# The Rivalry Between England and Germany - The current historical period is marked by **intense rivalry** between England and Germany. - This rivalry is likely to escalate into an **armed conflict**, with severe consequences for the defeated nation. - The interests of these two great powers are fundamentally incompatible, making coexistence increasingly untenable. > "The outcome of this conflict will likely be fatal for the defeated side."

# England: The Island Power - England's global significance is rooted in its **control of the seas**, extensive trade networks, and numerous colonies. - The island nation's dominance rests on its naval strength, which is essential for maintaining its economic interests. - England's survival is threatened by Germany's growing ambitions and capabilities.

# Germany: The Continental Power - Germany's future is anchored in its **expansion towards the seas**, as it seeks to secure trade routes and resources. - The nation has rapidly developed its **naval forces** to protect its interests against English dominance. - With the rise of the "Made in Germany" brand, Germany poses a significant threat to England's economic stability.

# The Inevitable Armed Conflict - A **life-and-death struggle** between England and Germany is unavoidable. - The conflict cannot be reduced to a simple duel; it involves unequal forces on both sides. - Germany has the potential to disrupt English trade through various means, including **privateering** and **submarine warfare**.

# Germany's Tactical Advantages - Germany could incite uprisings in regions such as **India, South America, and Ireland**. - The risk of a German landing in England is low unless the English navy is significantly weakened. - Germany's strategy relies on creating vulnerabilities in England's maritime trade and food supply.

# England's Strategic Options - England's access to Germany is limited; it can only target German colonies and trade routes. - Destroying the German navy is crucial, yet it’s not a guarantee of peace. - England will seek alliances with **strategically stronger powers** before committing to armed intervention.

# The Transformation of the Conflict - The future Anglo-German war will evolve into a broader struggle involving multiple powers. - Two distinct factions will emerge: those aligned with **Germany** and those with **England**. - This shift will redefine the landscape of international alliances and conflicts.

# Russia's Position: A Defensive Alliance - Until the Russo-Japanese War, Russia maintained a balanced foreign policy without clear alignment. - Since Emperor Alexander III's reign, Russia has engaged in a **defensive alliance with France**. - This alliance was robust enough to ensure mutual support in case of an attack but did not require absolute commitment.

# The Historical Context of Russian Alliances ### Overview of Russian Foreign Policy - **Complex Alliances:** Russian policy historically maintained a balance between competing powers, neither fully aligning with Germany nor England. - **Defensive Alliance with France:** Since Emperor Alexander III’s reign, Russia formed a defensive alliance with France, ensuring mutual support during threats. - **Friendly Relations with Germany:** Simultaneously, Russia upheld traditional ties with Berlin based on family connections, contributing to a stable European peace for years. > "Peace among great powers remained undisturbed despite Europe's volatile dynamics."

# The Russo-Japanese War's Impact on Alliances ### Shift in Global Dynamics - **Isolation of England:** Before the Russo-Japanese War, England remained isolated, concerned about Russian movements in Persia and India. - **Neutrality Patterns:** During the conflict, England and America favored Japan, while France and Germany maintained neutrality toward Russia. - **Emergence of New Alliances:** The war marked a turning point, leading to increased cooperation among England, France, and Japan. > "The Russo-Japanese War fundamentally changed relationships among great powers."

# Rapprochement with England: A Critical Analysis ### Evaluating the Shift - **Post-War Diplomatic Turn:** After the Russo-Japanese War, Russia pivoted towards a closer relationship with England, distancing itself from Germany. - **Formation of the Triple Entente:** This shift led to the establishment of the Triple Entente, dominated by English influence, setting the stage for future conflicts. - **Questioning the Benefits:** What advantages did Russia gain from this new alignment? A closer examination reveals minimal tangible benefits. > "It is difficult to discern any real benefits from rapprochement with England."

# Relations with Japan: A Unique Context ### Peaceful Coexistence - **Shared Interests:** The only significant advantage noted was improved relations with Japan, which can hardly be attributed solely to Russian-English rapprochement. - **Compatibility of Goals:** Russia and Japan share compatible interests in the Far East, creating a basis for peaceful coexistence. - **Minimal Conflict:** With no significant territorial disputes, both nations are positioned to collaborate rather than compete in the region. > "Russia and Japan are created to live in peace, as they have absolutely nothing to divide."

# Context of Russian-English Relations - The **Portsmouth Treaty** marked a significant moment in Russian-English relations. - However, the tangible benefits from this rapprochement remain unclear. - The only noticeable improvement has been in relations with **Japan**, but this is not directly linked to Russian-English interactions. > "It is difficult to discern any real benefits we have gained from rapprochement with England."

# Russia and Japan: A Natural Coexistence - Russia and Japan share a foundation for **peaceful coexistence** due to their mutual interests. - Both nations have minimal conflicting interests in the **Far East**, primarily limited to modest economic tasks. - Misinterpretations and overreactions have historically led to unnecessary tensions. > "A too broad flight of fantasy... caused a collision that more skillful diplomacy could have avoided."

# Russia's Interests in the Far East 1. **No need for territorial expansion**: Russia does not require control over Korea or Port Arthur. 2. **Access to the sea**: While valuable, the sea is merely a **trade route**, not a market in itself. 3. **Limited exports**: Russia lacks significant exportable commodities in the Far East.

# Market Dynamics in the Region - The Far East does not present viable markets for Russian exports due to competition from stronger industrial powers. - Potential markets include **inner China**, where trade predominantly occurs over land routes. - An open port may facilitate more **importation of foreign goods** rather than export of Russian products.

# Japan's Regional Aspirations - Japan’s territorial ambitions appear focused on regions like **Korea and Formosa**, rather than the harsh conditions of Russia's Far East. - Even within Japan, northern territories like **Yezo** and southern **Sakhalin** show limited population growth and colonization success. - Japan is likely to direct its aspirations toward the **Philippines, Indochina,** and other resource-rich regions.

# The Case for Russian-Japanese Rapprochement - A **close rapprochement** between Russia and Japan is both logical and advantageous, regardless of external influences. - Japan’s economic constraints make it challenging to maintain both army and naval power effectively. - An alliance with Russia could enable Japan to focus its resources on enhancing **naval strength**, crucial for its island nation. > "Maintaining both a strong army and a powerful fleet simultaneously is difficult for [Japan]."

# Peaceful Coexistence: Russia and Japan ### The Natural Alliance - The concept of *peaceful coexistence* between Russia and Japan is not only plausible but also advantageous. - Japan faces challenges: it is not a wealthy nation and struggles to maintain both a robust army and a powerful navy simultaneously. > A close rapprochement enables Japan to focus on strengthening its naval capabilities, essential for countering emerging rivalries, particularly with the United States. ### Strategic Advantages of the Rapprochement 1. **Focus on Naval Power**: Japan can prioritize its naval strength, addressing its geographical positioning as an island nation. 2. **Shared Responsibilities**: With an alliance with Russia, Japan can entrust the protection of its continental interests to Russia, allowing for a more concentrated defense strategy. 3. **Mutual Benefits**: Russia gains a formidable ally in the Pacific, utilizing Japan’s naval capabilities for coastal defense. ### The Limitations of British Relations - The rapprochement with England yielded minimal benefits for Russia's strategic standing in regions like Manchuria and Mongolia. - Despite efforts to strengthen ties, the situation in the Uriankhai region remains uncertain, indicating that diplomacy with England has not liberated Russia’s foreign policy. > Our attempts to engage with Tibet faced significant pushback from British interests, demonstrating the limitations of relying on English mediation. ### The Persian Dilemma - The situation in Persia has not improved post-agreement with England; historical influence under Shah Nasr-ed-Din is now a distant memory. - Russia's involvement in Persian internal affairs has backfired, as attempts to impose a constitution led to the downfall of a pro-Russian monarch. > This engagement not only diminished Russia's prestige but also resulted in significant financial and human costs. ### Consequences of Divergence from Germany - Aligning with England has led to a fundamental rift with Germany, particularly evident in the Near East. - Bismarck famously remarked that the Balkan question wasn't worth the bones of a single Pomeranian grenadier, indicating Germany's reluctance to engage in risky diplomacy. > Despite rising tensions, Austria-Hungary refrained from taking advantage of Russia's struggles during the Russo-Japanese War, illustrating the complexities of regional diplomacy. ### The Impact of Russian-British Relations - The consequences of aligning with England have been largely negative, leading to losses in prestige and influence. - The British rapprochement has left Russia entangled in unnecessary conflicts and political turmoil, ultimately eroding its standing both regionally and internationally. > The lessons from this experience underscore the need for a reevaluation of alliances and strategies moving forward.

# The Balkan Tensions - The **Balkans** have been a focal point for European powers, particularly during the early 20th century. - Germany's involvement: - Took the "sick man" of Europe (Ottoman Empire) under its protection. - Despite this, Germany remained cautious about risking relations with Russia over Balkan disputes. > **Key Takeaway:** Austria-Hungary missed crucial opportunities for expansion during the Russo-Japanese War due to Russia’s non-alignment with England.

# Missed Opportunities for Austria - Austria-Hungary had a **unique chance** to realize its ambitions in the Balkans during the turmoil of the early 1900s. - The **annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina** could have easily occurred in 1905 or 1906. - The subsequent **Albanian question** complicated matters, especially with the involvement of Prince Wied. > **Important Insight:** Aligning closely with England opened avenues for Austria that were ultimately missed.

# The Balkan League and Its Impact - In response to Austrian ambitions, Russia attempted to counteract with the **formation of the Balkan League**. - This alliance, however, ultimately proved to be **short-lived** and ineffective. - The geopolitical landscape was shifting rapidly, leading to increased tensions among the Great Powers. > **Quote:** "The Balkan League was an ephemeral response to persistent Austrian intrigues."

# Future War Groupings - The likely alignments in an impending conflict appear clear: - **Allies:** Russia, France, England - **Opponents:** Germany, Austria, Turkey - Additional nations may join based on the evolving circumstances leading to war. > **Key Consideration:** The trigger for war could stem from either **Balkan disputes** or **colonial incidents**, such as those seen at Algeciras.

# Italy's Position and Aspirations - Italy’s interests are crucial to understanding the broader conflict dynamics: - Likely to avoid siding with Germany due to its expansionist goals. - Aspires to territorial gains at the expense of Austria and Turkey. > **Example:** If Italy sees an opportunity for victory, it may shift to join the anti-German coalition, ensuring favorable post-war conditions.

# Regional Dynamics and Neutrality - Romania's potential role: - Expected to remain **neutral** until the outcome of the conflict becomes clearer. - Will likely align with the victors to secure territorial gains from either Russia or Austria. - Other Balkan states will align as follows: - Serbia and Montenegro against Austria - Bulgaria and Albania potentially against Serbia - Greece likely remaining neutral or opposing Turkey, depending on outcomes. > **Cautionary Note:** Sweden’s involvement could further complicate alliances and conflicts.

# Confrontation with Germany - Under these conditions, any conflict with Germany will be **complex** and multi-faceted. - The interplay of national interests and regional aspirations will drive the decisions of smaller states. - The balance of power in the Balkans will significantly influence the course of history in Europe as tensions escalate. > **Conclusion:** Understanding these dynamics is essential for anticipating the future of European relations and conflicts.

# The Balkan Landscape ### Key Alliances and Stances - **Serbia and Montenegro**: Likely to oppose Austria. - **Bulgaria and Albania**: Expected to side against Serbia, especially if Albania remains politically weak. ### Greece's Position - **Neutrality or Opposition**: Greece may stay neutral or side against Turkey, but only once the outcome of the conflict is more certain. > The involvement of other states in the conflict will be minimal, with the possibility of Sweden aligning against us.

# Challenges of Engaging Germany ### Preparedness of the Opponent - **Significant Challenges**: A conflict with Germany presents formidable difficulties and will demand substantial sacrifices. ### Germany's War Intentions - **Strategic Goals**: Germany's desire to maintain control over the seas drives its willingness to engage in war, despite the risks involved. > The timing of Germany's provocation will be tactically chosen, keeping its strategic objectives in mind.

# Russia's Central Role in the War ### Burden of Participation - **Main Contributor**: Russia will bear the primary burden of the war due to limited capabilities of England and France’s defensive posture. ### Defensive Strategies of Allies - **France's Limitations**: With significant human losses expected, France is likely to adopt strictly defensive tactics. > Russia will serve as the **battering ram**, breaking through German defenses amidst numerous challenges.

# Global Context and Rear Security ### Far Eastern Relations - **Hostility Towards Germany**: Both America and Japan are expected to oppose Germany, securing Russia's rear from the East. ### Economic Concessions - **Neutrality Costs**: These nations may extract economic concessions, but their involvement in military action against Germany is uncertain. ### Potential Conflicts 1. **Persia**: Hostilities against Russia are likely. 2. **Caucasus and Turkestan**: Unrest among Muslim populations could arise. 3. **Afghanistan**: Possible aggression linked to the unrest in adjacent regions.

# Regional Unrest: Finland and Poland ### Finland's Uprising - **Sweden's Role**: An uprising in Finland is almost certain if Sweden sides with our opponents. ### Polish Territory - **Loss of Control**: It is likely that Poland will fall into enemy hands during the war, inciting uprisings against Russian control. > Anticipating unrest in these regions is crucial for strategic planning during the conflict.

# Geopolitical Tensions in the Region - **Rising unrest** among Muslims in the Caucasus and Turkestan poses significant challenges. - **Afghanistan's potential actions** could complicate our position, particularly in connection with regional dynamics. - **Poland and Finland** are also areas of concern, with expected complications if hostilities escalate. > Understanding these geopolitical tensions is crucial for effective strategy development.

# Finland's Vulnerability - **Uprising likelihood**: If Sweden aligns against us, Finland is likely to experience an uprising. - **Implications for Poland**: Anticipate difficulties in maintaining control over Poland during the war. - **Potential provocations**: Should Poland fall to our opponents, expect attempts to incite uprisings, which could distract our focus. > The influence of our allies may lead us to take risky actions in Poland.

# Preparedness for Conflict - **Question of readiness**: Are we prepared for the intense struggles anticipated in the future European war? The answer appears to be **no**. - **Legislative shortcomings**: Young legislative institutions have not adequately addressed our defense needs. - **Dilettantish interest**: There is a lack of understanding regarding the seriousness of the unfolding political situation. > Our Ministry of Foreign Affairs' orientation reflects a need for greater awareness and action.

# Military and Naval Legislation - **Unconsidered bills**: Numerous military and naval ministry proposals remain unaddressed, highlighting a gap in legislative action. - **State defense plan**: The plan by State Secretary Stolypin is one example of the initiatives that require urgent attention. - **Troop training improvements**: There has been progress in troop training since the Japanese War, particularly in field artillery and equipment. > However, **essential deficiencies** remain in our overall defense organization.

# Supply Chain Challenges - **Inadequate military supplies**: The military department faces challenges due to incomplete procurement programs. - **Factory productivity issues**: Low productivity limits our ability to meet military supply needs effectively. - **Ammunition shortages**: These issues are critical, especially as domestic production cannot compensate during wartime. > The current state of our industry poses a significant risk to our operational capabilities.

# Dependence on Foreign Industry - **Excessive reliance**: Our defense heavily depends on foreign industry, creating vulnerabilities. - **Communication breakdowns**: Any disruption in foreign communications can exacerbate supply chain difficulties. - **Heavy artillery shortages**: Experience from the Japanese War shows that we lack sufficient heavy artillery and machine guns. > Fortress defenses, like Revel, are still in formative stages, which is a concern for national security.

# DEFENSE CHALLENGES IN RUSSIA - **Excessive Dependence**: Russia's defense is heavily reliant on foreign industry, which poses challenges, especially with disrupted foreign communications. - **Artillery Shortages**: The current quantity of heavy artillery is insufficient, as demonstrated during the Japanese War; machine gun availability is also lacking. - **Fortress Defense Issues**: The organization of fortress defenses is still in its infancy. For instance, the Revel fortress, crucial for protecting the capital, remains incomplete. - **Railway Limitations**: Strategic railways are inadequate for the massive demands of a potential European war, and while rolling stock may suffice for regular traffic, it's not equipped for wartime logistics. > To succeed, we must address the technical backwardness of our industry, as modern warfare will feature advanced military technologies.

# RUSSIA AND GERMANY: OVERLAPPING INTERESTS - **Diplomatic Considerations**: Current diplomacy may overlook critical factors, displaying a degree of aggressiveness toward Germany. This could accelerate armed conflict, especially influenced by England. - **Evaluating War Benefits**: Is the anticipated advantage of war worth the challenges and sacrifices? - **Coexistence Potential**: The vital interests of Russia and Germany do not conflict, providing a strong foundation for peaceful coexistence. Germany's future is maritime, while Russia's interests are primarily continental. - **Absence of Overseas Colonies**: Russia lacks overseas colonies and does not foresee gaining any, making land communications more vital than naval routes.

# ECONOMIC INTERESTS: RUSSIAN AND GERMAN SYNERGIES | Region | Potential Acquisitions | Notes | |------------------------|-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------| | Poznań | Densely populated area | Managing Russian Poles is already challenging; incorporating Polish areas may exacerbate tensions. | | East Prussia | National demands of local populations | Victory may not provide the benefits expected, raising concerns about internal stability. | - **Cohesive Economic Needs**: Russian economic benefits do not inherently contradict German needs. A collaborative approach may yield mutual advantages without territorial disputes.

# Economic Interests: Russian vs. German - The relationship between **Russia** and **Germany** is often viewed through the lens of territorial acquisitions and economic interests. - However, the argument that these two nations' economic needs and benefits fundamentally contradict each other deserves reevaluation. > "Russian benefits and needs hardly contradict German ones as much as is commonly thought."

# Regional Economic Potential | Region | Potential Acquisitions | Notes | |------------------------|-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Transcaucasus | Armenian-populated areas | Desirable due to revolutionary aspirations for a greater Armenia. | | Persia | Economic and territorial expansion | Interests align well with German objectives. | | Kashgaria | Economic and territorial expansion | Both nations share mutual benefits in this region. | | Urianhai region | Economic and territorial expansion | Compatible interests for both Russia and Germany. | | Vistula region | Areas of little value, poorly suited for colonization | Polish-Lithuanian population poses challenges for German interests. | | Baltic provinces | Areas of little value, poorly suited for colonization | Latvian-Estonian population is also resistant to German influence. |

# Trade Treaties: A Complex Relationship - Current **Russian-German trade treaties** present a complex scenario. - They typically favor **German agriculture** while placing Russian agricultural interests at a disadvantage. > "It is hardly correct to attribute this circumstance to Germany's cunning and unfriendliness."

# The Role of Russian Industry - Russian delegates during treaty negotiations aimed to bolster **Russian industry** at the expense of agricultural interests. - This reflects a strategic choice to prioritize industrial growth, even if it meant sacrificing agricultural benefits. - Thus, it is essential to see these treaties as part of a broader strategy rather than a straightforward exploitation by Germany.

# Germany's Position in Trade - Germany often acts as an **intermediary** rather than a direct consumer of Russian agricultural products. - This means that **Russia** can seek direct trade relationships to avoid costly intermediation. - Establishing these direct links can enhance Russia's position in international markets.

# Changing Dynamics in Trade Relations - Trade relations can shift based on the **political climate** between nations. - Neither country benefits from weakening its ally; rather, they are incentivized to maintain strong economic ties. - Conversely, a political opponent's economic decline can provide advantages. > "No country benefits from the economic weakening of an ally, but conversely benefits from the ruin of a political opponent."

# Economic Relations with Germany: Analysis and Recommendations - **Importance of Direct Relations**: It is crucial for us and consuming markets to establish direct relations to avoid the costly intermediation by Germany. - **Impact of Political Conditions**: Trade relations are influenced by the political coexistence of contracting states. No country benefits from weakening an ally; rather, they benefit from the downfall of a political opponent. > "No country benefits from the economic weakening of an ally, but conversely benefits from the ruin of a political opponent."

# Understanding Germany's Trade Tactics - **Germany's Strategic Advantage**: The current Russian-German trade treaties are unfavorable for us, as Germany has successfully exploited favorable circumstances to gain an upper hand—essentially squeezing us. - **Healthy National Egoism**: Germany's actions, while seemingly unfavorable, should not be seen as hostile. This behavior reflects a healthy national egoism that is expected in international trade relations.