This isn't exactly an AH question. I've been reading about the unification of both countries, and I found it a bit odd that the British didn't seem to have intervened, in one way or another.
Obviously, the unification of both nation-states radically alterended the European balance of power in the continent (which was an esential goal of the British policy). Of course, it didn't mean directly that the equilibrium had been completely broken and that one country had united the continent. But it was still a significant change in the status quo established in 1815. Morover, the unification of Germany would be a challenged to British world dominance (a challenge that might had easilly been predicted even in the 1860ies)
So, the questions I have are:
Were the British reluctant to intervene in the continent in that decade?
If so, why? Was it because by that time they had realize thet fighting nationalists aspirations was pointless? Or was it because intervenenig in the continent was seen as risky and contrary to the laissez faire ideology en vogue at the time?
Or was it because they still saw France or Russia as the main threats, and didn't though a Piamonte-unified Italy or a Prussia-unified Germany would pose any threat?
Or was it because theyknew that, in any case, their unifications wouldn't imply that one single country would dominate the continent any time soon?
Or was it because these process were to fast for the politicians to realize what was happening?
Or was it because the liberal British favoured the aspirations of the italian and German nationalists, in the same way they had favoured the Greek national aspirrations 30 years ago?
And finally, an AH related questions: could they had intervened, if they had wanted to? Would such an intervention be effective?