Why was England so worried about possible Russian control over Central Asia?

Drakker

Banned
I never really understood what the rational was for England's Central Asian adventures(I'm talking about Afghanistan and Tibet mainly here). The official explanation was that they were worried about a Russian invasion of India,but looking at the terrain it's some of the most mountainous, guerrilla riddled territory in the world. Even if Russia did think about invading, resupply would be a nightmare.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
A lot of the "Russian threat" perspective came from Delhi

A lot of the "looming Russian threat" perspective came from Delhi, which, as you say, should have had a pretty deep understanding of the topography of the NW frontier...

So, one can be cynical, and suggest it had more to do with justifying an Army in India that was strong enough to preclude any chance of a second conflict along the lines of 1857-58 than a realistic "foreign" threat....

Or one can be less cynical and see it as a legitimate reaction to Russian expansion in Central Asia and adventures in Persia, etc.

The truth is presumably a mix of both, along with the realities of "forward" policies in a distant empire that were only reined in when transportation and communication technology advanced to the point that India was not months away...

Best,
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
The official explanation was that they were worried about a Russian invasion of India,but looking at the terrain it's some of the most mountainous, guerrilla riddled territory in the world. Even if Russia did think about invading, resupply would be a nightmare.

The geography wasn't understood at the time. Indeed, many of the expeditions sent into the region were specifically intended to map it out. So they couldn't be sure for some time that there wasn't a route along which a Russian army could advance. The decision-makers in London and Delhi were classically educated men; if Alexander the Great could do it, so might the Russians.

As far as the guerrillas, they hated the British, who therefore naturally worried that, since the Russians also hated the British, the various tribes and kingdoms in the region might kind common cause with the Russians.
 
Well this was in an era when armies could still move long distances without secure lines of supply, by living off the land or buying supplies from the locals. Obviously it woulsnbe easier to have a supply train, but a large enough Russian force could conceivably march on India via Afghanistan or Persia, and trigger an uprising against the British. The important thing for the British was making sure the buffer zone was large enough that it would be quite the arduous trek for an invading army.

As the century wore on and armies grew more supply heavy, the logistics of an invasion became nightmarish and that's when Britain's Central Asian policies become window dressing to justify a larger army in India. Persia is an exception to this, because if it was Russian controlled it would pose a very real threat to Northwest India by way of a very secure line of communication for an invading army. Afghanistan is less so, but the closer the Russian can get their jumping off point to India, the worse it is for Britain, thus their reaction to Russian forays into Afghanistan and the issue of Persia in the early 20th century driving a wedge between the two powers.
 
The geography wasn't understood at the time. Indeed, many of the expeditions sent into the region were specifically intended to map it out. So they couldn't be sure for some time that there wasn't a route along which a Russian army could advance. The decision-makers in London and Delhi were classically educated men; if Alexander the Great could do it, so might the Russians.

As far as the guerrillas, they hated the British, who therefore naturally worried that, since the Russians also hated the British, the various tribes and kingdoms in the region might kind common cause with the Russians.

Except that the Russian did not really hate the British. I acknowledge it was a widespread, albeit mistaken, perception in British ruling circles.
More generally, the thing is that Russia was (and is) BIG. As in, enormously big, with a potential for land military dominance (as was widely felt after the campaigns of 1813-13, albeit with exaggeration). A Russian drive to open warm seas would have put Russia in a position to become a naval power as well. That would have represented a challenge to British global dominance simply by existing.
Paranoia about Russian invasions of India was never realistic. Russia had never a realistic way to bring enough power into the area to challenge the British in the area, even if it had the willingness to do so, which it normally had not. However, the British generally felt, it seems to me, that their position in India was not as secure as theyb would have liked it, so they preferred to stay in the safe side, that is, the one without other European powers in the general neighbourhood.
 
I never really understood what the rational was for England's Central Asian adventures(I'm talking about Afghanistan and Tibet mainly here). The official explanation was that they were worried about a Russian invasion of India,but looking at the terrain it's some of the most mountainous, guerrilla riddled territory in the world. Even if Russia did think about invading, resupply would be a nightmare.

Basically the Heartland theory: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_History

Russia was to become the biggest world power, once it industrialized properly like the Anglosphere. The British Empire, wanted to stop Russia from expanding over all of Central Asia, like the Us are now opposing the Eurasian integration between Germany, Russia and China (Ukraine proxy war and european sanctions are just a part of it).
 
Why was England so worried about possible Russian control over Central Asia?

Short answer: Because it meant that British control over the area was not inevitable. Brittain was slowly moving north and east from their stronghold in southern India. With no other mayor European powers in the area, it seemed as if they would just move on as far as they could imagine. Then came the realization that far, far away, there was Russia slowly moving south-east. Far off yet, but they were there, and they were moving. And eventually, may be in 20 years, may be in 50, may be in 100, they would meet up.... So suddenly there was the realization that the land was not endless and eventually borders would have to be draw, either militarily or through negotiations or through some other means. So it would be best to make sure that when that time comes.... Not IF but WHEN... You would have the best starting position.
 
Last edited:
India was the coffer that by scientific systematic plunder was paying the bills of the British Empire; the british were resolved not to take chances with it.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
YAQW - never abscribe to strategic need what

YAQW - never abscribe to strategic need what can be more simply explained by the needs of bureaucrats to remain in their sinecures.;)

Best,
 
Top