Historymaster: space, time and dimensional traveler, Jedi Master, history student, political scientist, archmage, Ainur, fairy lord, fantasy writer, super hero in my spare time and a lot of other things not important at the moment. Nice to meet you.
Poland-Lithuania become independant in 1864
- Thread starter filipdomanski
- Start date
You can believe in whatever you want, including the flat Earth and the little green men from Mars and it is just fine. The problem in this specific case is that you did not produce a single serious factual argument to back up your beliefs.
I actually did produce several factual arguments, from a different conduct of the governement to a decisive intervention of France and the United Kingdom, to Prussia neutality and what could motivate it to a tactical which could complicate the life of the russians long enought. You are not convinced? Legit, but please do try to not sound so patronizing, maybe it is not your intention, but you do transmit this kind of vibes, and it does not help the discussion.
The problem is that the POD you mentioned would be realizable only in the context of a general war in Europe, something all the more difficult given how an independent Poland is not in the interest of at least two great powers. The Poles, for their part, cannot bargain; a non-existent Poland is in no position to deliver an existing Denmark to Prussia, say.
plus by 1864 the second holstein was already started and prussia didn't need to convince anyone as denmark give them the causus belli, historynomaster is a wild fantasy make estonian nationalist one looks sane
Sorry, these are not “arguments” but pure fantasies void of any specifics and unrelated to the geopolitical situation, logistics and pretty much everything else.
To be clear, it is not impossible. Napoleon III and France might well support this project as part of a plan for a general reorganization of Europe along presumably pro-French lines. Getting France to commit wholeheartedly to this project, at a time when it has extensive overseas involvements, would take some doing, while getting Britain to join France in this project would take more.
At the very least, France will need to get Austria and the smaller German states on side for this project. How it can do that, if the arguable French client of Italy is getting ready to war against Austria with the support of Prussia, is another matter. Perhaps if you had a different outcome to 1859-1860 that saw all Lombardy-Venetia transferred to the Savoyard kingdom, effectively limiting the potential for Italian irredentism and making a deal possible? Maybe even talk of compensating Austria for the loss of its Italian territories with Prussian Silesia?
(But then, how do you get Britain to support this?)
What about greater European involvement in the Civil War? France and Britain lend a theatrical bit of support to the CSA, the Russians make a more concrete grand gesture of support to the Union and Russian distraction strengthens Polithuania's hand, opening the way to Franco-British support to counter the Russians on the continent 🤔
At that time, funny as it may sound, Little Nappy was trying to maintain partnership with AII as a tool for achieving his goals in Europe while trying to placate the pro-Polish sentiments in France by making the anti-Russian noises. Needless to say that he failed on both accounts as he had change to find out later. The British goals had been even less clear and, as far as I can tell, were mostly a pure demagoguery (to be fair, not up to the Palmerstonian insanity level).
On a pure practical side the “project” was fantastic by a number of reasons:
1. Little Nappy already had enough of experienced of the joined French-British operations during the CW when France suffered huge losses for pretty much nothing except for him gaining an appropriate addressing from AII.
2. While during the CW the allies had a numeric advantage at the theater (most of the Russian troops had been staying on Austrian border) and certain logistical advantage due to the underdeveloped roadmap of the Crimea and Southern Russia in general and the theater being far removed from the production centers of the Russian Empire, here the attempt of a meaningful landing would be just in the completely opposite area: concentration of the most of the Russian armed forces, closeness to the production centers and much better communications on the Russian part of the theater (but not in a big part of a rebellious area).
3. The upraising at its top point (May 1863) amounted to 50,000 insurgents after which the numbers had been speedily decreasing (10,000 in September and after this single thousands) while the Russian numbers had been steadily growing (130,000 in August, 180,000 in October, and all the way to 220,000 in 1864). By the time the allies could realistically start implementation of the “plan”, they’d have a hard time looking for those whom they were intended to help, taking into an account that at no point they formed anything close to an unified army and even in May 1863 had been spread all over the internal areas of Poland and Lithuania. So, in the practical terms, the allies would have to fight a war on their own with a token Polish presence. Even from the very beginning the uprising was not a popular one: the peasants were not interested and even promises of the polish “government” did not change this.
4. Even during the CW the allied achievements on the Baltic were close to zero and now they would have to capture a major port, hold it and greatly increase their own numbers because they’d have to fight a long war of exhaustion.
That’s a very realistic assessment of the situation: making speeches and waving the fists is one thing but getting into the major war is a completely different issue.
AFAIK, for NIII Austria and Prussia had been of a considerably greater importance as the potential opponents than Russia: after 1863-64 NIII kept trying to patch relations with AII expecting various types of a diplomatic help from him. Russia at that time was pretty much contained (in Europe): serfs emancipation, military reform and all other types of a domestic entertainment prevented it from any serious involvement into the foreign affairs. Neither could it make a really “grand” gesture toward the Union.
I meant "grand" in more of a relative sense, in that yes, the Anglo-British involvement is largely performative, while the Russians make a somewhat less token contribution. Russia's domestic agenda means they can't really do any more, but if hostilities suddenly broke out in Europe even small-scale involvement in a North American conflict is potentially a major distraction.
I would ask you to not step so low like mistyping my nick on purpose. Beside, my pod is in 1863, not in 1864.
The same thing, Bismarck already have this war planned from 2 years and didn't need anyone OTL, plus Bismarck is a Junker, he would rat them out and get a better treaty with Russia 3 years earlier than OTL. So your pod and ideas are fantasy ASB, 1863 uprising was defeated without Russia breaking a sweat.
Bismark was an old Fox, what he would do is debatable; In those years he was pretty interested in fostering good relationship with England. A better deal with Russia is certainly a possiblity, but not a certainity; My PoDis certainly not fantasy ASB, as it does not involve magic, aliens or anything of that kind; It involves a good dose of luck, it may be not the more realistic scenario, but even unlikely scenarios got real in OTL, so, we can respectfully agree we disagree and stop a not constructive discussion.
Your is a constructive criticism who deserve some thought; We could say that in 1863 Napoleon III decides to not invest in creating the Second Mexican Empire; That way he stays on good side with Britain who was opposed to creating it and England and France can concentrate their strenght elsewhere.
Has this started yet?
I’m not sure on Lithuania’s inclusion, but support for Poland was very real and seemed to include two different suggestions. The POD might require better performance at the beginning, maybe avoiding some of the “white” and “red” splits among the rebels.
1) The reinforcement of the Treaty of Vienna by the UK, France, and Austria, meaning Poland’s autonomy as the Grand Duchy or “Congress” Poland be returned. This is the more likely but less fun outcome.
2) Napoleon III, grand schemer as he was, seemed to have a proposal of a larger scale - an independent Poland including Posen and Polish Galicia. It seemed certain that the smaller Congress Poland couldn’t survive on its own. In the grand deal, Austria also returns Venice to Italy and gains Silesia. This is really intended to punish Prussia more than Russia. Bismarck was seen as the main aggressor more than Russia after the aforementioned Alvensleben Convention.
Napoleon III also tried to persuade Austria by proposing a Hapsburg Grand Duke become King or Grand Duke of Poland. I’m struggling to figure out which Grand Duke Napoleon intended though - was it possibly OTL ill-fated Maximillian?
What Great Britain got out of this is uncertain to me, other than cutting down Russia. Perhaps Napoleon assumed popular sentiment in England would saw the government. Additionally, Napoleon was on rather good terms with Queen Victoria, albeit not for much longer.
I think it's a non-starterwithout getting Prussia on board. But how does one get Prussia on board when Prussia doesn't want Poland to exist?