39 – Episode 39 Aftermath of Defeat
November 1, 1914. Russian Empire, Foreign Ministry in the capital city of Petrograd.
Russian Foreign Minister Sazonov was astonished by the diplomatic losses caused by the defeat in the Balkans. Danger signals were being sent from almost every major neutral country’s diplomatic mission. Diplomats stationed abroad reported that the neutral countries were seriously considering leaning towards Germany.
“We cannot be reassured by the stance of Romania and Italy. The international community is taking the loss of Serbia and Montenegro much more seriously than Petrograd had vaguely imagined. If we let this situation continue, the negotiating countries could face complete defeat in neutral diplomacy. We cannot afford to let this flow continue.”
“Unless we create a turning point, we are doomed. Even if Russia can withstand this blow, if we suffer a complete defeat in diplomatic warfare, my own downfall is inevitable.”
Sazonov urgently summoned the British Ambassador to Petrograd, George Buchanan, warning that if they did not take action, the balance of power in Europe could collapse.
“If we are completely defeated in this war, Germany and Austria will stand tall as the rulers of Europe. Taking action before that happens will be the way to save yourselves.”
The British Ambassador did not deny Sazonov’s words. There was nothing harmful to the security of the British Empire as much as one power dominating the European continent, just as the Russian Foreign Minister had said.
But even now, it was not easy for Britain to make a move. The improved situation for the Allies and the political burden on the government regarding the decision to go to war, which had come from France, increased.
Under these conditions, even if the government was willing to take some risks, it was not easy to jump into war.
George Buchanan was aware of this fact, so he could only give Sazonov a theoretical response while presenting various concessions and seeking help.
“So, why don’t you consider accepting mediation from London?”
“Mediation… That’s an impossible idea.”
Sazonov jumped up at the British Ambassador’s words. Accepting mediation from Britain in the current situation where Germany was gaining momentum would be the same as signing a strengthened treaty that was disadvantageous to Russia in the Russo-Japanese War. This had the potential to bring a fatal crisis to the shaky Tsarist regime, which had suffered a severe blow from the defeat in the Russo-Japanese War.
Half of Sakhalin, which was almost a wasteland, had already been handed over to the Empire’s indirect sphere of influence, and just by giving up half of Manchuria, the regime itself was shaken. If Poland, which had developed industries, or parts of the Baltic region were also surrendered, could Petrograd withstand the political blow?
Even attempting such negotiations could jeopardize the Empire.
In the end, Sazanov gained nothing from his meeting with the British ambassador.
Of course, he hadn’t expected this outcome.
Britain had consistently shown its intention to maintain neutrality since the beginning of the war. They had no intention of going beyond being a “friendly” neutral country that provided convenience in the import of military supplies and the sale of bonds.
Perhaps Britain was under the illusion that they could handle the post-war settlement of this war at the level of the “Boer War” that happened forty years ago. It was a fight that ended with a “reasonable” compensation and territorial concessions.
In fact, if Britain succeeded in drawing other powers to press Germany, this war could have ended in the same way. Sazanov was not unwilling to end the war with compensation if he could, if there was no agreement.
However, the post-war settlement proposal obtained through secret channels showed that such an idea was nothing more than optimism. The Germans were determined to tear apart the western part of the Russian Empire, or even the Empire itself, and render it incapable of recovery.
It was impossible to expect mercy from them.
“It seems difficult to expect something from Britain. In that case…”
Sazanov pondered deeply.
*
November 1, 1914, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Paris, French Republic
While Petrograd was visibly distressed by the diplomatic losses caused by the Balkan defeat, Paris maintained a calm attitude.
They were not as nervous as Russia because they were placing hope on the offensive in Metz.
“If our army’s operation is successful, we can make up for the losses we have suffered so far.”
Their thinking was that if the Imperial Army broke through Metz and ravaged the German territory west of the Rhine, they could start reinforced negotiations on favorable terms.
It was not an incorrect idea, considering that even if Serbia and Montenegro combined their forces, they still couldn’t match a small part of Germany’s industrial power. If they broke through the strong fortress zone of Mozelstein, the neutral countries would have no choice but to change their attitude.
“The problem is Italy. If the Italians side with Germany, the situation will completely tilt. Then there will be no way to turn back.”
Foreign Minister Théophile Delcassé was well aware that Italy was clearly aware of the possibility of siding with Germany before the Imperial Army achieved success. Delcassé had received reports that Rome was deceiving Paris while contacting the Allies, so he felt the need to take action against them.
The Minister called for Francis Leverton Bertie, the British Ambassador to Italy, to inquire whether Britain could exert pressure to ensure Italy’s neutrality. Bertie, who had maintained a hostile attitude towards Germany, responded positively to Del Casse’s request.
“Italy has agreed to maintain the status quo in the Mediterranean. If they try to break their promise, we won’t sit idly by.”
Del Casse was satisfied with the British Ambassador’s response. If Britain exerted its influence to support Italy’s neutrality, they could breathe a sigh of relief.
“However, it would be wise to have an additional safety measure in place.”
Del Casse met with his cabinet colleague, Viviani, and proposed extending a carrot to Italy to ensure its neutrality. Viviani initially reacted with disbelief, but after hearing the Minister’s explanation of the seriousness of the situation, he agreed to discuss it.
“How far are we willing to go to tie their hands?”
“Tunisia.”
When Del Casse mentioned Tunisia, it was referring to the colony that Italy had long coveted.
Italian immigration to Tunisia, which began in the early 19th century, gave them a strong claim to the region. The claims of the Italians were not baseless, as there were over 100,000 Italians compared to less than 30,000 French immigrants in Tunisia.
France had successfully thwarted Italy’s demands for Tunisia with the support of Britain, but their greed was not completely extinguished. Even now, voices in Italy could easily be found that considered Tunisia as an unredeemed territory.
Del Casse wanted to tie Italy’s hands by offering Tunisia as a price for neutrality. Viviani pointed out the painful precedent.
“It’s similar to what Austria proposed during the Franco-Prussian War.”
As Viviani pointed out, during the Franco-Prussian War, Austria had offered Venice’s cession as a price for Italian neutrality. Italy at the time showed no interest in Austria’s proposal. They clearly expressed their refusal by siding with Prussia and attacking Austria.
They believed that gaining fame by joining the winning side was more beneficial for national prestige than negotiating territorial concessions.
“But this time, Britain is involved.”
“Did the British Ambassador promise support?”
If that was the case, the story would be different.
“Yes. The British Ambassador responded that they would exert pressure to ensure Italy’s neutrality.”
“If that premise exists, Italy would have a reason to be satisfied with a piece of land they can swallow. Very well. I will report to the cabinet, so Minister, contact the Italian Ambassador.”
After receiving Viviani’s approval, Del Casse immediately summoned Tommaso Titoni, the Italian Ambassador to Paris. Tommaso Titoni, who had served as Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, was a key figure in the negotiations and secret agreements between the three countries.
Because of this background, the Italian ambassador was more interested in maintaining neutrality than participating in the Tripartite Alliance.
To be more precise, it could be said that they were the side that wanted to switch sides if the negotiations of the Tripartite Alliance became more advantageous for them.
When Ambassador Tomaso Tittone arrived, Delcasse pointed out recent suspicious behavior in Italian politics and questioned whether they were trying to break neutrality. The Italian ambassador felt quite uneasy about this, but Rome responded that they intended to maintain neutrality.
“We, Italy, have no intention of breaking the friendship between the two countries.”
“Since you say so, Ambassador, I will trust our friendship and make a significant proposal.”
“Please go ahead.”
“If the Kingdom of Italy continues to show friendly neutrality towards the Republic in this war, Paris is prepared to adopt a proactive attitude towards the Tunisian issue.”
“Wasn’t that issue already resolved through an agreement?”
The Italian ambassador was puzzled as the French side brought up an issue that had already been resolved through negotiations.
“Of course, it’s a resolved matter. So you can consider this as the price we are willing to pay when Italy continues to show favor to Paris.”
“……!”
Tomaso Tittone was surprised by this and asked if this was an official statement from the French government.
“Why would I say something unnecessary when I’ve called the ambassador?”
The Italian ambassador couldn’t hide his joy at Delcasse’s firm response.
However, in diplomacy, there is no such thing as unfounded favor.
Soon, the ambassador realized that there was something he didn’t know.
“Did they do some groundwork to join the Tripartite Alliance on the side of the Central Powers?”
It was not an impossible task.
Officially, Italy had an obligation to assist and participate in the Tripartite Alliance. Of course, it was not clearly defined whether the nature of the Tripartite Alliance was limited to “defense” or included both “offense” and “defense.”
However, in such cases, it was generally interpreted as a mutual defense treaty.
Tomasso Titoni pondered for a moment before reaching a conclusion.
“It’s better to obtain something easily rather than shedding blood and gaining land through combat. And in times like this, it is more beneficial for the nation to carefully assess the situation and increase our value rather than hastily choosing sides. We should report back to our homeland with a positive outlook.”
With his thoughts settled, he smiled and responded.
“I will convey the Republic’s friendly proposal to Rome. I only hope that the result will not harm the relationship between our countries.”
“I also hope for the same.”
Delcasse smiled back as he clinked glasses with the Italian ambassador.
