I believe Denmark was interested in joining the Zollverein customs union not the German Confederation.
http://icelandreview.com/news/2010/08/20/iceland-could-have-become-german-colony-1864
I believe Denmark was interested in joining the Zollverein customs union not the German Confederation.
I have found an an article collaborating this from a Danish newspaper date August 18, 2010.
I have found an an article collaborating this from a Danish newspaper date August 18, 2010.
https://politiken.dk/kultur/art5606634/Hemmeligt-arkiv-Kongen-tilbød-Danmark-til-tyskerne-efter-1864
Google translate usually works really well with translating a Germanic or Romance language into English.Is there a way of translating it?
Denmark joining more than a custom union is a big red flag to Britain not because of what navy it has but the naval threat it creates. Jutland seals off the Baltic, the North Atlantic Islands (Faroes,Iceland and Greenland ) are potential bases for a blockade of Britain, the other colonies again can be seen as a basing threat. RN does not often drink lead paint, it can read the map, look a few moves ahead and point out the encirclement threat.Yeah, but by this point it's 2nd rate. Not really a threat to Britain. This Germany is still primarily a land power with both France and Italian holding irredentist claims and Russia looming large to the East.
Denmark joining more than a custom union is a big red flag to Britain not because of what navy it has but the naval threat it creates. Jutland seals off the Baltic, the North Atlantic Islands (Faroes,Iceland and Greenland ) are potential bases for a blockade of Britain, the other colonies again can be seen as a basing threat. RN does not often drink lead paint, it can read the map, look a few moves ahead and point out the encirclement threat.
Prussia leading a Germany that is a Europe based land power Britain can live with , its colonies can be isolated and taken. Same Germany with control of the Baltic and potentially a string of bases able to dominate the North Atlantic trade routes along with gaining a naval tradition is a completely different fish. At the very least those North Atlantic Islands are getting sold/annexed/British protectorate status as a quid pro quo.
Agreed but Britain will assume bad things due to its general paranoia on all things naval. As long as the GC does not include anyone that can interdict the sea lanes ( Austria was seen as limited to the Adriatic, Denmark blocks the Baltic and threatens the Atlantic ), its a counterbalance to France/Russia but once it does, its a deadly threat to be resisted/stopped.Though Denmark joining the GC would not in itself give Prussia control of it - one reason no doubt why Bismarck wasn't interested. Indeed Christian IX already belonged to it under his "Duke of Holstein" hat.
Jutland seals off the Baltic, the North Atlantic Islands (Faroes,Iceland and Greenland ) are potential bases for a blockade of Britain, the other colonies again can be seen as a basing threat.
Trade and the control it gives over both Finland and Sweden. The comparison with the Ottomans is not at all valid, Britain knew it could pressure the Ottomans, they were on a downward spiral , Germany is rising. Given the amount of British policy to stop Russia getting control of access to the Black Sea, its not even arguable that it was seen as a big thing. Britain just saw the Ottomans as the safest option and a block on Russia.Why do they care? That screws over the Russians, one of their prime geopolitical rivals. By that logic the British should be upset that the Ottomans can bottle up the Black Sea.
They had control over Baltic trade even without Denmark in OTL.Trade and the control it gives over both Finland and Sweden. The comparison with the Ottomans is not at all valid, Britain knew it could pressure the Ottomans, they were on a downward spiral , Germany is rising. Given the amount of British policy to stop Russia getting control of access to the Black Sea, its not even arguable that it was seen as a big thing. Britain just saw the Ottomans as the safest option and a block on Russia.
Not in 1864 they didn't, no real navy and no blocking position on Swedish/Finnish ships using the Sound. Britian's worries would be on what they could do. The growth of the HSF is the main reason Britain started getting friendly with France ( without the HSF it would have been neutral ).They had control over Baltic trade even without Denmark in OTL.
Not in 1864 they didn't, no real navy and no blocking position on Swedish/Finnish ships using the Sound. Britian's worries would be on what they could do. The growth of the HSF is the main reason Britain started getting friendly with France ( without the HSF it would have been neutral ).