NOVPUBAs the 19th century drew to a close, the wave of colonialism was also in its final stages. All the land suitable for colonies around the world had been carved up, leaving only scraps and hard nuts to crack.
With the deepening of colonial expansion, the buffer zones between countries disappeared, and international conflicts increasingly escalated.
Particularly, the scramble for the remaining lands intensified. This continued until the "Anglo-Ebura War" after which, having directly confronted each other in South Africa, the Anglo-Austrian countries realized the horrors of war and began to calm down.
The essence of European colonization was to make money, not so-called territorial expansion. While competing for colonies, the primary consideration was the problem of investment and return.
England, France, and Austria were the big winners of the colonial era; even the French Empire, with the least colonies, started with tens of millions of square kilometers.
As vested interests, the England, France, and Austria had had their fill. The pursuit of colonies was no longer as frenetic; the most fertile regions had been divided, and the remaining scraps were not worth the confrontation among the three countries anymore.
The British proactively proposed an alliance among the three nations, which, apart from diluting the France-Austrian Alliance, was also intended to ease tensions with France and Austria.
Open a map, and you will see that England, France, and Austria already occupied half the globe. As long as there are no internal problems among the three, this hegemony would be unassailable.
For the vested interests, stability was the best option. Everyone now wore shoes and could no longer afford to be as reckless as in the barefoot era.
A tripod is the most stable structure. Until such balance is broken, it would be difficult for the world situation to descend into chaos. Including the Prusso-Russian tensions, which in truth, were allowed to exist deliberately by the three powers.
It is better for three nations to divide the world amongst themselves, than for four or five to do so, allowing the three to reap more benefits.
Prussia and Russia were not weak; had they not been set against each other, they too would have had the strength to partake in the division of the world—something all the old empires did not wish to see.
Under the common will of the three nations, the Prusso-Russian conflict was insoluble. Just like the Franco-German tensions in the original timeline, without a clear victory or defeat, there was no possibility of easing.
...
In the Vienna Palace, Franz had high expectations for this trilateral summit. Despite the confrontations among England, France, and Austria, they held a unified stance on core issues.
For instance: maintaining European stability, suppressing the challenges from emerging empires, and consolidating the world hegemony of the three countries.
If we were to look at the distribution of hegemony, it would roughly be 4.2 for England, 3.0 for France, and 2.8 for Austria. Purely based on the numbers, Austria seems to have gotten a raw deal, not corresponding at all with its national power.
But this isn’t the correct way to account for it; so-called hegemony is essentially international discourse power. Austria joined the colonial expansion much later than England and France, therefore its influence overseas naturally could not match theirs.
This is not something that can change overnight; as long as the substantial benefits are in hand, Franz is in no rush for international influence.
Foreign Minister Weisenberg presented a document: "Your Majesty, this is the draft from the first day of negotiations. It mainly contains two parts:
First, to clearly define the respective spheres of influence of the countries in the form of a treaty, in order to reduce international conflicts. Other colonial nations may be invited to participate later on;
Second, to jointly suppress potential competitors, the British have even categorized the threats by their magnitude.
In the first tier are: the Russian Empire and the United States of America;
In the second tier are: the Prusso Federation, the United States of America, and Spain;
The third tier includes a longer list: the Nordic Federation, the German Federation Empire, Brazil, Argentina...
Overall, apart from the countries in the first and second tier, the rest are not worth worrying about. These countries might have potential for development, but no one seems poised to rise up in the short term."
Without a doubt, this threat assessment was just for the sake of show. In the minds of the British, the real threats they had to worry about were only France and Austria, the other nations were too far behind.
If the England, France, and Austria were to genuinely cooperate, it would take the Russian Empire power levelling—gobbling up the Prusso Federation in one bite—for there to be a chance to trigger a panic among the three nations and hence a united front.
Otherwise, it would just be all talk, or at most some diplomatic harassment. A direct action is usually out of the question; the relations among the three are not that good. Getting everyone to completely let down their guard and cooperate is very difficult.
Franz took over the document: "Let’s talk about the division of spheres of influence first. What regions can we gain, and what do we need to give up?
Suppressing the rise of new powers is not an overnight issue; it’s enough for us to prevent the unification of America and to avoid a decisive Prusso-Russian outcome."
It wasn’t that Franz was unaware of the significance of suppressing competitors, but these nations were currently of limited strength and generally not perceived as a threat.
For the British to raise it so early was already indicative of outstanding strategic foresight. However, these threats lay in the future, fraught with uncertainties, whereas the benefits of dividing spheres of influence were immediate.
Politics should not be taken for granted. Nobody should neglect current benefits for the sake of hitting potential future enemies.
Rather than worrying about potential competitors, it would be wiser to consider the present ones. It’s good to have foresight and to look far into problems, but all this is under the premise that Austria remains strong.
If it did not have enough power and lose the entitlement to share in world hegemony, then even if these potential competitors were all defeated, it would merely be paving the way for others.
Weisenberg replied: "The range involved this time is broad, covering almost the entire world. This includes the Mediterranean, West Asia, Southeast Asia, the Far East, Africa, South America, and other places.
The regions that concern our interests are mainly focused in the Mediterranean, Africa, Southeast Asia, South America, as well as West Asia and the Arabian Peninsula."
Franz was inwardly shocked; if this plan became reality, the international situation would undergo a radical change.
The major colonial empires dividing their spheres of influence through a treaty might seem ineffectual at first glance, but once an agreement is reached, it would drastically reduce conflicts between countries.
Even if conflicts occurred, they could be mediated by the three major powers, significantly lowering the probability of war breaking out.
From this point of view, it doesn’t seem to fit John Bull’s style. When have the British been so peace-loving?
Alright, Franz admitted he was biased against the British, but it was a conclusion drawn from countless cases stacked together.
In the past few centuries, more than half of Europe’s wars were related to the British, hardly associating them with a preference for peace.
"Do you know the reason why the British suddenly want to reduce international conflicts?"
