Welcome back.
We’re going to talk about European diplomacy in a couple of short lectures here.
This is by no means the history of European diplomacy.
We’d be here the rest of our lives.
But what I do want to do is introduce you to some sort of key terms and concepts, or
practices, or strategies, used over the years, over the last half millennia in Europe, and
give you some notion of the significance of these practices.
I think this will be helpful to you when we get to the 20th century, when we get to the
great wars, the First and Second World Wars in the 20th century, maybe some of this will
sort of bubble up again, and you can see how some of these European diplomatic theme track
back through time.
So let’s introduce European diplomacy here.
Some of this you’ve heard of, and some of this you will hear again.
In the 17th century, Cardinal Richelieu of France introduced the modern method of foreign
policy based on the states’ national interest, as opposed to any other sort of interest,
particularly religious interest – for instance.
In the 18th century, Great Britain elaborated the concept of the balance of power.
This will dominate European diplomacy for the next two hundred years.
Also, in the 19th century, at the end of the Napoleonic Wars, you have the Settlement at
Vienna, and we created here what’s called the Concert of Europe, that is certain European
states acting in concert, together, as an alliance.
Again, this is after the tumult and chaos of the Napoleonic Wars.
And then in the second half of the 19th and then the early 20th centuries, you get the
rise of Bismarck, the cobbling together of the small German states that used to make
up the Holy Roman Empire.
Bismarck’s going to weld these together into modern Germany, and it’s going to reshape
European diplomacy in this sort of cold-blooded power game.
Some people call this power politics, or the French term real politic, real politics.
A little background here – The medieval dream of a universal empire in Europe had
failed.
This universal empire, based partly on Christianity, had been shattered by the Reformation; the
Christian unity of Europe has ended.
It’s also based – in part – on this lingering notion of unity created by the Roman
Empire in Europe.
But again, this is clearly a failure.
The Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 demonstrates this quite clearly.
Here, Richelieu’s practice of putting the nation state’s interest above religious
unity creates scandal in Europe.
France, a Catholic country, at war with the Habsburgs – Catholic domains, yet Richelieu,
sort of foreign minister of France, subsidizes a Protestant army from Sweden to attack the
Habsburgs in Central Euro Europe, sort of an unprecedented break with religious loyalty.
Europe’s multistate system was unique and from this it created these concepts of the
nations’ state, of national sovereignty, the balance of power.
Of course, we still hear of these terms today.
And again, let’s extend this balance of power a bit.
Balance of power is based upon Great Britain’s fear that a dominant European country could
threaten Britain’s control of the seas and her independence.
Britain is, after all, an island, and her navy and merchant marine bring food and fuel
and other things back to the island.
So a dominant European power has always been feared in England’s eyes because they could
impose either commercial or military opposition to the English.
Let’s continue with background here, and talk a little bit about the Holy Roman Empire.
We’ve already discussed this before, but it bears repeating.
Located in the heart of Central Europe, the empire sought unity based on Christianity,
and the lingering ideas of the ancient Roman Empire, and then on the periphery of the Holy
Roman Empire, you have those states that border the Atlantic – Spain; England; France – they
don’t accept the authority of the Holy Roman Empire.
After the Reformation, the Holy Roman emperor was perceived in Protestant lands less as
an agent of God, than a sort of a corrupt warlord tied to the antichrist, a common name
for the pope.
Protestant leaders are going to break from Rome, from Catholicism.
Protestant leaders broke the religious universality of Catholicism in Europe.
Protestant leaders no longer saw loyalty to the Holy Roman emperor as any sort of religious
duty.
Protestant leaders said the empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor even an empire.
Now, back to Richelieu for a moment, the practice of raison d’état, the reason of state – So
the notion of a European empire based on Christianity, based on notions of the Roman Empire has been
shattered.
So how are we going to regulate our relations with each other, these nation states; how
are we going to justify this breaking away, or this shattering of Christian unity.
They founded, the nation states founded in this concept, raison d’état, the interest
of state overall, and they founded in this notion of the balance of power, to keep any
one particular state from becoming dominant.
Raison d’état asserted that the well-being of the state justified whatever means were
employed to further its interest.
The national interest of the state supplanted the medieval notion of universal morality.
Again, Cardinal Richelieu essentially began this practice.
You can see it fully formed at the Treaty of Westphalia, or at least the results of
it.
And it’s interesting – upon learning of Richelieu’s death, Pope Urban the VIII is
alleged to have said, quote – If there’s a God, Cardinal Richelieu will have much to
answer for.
You can imagine the pope’s dismay that a Catholic cardinal, Richelieu, is aiding Protestants
against other Catholics in the Holy Roman Empire.
Of course, Richelieu came to office in 1624 and guided French policy for the rest of his
life.
And the Habsburg emperor, Ferdinand the II, of course, is attempting to revive a Catholic
empire there in Central Europe.
Ferdinand is trying to stamp out Protestantism.
Ferdinand is trying to establish imperial control over this central, German region of
Europe.
Of course, Richelieu helped to prevent Ferdinand achieving his goals by financing Protestant
war efforts.
Sweden’s Gustavus Adolphus brings his army into the mainland of Europe and helps to foil
Ferdinand the II’s ambitions.
And again, I can’t emphasize this enough – both Richelieu and Ferdinand, at war with
each other, are both Catholic; the Swedish king is Protestant, yet Richelieu supports
him.
That Cardinal Richelieu should subsidize a Protestant attack on the Catholic Holy Roman
Empire had implications as profound as the upheavals of the French Revolution.
So we’ve already talked about the Thirty Years’ War, this is essentially a Habsburg
attempt to unify Germany.
Richelieu thwarted the Habsburgs and the Holy Roman Empire by keeping it comprised of small,
weak, German principalities and kingdoms that could pose no threat to France.
The rulers, the German rule restrictions of each of these little principalities and kingdoms,
of course, could determine the religion that would be practiced in their kingdom – the
Treaty of Augsburg, I believe, is the treaty that made this possible.
Let’s continue a little bit further here.
Louis the XIV’s pursuit of raison d’état alarmed the rest of Europe, and triggered
an anti-French coalition, an example of the balance of power – France under Louis the
XIV is becoming too powerful, beginning to exert its dominance outside of French borders,
therefore the other European states gather in alliance to prevent French domination.
Again, William of Orange; we talked about the English Civil War, William of Orange assumed
power in England in the Glorious Revolution of 1688.
We talked about that last time.
William of Orange brought England into the anti-French alliance against Louis the XIV
– balance of power.
William of Orange’s decision to send English troops to fight for present-day Belgium, or
what we call Belgium today, against France was a precursor of the British decision to
fight for Belgium when Germany invaded it in 1914.
Here, we’re talking about the Great War, or World War I, and we’ll see this strategy
reappear again in 1914, when the English seek to prevent Germany from dominating the European
continent.
Now as a result, France would remain the strongest power in Europe but it would not be dominant
overall, a textbook case of the balance of power.
Let’s take a short break.
We’ll come back in the next lecture and look at the Concert of Europe.