Connect with us

Europe

From Prussia to Germany: Bismarck’s Foreign Policy

Avatar photo

Published

on

Before Bismarck helmed the German stewardship, the German areas were fragmented into many a piece— this included two major exceptions: Hanover governed by the United Kingdom and the duchy of Holstein under the aegis of the King of Denmark.  All the duchies, Kingdoms and city-states came under the umbrella of the Holy Roman Empire.

The incessant victories of Napoleon Bonaparte in Europe resulted in the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire. Napoleon formed the Confederation of Rhine which was, after Napoleon, supplanted by the German confederation devised by the Congress of Vienna in 1815.The Congress awarded the heterogenous Austria with the presidency of the German Confederation, Kingdom of Prussia was set aside.

Prussia endeavored economically to coalesce the fragmented German states within a common customs union. This onerous task was hard to achieve. Before 1818, each district in Prussia had its own customs and there were as many as 67 tariff areas in Prussia alone.[1]First of all, Prussia effaced the custom barricades in her own boundaries and then other German areas merged into it. The Customs Union was known as Zollverein—Austria ostracized from it.

The revolution of 1830 sparked protests in Europe, however, with the help of the Carlsbad decrees Metternich was able to curb the revolutionary elements in its milieu. Metternich did not allow the revolutionary elements to harbor in Central Europe. He orchestrated the Metternich system to obliterate any revolutionary activities. This upended in 1848, Amidst the revolution,Metternich fled from Austria.

In the period before march 1848, known as the Vormärz, the futility of the German Confederation became self-evident. Its diet declined into little more than a court of appeal. It was still preoccupied in settling debts from the Thirty Years War.[2]The German Confederation ceased to exist and a new Frankfurt Parliament, under the aegis of Prussia, came into being. The parliament promulgated a constitution with a constitutional monarchy as its bedrock.


The parliament wanted King Frederick William IV of Prussia to accept the throne. He was, however, adamant in accepting the constitution because of his autocratic idiosyncrasies and absolutist predilections. This was a historic mistake— Metternich was out of the scene; France was enmeshed in the revolution and England was against the suppression done by the Concert of Europe. Notwithstanding the rejection to helm the leadership by constitutional means, he decided to take on the task of Unifying the Germanic hierarchy in Erfurt. It morphed into a fiasco as the situation in Europe changed. Metternich was back — Austria had suppressed the revolutionary elements from Hungary to German lands. These events led Frederick to capitulate at Olmutz. The dream of German Union was given up and the erstwhile German Confederation was restored under the leadership of Austria.

Bismarck’s Foreign Policy

It became evident to the new King that as long as Austria was in power, the dream of German unification could not be achieved. King William I came to the Prussian throne which reinvigorated the dream of a United Germany. He wanted to strengthen the Prussian military might, however, the landtag was interested in constitutional reforms. The crown-landtag crevice started to widen. In this peculiar situation, the King called on Bismarck to become the Minister-President of Prussia. In 1862, Otto Von Bismarck was appointed Premier to sort out the resultant crisis, if necessary, by unconstitutional measures.

Before becoming the Minister-President, he served as an ambassador to Russia and France— where he harboured amicable relations with the Tsar and Napoleon III. His first foreign policy challenge was the annexation of Schleswig by the King Frederick VII of Denmark.
King Frederick, yielding to the pressure of Danish Nationalists and contrary to the Protocol of 1852, separated Schleswig from Holstein, annexing the former and introducing a new constitution for the latter.

The developments led to the second Schleswig war. Bismarck drew Austria is her ambit and jointly fought Denmark. The coalition won the war and the treaty of Vienna awarded Schleswig to Prussia and, the purely German, Holstein to Austria to administer. Austria soon realized that administering Holstein, a purely German land, would be incongruous as it was environed by Prussia from all sides. Therefore, Austria started to propound the right of the Duke of Augustenburg to the Duchies.

This caused a rift between Prussia and Austria as it was contrary to their agreement. Bismarck saw this opportunity to accede both the duchies to Prussia. Before starting the war, Prussia isolated Austria diplomatically. He won over the Tsar during the Polish Revolt — Although he had nationalist predilections, he did not support the Polish nationalists. There were two reasons behind it — Firstly, he wanted to win over the Tsar against Austria and the second reason was the danger of a powerful Poland near the German borders. Austria, after the Crimean war and the demise of the Concert of Europe, did not have cordial relations with Russia. Italy’s risorgemento movement tethered Italy with Germany against Austria — Austria had to fight on two fronts. Italy wanted the Venetian lands as part of her plan to unify Italy. Furthermore, He met Napoleon III and secured his neutrality.

 Soon, War started between Austria and Prussia that lasted seven weeks this is why it is called the Seven Week’s war. Prussia Won the War and incorporated the Northern Germany including Hanover, Schleswig and Holstein. The erstwhile German confederation ceased to exist and the North German Confederation superseded Prussia.

The last barricade between the North-South Union was France. France did not allow a strong German Federation in its vicinity and King William I did not want to fight France. It was the revolution in Spain that brought both the powers at loggerhead. After the Spanish Revolution, the Spanish throne was being offered to the Prince Leopold, House of Hohenzollern. Napoleon III became indignant as it would place France between two German Princes. Benedetti, the French Ambassador, asked King William I to retire the Hohenzollern Claim from Spain at Ems. This interview, when dispatched to Bismarck, was published in such a way that rose jingoism on both side of the border —both sides believed that they had been treated undiplomatically.

France, like Austria, had been isolated before the war. The Crimean war theater assured Russian neutrality, Italy hopped the bandwagon again and Austria was not interested in buttressing France after her defeat. Napoleon wanted to increase in his glory as he failed to receive fanfare during his tenure. France was defeated by Prussia and subsequently the south Germany amalgamated with the North. This resulted in the Unification of Germany in 1871.


[1]Mahajan, V.D; History of Modern Europe Since 1789. (P. 197)

[2] Davies, Norman; Europe: A History. Oxford University Press. (P. 824)

I am a writer based in Lahore. I have done my masters in Islamic History and bachelors in European History and International Relations. Erstwhile, I was teaching History & Pakistan Studies at a school in Lahore Cantt. I have been writing for major newspapers and magazines both in India and Pakistan.

Continue Reading
Comments

Europe

China-Germany Win-Win Cooperation

Published

on

photo:Yao Dawei / Xinhua

The China-Germany cooperation exemplifies the transformative potential of collaboration based on mutual regard, shared objectives, and complementary strengths. This exceptional partnership has spawned a domino effect that extends beyond bilateral relations, inspiring other nations to pursue similarly mutually beneficial partnerships.

 As the world becomes more interconnected, countries can learn from the China-Germany model of cooperation, which fosters economic development, technological advancement, environmental stewardship, and cultural exchange. By adhering to the principles of win-win cooperation, nations can construct a more prosperous, sustainable, and harmonious global community.

China and Germany’s dynamic and mutually beneficial cooperation is a shining example of win-win collaboration on the global stage. Both nations have nurtured strong economic and diplomatic ties over the years, resulting in enormous advances and benefits for their respective societies.

Strong and coordinated global action is needed immediately to combat climate change and advance sustainable development. There is still a lot to be done, but China and Germany have already shown their dedication to environmentally friendly and low-carbon development. By aligning their strategies and exchanging best practices, they can expedite the transition to a low-carbon, sustainable economy.

China’s pledge to peak carbon emissions before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality before 2060 shows its commitment to a deep low-carbon transformation of its economy and society. Through the International Climate Initiative (IKI) administered by Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, the German Federal Government supports Sino-German climate change cooperation.

 Collaboration in areas such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, the circular economy, and sustainable transportation can lead the way for a greener future, mitigating the effects of climate change and nurturing ecological equilibrium.

China and Germany have established a strong economic partnership that has benefited both countries significantly. Germany’s main commercial partner is China, and vice versa, and this strong bilateral commerce has led to significant economic growth and employment creation. This collaboration has given German businesses access to the sizable Chinese market.

Notably, the exchange of products, services, and knowledge between the two nations has fostered innovation, productivity, and economic resiliency, thereby laying the groundwork for long-term cooperation. This commitment to cooperation has yielded an array of beneficial effects, strengthening the conviction that win-win partnerships can drive progress and prosperity in an interdependent world.

The dynamic economic partnership that has grown between the two nations is one of the pillars of China-Germany cooperation. Germany, known for its scientific prowess, inventiveness, and precision engineering, found a favourable market in China, with its enormous customer base and rapidly expanding economy.

On the other hand, China’s manufacturing expertise and devotion to infrastructure development have presented German businesses with incredible possibilities to expand their operations and enter new markets. Entrepreneurs from both nations could keep pursuing openness, inclusiveness, and win-win cooperation, as well as keep the stability of industrial and supply chains with high-level practical cooperation. This symbiotic relationship has allowed both nations to capitalize on their respective strengths, resulting in economic expansion and job creation for both countries.

China and Germany have also established cooperation in the fields of innovation and research, recognizing that advancements in these fields are crucial agents of economic and societal progress. Through joint research initiatives, academic exchanges, and institution-to-institution collaboration, both nations have been able to pool their intellectual resources, foster innovation, and address global challenges. This cooperation has not only led to revolutionary scientific discoveries, but it has also set the groundwork for future innovations in technology that will benefit all of humanity.

China and Germany have fostered cultural exchange and people-to-people diplomacy in addition to their economic and technological cooperation. By encouraging education exchanges, cultural events, and intercultural dialogue, both countries have built bridges of appreciation, understanding, and friendship. Not only do these interactions enrich the lives of individuals, but they also strengthen the bilateral relationship as a whole. They facilitate dialogue, eliminate preconceived notions, and set the groundwork for mutually beneficial relationships and respect.

By expanding on these accomplishments and upholding a spirit of mutual respect and shared objectives, the China-Germany partnership can continue to advance progress and inspire global collaboration.

The China-Germany model of win-win cooperation provides valuable lessons for nations seeking to forge prosperous partnerships. It emphasizes the significance of mutual respect, trust, and open communication as the foundations for productive collaboration. It also emphasizes the importance of recognizing and capitalizing on balance in strengths and resources, which allows nations to maximize the positive effects of cooperation.

Continue Reading

Europe

The Eurasian Zeitenwende: Germany and Japan at the Crossroads

Avatar photo

Published

on

Image source: X @Bundeskanzler

Russia’s decision to invade in Ukraine in February of last year has been nothing short of a critical juncture in recent history—sending reverberations across the entirety of Eurasia. Seldom have events on one end of the continent been so consequential on the other. Russia’s invasion has shattered the prime directive underpinning the long peace after the Great Wars—the inviolable right to sovereignty has been shattered, as mass armed aggression has reared its head once again. Nowhere is this sweeping change felt than in Berlin and Tokyo—to capitals separated by over 12,453 kilometers of land and sea.

German Chancellor, Olaf Scholz spoke to the Bundestag just three days after Russia’s invasion, on the ‘historic turning point’, the Zeitenwende this moment presented. Not a year later, on December 16, after much negotiation Japan finally released their first National Security Strategy in almost a decade. Ukraine provided for both governments the impetus to shed decades of consensus on defense policy. Berlin and Tokyo were once partners in the greatest conflict wrought on mankind, and today they are once again on the same page—but this time arming in the name of global peace.

The postwar consensus

With 1945 came the crashing down of the German and Japanese imperial ambitions that underwrote the explosions of violence from 1914 to 1945. The first half of the twentieth century saw successive orders predicated the passing of power; the imperialist order long preceded the turn of the century, and came crashing with the First World War. From there, a brief liberal interlude of the Washington Conference was doomed to fail given Anglo-American isolationism, and from that chaos was born—a return to imperialism. With these passing orders, German and Japanese leaders debated and sought to reinvent themselves in response to changing tides across the globe.

In fact, twice in the last century, during Twenty-five Years Crisis, Wilhelmine and Nazi imperialism exploded in the European theater. For the Japanese, a slow roll to imperial domination in Asia began much before the war and exploded in the 1930s. This imperial flame was extinguished almost as soon as it was ignited—bringing with it the deaths of millions through genocide and war, and the destruction of much of the world’s industrial capacity. In the wake of it, a similar thinking overtook both Berlin and Tokyo. In the wake of the horrors of war, both peoples came to a similar conclusion that militarism ought be eschewed—with Japan going as far as enshrining its anti-militarist urge in the constitution’s article 9. Though it must be noted, the Germans accepted their guilt—the Japanese continue to engage in denialism and apologia.

For decades, under the guise of guilt in Germany, and occupation-enforced constitutional limits for Japan, both countries eschewed providing for their own national defense needs—instead relying on the all-powerful U.S. security guarantee.

A new look in a new environment

This change that has occurred here has happened within the context of what Dr. Kent Calder described in The New Continentalism: Energy and Twenty-First Century Geopolitics, and Supercontinent: the Logic of Eurasian Integration, as ‘proto-continentalism’—the modern stirrings of transcontinental integration. The continent was transformed by China’s Four Modernizations, the Oil Shock, and the Collapse of the Soviet Union—all requiring readjustments on the continent. Continental integration followed the integration and modernization within China, the Oil Shock highlighted the need for energy-driven interconnection, and the collapse of the Soviet Union meant no more Cold War political antagonisms. These changes meant that there were suddenly lower costs for trade across the continent—one rife with great complementaries. Like some geographic providence, the world’s largest energy producers in the Middle East, sat between the world’s biggest consumers in Europe and Asia.

Of course, this integration isn’t just relegated to the economic realm—but also the defense sector. Whereas integration was predicated by the near-collapse of mass interstate conflict, the War in Ukraine would seem to threaten just that. But in fact, integration ensures the costs associated with this conflict are felt from one end of the continent to the other. This inherently ties the most far-flung countries on matters of defense—exactly what ties Berlin and Tokyo, and their similar responses to the war in Ukraine. This integration doesn’t just tie Berlin and Tokyo, but also Seoul and Warsaw, both of which have seen deepened defense cooperation not limited to the production of South Korean tanks and artillery in Poland. Furthermore, Japan has sought out increased cooperation with NATO.

The mutually-reinforcing loop

Russia’s invasion has been an unmitigated tragedy for the people of Ukraine—but a boon for solidarity in the ‘Western’ security architecture, including the West’s numerous Asian allies and partners, and Eurasian integration writ large. In fact, the mutual economic ties that have fostered closer defense ties across the region, will continue to reinforce each other. Integration between these partners, across various sectors is the greatest mitigator of future conflict—an idea that underpins the great postwar peace, and one that will continue to endure.

Today, Germany and Japan, once imperial menaces to the international system, now make a proactive contribution to global peace—in deciding to behave like normal countries, and arm amidst a threatening global environment. Their contribution to the peace is in the solidification of transcontinental defense ties—ones predicated on deep economic integration.

Continue Reading

Europe

Bangladesh-UK strategic dialogue: Significance in the post-Brexit era

Avatar photo

Published

on

On September 12th, Bangladesh and the UK held their fifth strategic dialogue. The future of Bangladesh’s ties to the United Kingdom in the wake of Brexit has been the subject of much conjecture. Analysts questioned Dhaka’s duty-free access to Britain, which has been generous to an LDC economy like Bangladesh’s, as the UK prepared for its exit from the EU. However, the United Kingdom and Bangladesh have weathered these worries quite well. Rather, the statement by FCDO Permanent Under-Secretary Sir Philip Barton during the dialogue, sums up the strength of Bangladesh-UK relations in current times- “The Dialogue is a reflection of the growing relationship between our two countries, and our desire to work together more closely on our economic, trade and development partnerships and on regional and global security issues.”

Dhaka and London are having a great year on cooperation and connectivity. In the post Brexit era, the year 2023 seems like to be the year that will shift the ties between these countries from a bilateral partnership to each other’s crucial strategic partner in the current geo-politics.

Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina went to participate in the formal inauguration of the new King Charles III of the United Kingdom earlier this year. UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak had only good things to say about Bangladesh during the visit. This is also reflected in London’s post-pandemic approach to Dhaka.

Bangladesh-UK held their first ever defense dialogue in March of 2022 where they discussed various ways of strengthening cooperation including defense, security and trade and climate change. This year started with the second Bangladesh-UK Trade and Investment Dialogue on February. Both the UK and Bangladesh agreed during the discussion that they would want to enhance their trade connection in order to increase their prosperity. This discussion was followed by signing an agreement on March for working together in climate action bilaterally and multilaterally to help deliver the outcomes of COP26 and COP27.

UK’s Indo-Pacific Minister Anne-Marie Trevelyan signed the doctrine during her visit to Bangladesh which also signifies UK’s understanding of Bangladesh’s geostrategic importance in the Bay of Bengal and in the Indian Ocean.

So, this dialogue was surely a much anticipated one among the foreign ministries of these countries.

The provisional agenda included the state visit of President Mohammed Shahabuddin to the United Kingdom in November and the possible visit of British King Charles III (Charles Philip Arthur George) to Bangladesh in 2024. Other than that bilateral trade, investment, and market opportunities; migration, mobility and a new visa scheme for students are expected to be at the top of the agenda. Discussions on the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Rohingya crisis will also be featured.

The more complex agendas this year include discussions on mutual legal assistance and the extradition of convicted persons.

But Bangladesh has failed to gain an extradition treaty with UK. Although both countries agreed to constitute a joint working group to discuss migration, mobility and mutual recognition of qualifications, and agreed to sign a standard operating procedure (SOP) on returns of Bangladesh nationals in irregular situations in the UK.

The discussions regarding extradition issues if was fruitful, it might have helped the government to bring fugitives to national justice finally. Except this, the strategic dialogues between these countries in recent years have usually brought deep discussions and decisions on bilateral issues.

On the first of this strategic dialogue was in 2017, the issue of defense purchase was discussed- a much needed ground setting for the Forces Goals 2030 of Bangladesh. On the last edition of this dialogue, held in London back in 2021, the UK pledge to extend duty-free, quota-free access to its market until 2029, aiming to facilitate Bangladesh’s export-led growth.

Not only that, UK also added Bangladesh’s name to the list of the Developing Countries Trading Scheme (DCTS) where the country will experience a more simplified regulation system and reduced tariffs on its products entering the UK. This only adds to UK’s commitment towards Bangladesh’s development – where the country is already one of the biggest developing partners of Bangladesh.

UK’s such generosity towards Bangladesh isn’t only because of the benevolence of its heart. The country is now out of the shell of EU, certainly has to widen its reach across other regions. Indo-Pacific is its preferred place to start.

Bangladesh’s geostrategic location between China and the Indian Ocean with its advantage of having a gate way to Southeast Asia makes Bangladesh seemingly the perfect candidate for UK’s strategic interests. Both countries have also announced their Indo-pacific policies which focuses mainly on their economic aspirations. With such resonating goals for the region, the countries can definitely build a bigger stage of collaboration with each other.

The countries used this occasion as the pinnacle of their further economic cooperation as Bangladesh and the UK have agreed to create new institutional cooperation to promote business, trade, investment and are considering signing a new MoU on economic cooperation. They also discussed potential increase of cooperation and capacity building on global and regional security issues of mutual interest, including maritime and blue economy goals in the Bay of Bengal in the Indian Ocean.

The UK also announced a further £3m contribution to the Rohingya response, taking its total contribution since 2017 to £368m.

Another important discussion was on defense and cooperation where UK expressed its interest in selling advanced weapons to Bangladesh for protecting its air and maritime territory.

UK already recognizes Bangladesh as a critical stability provider in the Indo-Pacific and as both the countries have played their cards right, one could argue that bilateral ties are stronger than ever before. The dialogue has served as a further golden thread binding their visionary future together.

Continue Reading

Trending