Chapter 1054 Geographical Game
It can be said that the natural opposition between Britain and Russia has extended to a century-long great game. This kind of game was inherited by the Soviet Union and Russia in previous lives, but Britain also Because of the decline in national power, the chess player changed to the United States.
It can be simply understood as the geographical dispute between the Slavs and the Unsa people about world hegemony. There are three key points in it, namely Europe, the Far East and the Middle East (Asia). Needless to say, Europe, between Western countries and Russia The war between the two countries lasted for hundreds of years, and the Middle East and Central Asia were also hot spots of contention. The Russo-Japanese War was the embodiment of the conflict between the two sides in the Far East.
When Europe is strong and it is difficult for Russia to play a role in Europe, Russia will shift its attention to the Middle East and Central Asia, and finally choose the Far East.
In fact, this can also be seen in Russia's actions from the 19th century to the early 20th century. First, it was blocked by Britain and France in Crimea, followed by the Turkish-Russian War, and finally the Russo-Japanese War.
In the geopolitical dispute between Russia and Britain, Persia is at a key node. Britain wants to build a land channel connecting India in the Middle East and Central Asia. The main line involves India, Afghanistan, Persia, the Ottoman Empire, and ultimately the Mediterranean.
Of course, the UK also has an alternative, which is to bypass countries such as Bahrain, Oman, and Qatar that control the west coast of the Persian Gulf.
The driving force for the formation of the alternative plan was that Britain was at a disadvantage in the game with Tsarist Russia and therefore was unable to control countries such as Persia and Afghanistan. In order to prevent Tsarist Russia from cutting off the connection between Britain and India.
In fact, in the previous life, Africa was also very important in the layout planned by the UK. If the UK deployed a horizontal land strategic channel in the Middle East and Central Asia, the UK also designed a vertical land channel in Africa. It is Plan 2C from Cape Town to Cairo.
The vertical and horizontal intersection is Egypt, and through Britain's strong power in the Mediterranean, Britain can indirectly control most of Europe, Asia and Africa.
Of course, because of East Africa, the British two-C plan could not take shape. The existence of East Africa can be said to have broken one leg of the British century-old layout.
Fortunately, Africa did not receive much attention from various countries in the past. If it had been a little later and the British had used various intervention methods, East Africa would not have been established so smoothly.
Compared with East Africa, Tsarist Russia is undoubtedly a greater threat to Britain. Although East Africa sits on a smaller half of Africa, Africa's ability to intervene outside the region is obviously not as strong as Tsarist Russia.
Tsarist Russia can be said to be in the center of Eurasia and can attack in all directions. If Russia cannot be blocked in any direction, Russia will move further in Eurasia.
So in order to prevent Russia from becoming bigger, countries around the world must put in a lot of energy, such as the direction of the Baltic Sea, the direction of Central Europe, the direction of the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, the direction of the Middle East, the direction of Central Asia, and the direction of the Far East.
If Russia gains an advantage in any area, Russia will be able to obtain an outlet with better conditions. Coupled with its land power advantage, it will be even more difficult to suppress Russia.
Looking at East Africa, the Sahara Desert in the north blocks the exchanges between East Africa and Europe and Asia. Although East Africa has the advantage of two oceans, at the current stage, the naval strength of East Africa is not enough to pose a threat to the United Kingdom, and it is not possible to attack from the sea. Like Tsarist Russia, which is as convenient from land as it is from land, the British can suppress potential enemies on the sea with their powerful navy. However, Tsarist Russia cannot be easily suppressed by Britain if it attacks from land.
……
Rhine City.
In response to the changes between Britain and Russia in the Middle East and Central Asia, East Africa including the military, security bureau and other government departments have conducted targeted discussions. Cristiano, a member of the staff, drew on the map with a triangle ruler and pencil: "Starting from Central Asia and connecting with Persia, Tsarist Russia can obtain the coveted Indian Ocean outlet, or covet the rich Indian colonies through Afghanistan. This is also the case for Britain and The key to the conflict between Tsarism and Russia ”
“On the contrary, Britain’s layout in the Middle East and Central Asia has restricted Russia’s southern sea access, so the two sides have been unable to reach an agreement. The Russo-Turkish War and the Afghan War are concrete manifestations of the game between the two sides.”< br>
“Looking at the layout of both sides, we can draw two straight lines, one from southern Russia to Central Asia and then to the Persian Gulf, and one from Syria in the Ottoman Empire to the Persian Gulf and then to India. The intersection of the two straight lines It’s Persia.”
Cristiano downplayed the core interests of Britain and Russia in the region, which also made other people in the East African government feel depressed.
“This is the Empire. From the map alone, the Empire should also have most of the interests in the Middle East and Central Asia. After all, we can exert influence here through convenient shipping conditions, but the fact is exactly the same. On the contrary, the Reich’s political influence in the Middle East and Central Asia has long been missing,” said Reich Foreign Minister Frier.
The distance from Mogadishu at the northern tip of East Africa to the Persian Gulf is only over 3,000 kilometers. This distance is not too far for the ocean, and there are almost no obstacles in the middle, so shipping between East Africa and the Persian Gulf is very convenient. .
Taken together, the advantage is at least much greater than that of the United Kingdom and Russia. Although Russia is the closest to the Persian Gulf, most of it is land. The cost of land transportation is too high, and the United Kingdom is thousands of miles away from the Persian Gulf. If you are far away, you have to go through the Strait of Gibraltar, the Suez Canal, the Bab el-Mandeb Strait or go around the Cape of Good Hope.
Frere continued: "If we want to break the regional monopoly of Britain and Russia, we must join the competition in the Middle East and Central Asia. Although our navy is currently far less powerful than the United Kingdom, But the main force of the British navy is concentrated in the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea, and we have a huge space for maneuver in the Indian Ocean."
"As for Russia, we can also block Russia's southward path through shipping and supporting local forces. The British do the same, so our intervention in the Middle East and Central Asia does not have common interests with the British. "
The stability of the triangle also means that the addition of East Africa will make the entire Persia. The situation in the Gulf Coast region is more complicated, and the relationship between Britain, Russia and East Africa is also quite complicated. Even if East Africa temporarily joins the intervention in the region, it will not have much impact on the geography. At least in the short term, Britain, Russia and East Africa , no one can easily gain an absolute advantage.
Ernst said: "Our ultimate goal is not to have an irreconcilable conflict with Britain or Russia. The United States has already set an example for us in the Far Eastern Empire, so we must also join in in the name of safeguarding trade. , thus forcing Britain and Russia to make certain concessions. "
Even if East Africa has serious ambitions for the Persian Gulf coast, it cannot be done at once. It will cost a lot of money just to develop its power there. It will take less time, and Britain and Russia will not back down because East Africa joins. After all, East Africa does not have such strength.
In the previous life, the United States was able to enter the Persian Gulf because it actually inherited British assets. For example, the U.S. naval base in Bahrain is actually the core of the British navy in the Persian Gulf. The British withdrew because of two The World War caused Britain to be completely reduced to a second-rate country, and it had to make compromises. But even so, Britain's influence on the local area was maintained for at least several decades.
Therefore, if East Africa joins, the effect will not be seen in a short period of time, unless both Britain and Russia suddenly decline. This also needs to consider the factors of local countries and regions. For example, in the previous life, the rise of countries such as Persia also It is difficult for the United States to monopolize the sky in the Middle East. Therefore, if East Africa wants to make a difference in the Middle East and Central Asia, it is bound to go through a long layout.
“In the Middle East and Central Asia, we must also follow some objective facts. First of all, we must not let Russia benefit. If Russia is really allowed to obtain the Indian Ocean outlet for our reasons, it will be a disaster for the empire. This is a disaster, so we are consistent with the UK on blocking Russia.”
(End of this chapter)