considerable effort fighting against it in WWI.

So how about a general wisdom of the British politicians and their ability for the long-term analysis of their actions?
 

longsword14

Banned
Is there any way Britain could decide to accomodate Russia's ambitions, or were they too scared of this potential rival?
Britain tried to stay away from deeply entangling commitments on the continent. For most of the century focus was on expanding overseas, so not only did Britain not have any especially good relations with Russia, it did not have them with any other country either.

The one thing that could bring Britain closely into an alliance would be a common threat. Short of that splendid isolation would remain in place. OTL alliances came about when isolation stopped working for Britain.

Even prior to WWI it was France that wanted to keep Russia onside for obvious reasons and at the same time at-least have GB neutral. Once all three had a common enemy, they became natural allies by force of circumstances.
 
Last edited:

Skallagrim

Banned
Napoleon does better, and is a bit smarter in how he plays ball with Russia. This initially keeps Russia on his side, and Britain ends up isolated. The French Empire must eventually be recognised, peace is concluded, and things settle down. Britain does deprive France of most colonies, though-- but france basically rules Europe. After some time, relations between France and Russia get increasingly tense. France doesn't want Russia getting too powerful, so it tries to curb certain Russian ambitions. Maybe France props up the Ottomans a bit, reasoning that this ensures stability. (Also, one could imagine a joint French-Ottoman project to dig a Suez Canal.)

Irked at the French attitude, Russia seeks closer relations with Britain, and the two powers begin to plot against France (and the Ottomans). Eventually, we see a major war where an Anglo-Russian alliance faces of against a Franco-Ottoman one.
 
Top