What's the basis for Britain's "balance of power" policy?

I would think a hegemonic power would also have much greater ability to control -- or forbid -- British access to Continental markets.

This was a huge factor. Despite its colonial empire, the bulk of British trade was still with the rest of Europe.

Napoleon's Continental System represented a significant threat to the British economy if it had been fully implemented, but it broke down seriously in Spain after he invaded there, and later in Russia.
 
Last edited:
Well Britain wasn't really one of the 'Great Powers' until the decline of Spain vis-a-vis France, and it wasn't until the War of the Spanish Succession that Britain was recognized as a Great Power in its own right.

Even then Britain was not the 'top dog' internationally, it took the Seven Years War to make Britain a colonial power proper, and then they were knocked down a peg again the Revolutionary War. Though Britain was undoubtedly powerful, that war proved they weren't all powerful, and it showed Britain was not master of the seas.

Britain's real uncontested dominance of the seas and position as the premier Great Power of its day came after the Napoleonic Wars. So too did the position that no one power could be allowed to dominate the Continent where the ghost of Napoleon loomed large. After the Napoleonic Wars there was no one who could even remotely hope to directly challenge British sea power on their own, and in order to ensure that Britain sought to prevent one single power (or alliance of powers) from dominating the continent.

So Britain's 'balance of power' strategy is largely a post-Napoleon legacy where they remembered with dread as one power nearly dominated all of Europe and attempted to turn its resources against them.
 
To quote British Television Series, Yes, Minister, British foreign policy works like so:

"Minister, Britain has had the same foreign policy objective for at least the last five hundred years: to create a disunited Europe. In that cause we have fought with the Dutch against the Spanish, with the Germans against the French, with the French and Italians against the Germans, and with the French against the Germans and Italians. Divide and rule, you see."

The problem of that quote is that, while humorous, it isn't exactly 100% factually correct. Pre-Napoleon Britain didn't really have to do anything to try and foster a disunited Europe, the France-Hapsburg rivalry did that for them. It's only in the aftermath of the spectre of Europe actually being forcibly united under Napoleon that they actually decided on trying to prevent one power or another from overturning the status quo of 1815.

Pax Britannica lasted from 1815-1914 after all, and as we know it didn't exactly work out 100%.
 
I really wonder, why is Britain so eager to prevent any nation in continental Europe to single-handedly dominate everyone there?

I think while it's likely that Britain had a vaguely pan-European view of the balance-of-power while it decided which Continental state to support, its motivations for siding against a power or not also included 'smaller' territorial concerns. In particular, it was very keen on the Low Countries not falling into the hands of a hostile power, since that was the likeliest embarkation point for an invasion of England as well as being major destinations for British trade.

The fate of the area from Antwerp to Dunkirk, especially, was something that English/British policymakers were very interested in even into the 20th Century, and generally Britain sought to deter European powers from encroaching on that territory, which inevitably meant conflict with France and Spain, and also Germany in WWI. Powers that weren't directly affecting that region were not so much Britain's concern - such as the Ottoman Empire and arguably Russia.

Also, balance-of-power was hardly just a British invention. France (in)famously cooperated with the Ottomans in an attempt to smash Habsburg power.
 
Last edited:
Realpolitik

In a world where the HRE unites in the early middle age. I can see that Empire tries to prevent the rise of a unified competition on the isles. Or everywhere else.

In OTL Britian had the advantage of the channel.
 
The advantage of the Channel was really an advantage only if you have a strong, navy. There could've been occasions in which France, under Louis XIV, could've had a debarked in England, but chose to attack Hanover instead as it was more of a liability to England, and as a big defeat by sea would've meant a return of "Invincible Armada" pride in Britons.
 
Where do they get the notion that Top Dog in continental Europe -> invades Britain next?

Not all nations hate the British, right?

Correct. Only the Spanish, French, and Germans have attempted to invade Britain. The Luxembourgers, Latvians, and Andorrans have not.
 
Why talking about hate ? Most wars do not come out of hate : they originate from cold ambition and conflicting interests.

Britain's balance of powers policy did not start in 1814/1815. It evolved then because Britain actually became the top dog then. But it started earlier : basically in 1688 through William of Orange who was the soul of the coalition to contain expansionnist France. And even earlier with Henry VIII.

Of course, it did so in 1688 because France was on the other shore of the Channel. It would not have been the case against a far more distant growing power. But basically it was the same principle.
 
Last edited:
The advantage of the Channel was really an advantage only if you have a strong, navy. There could've been occasions in which France, under Louis XIV, could've had a debarked in England, but chose to attack Hanover instead as it was more of a liability to England, and as a big defeat by sea would've meant a return of "Invincible Armada" pride in Britons.

Are you sure you don't mean Louis XV? England and Hannover only became united in 1714, just one year before Louis XIV's death.
 
Correct. Only the Spanish, French, and Germans have attempted to invade Britain. The Luxembourgers, Latvians, and Andorrans have not.

Actually so have the Dutch (successfully- 1688) and the Danes (successfully - twice if you count the Normans). Going further back we have the Italians (Romans) and the Irish (Dal Riata) taking parts of the island. And of course Scotland has invaded England several times.

in fact you wonder where the "invulnerable" England / Britian meme started :D
 
Top