The Sleepwalkers (101 page)

1
. For the text of the treaty, see The Avalon Project. Documents in Law, History and Diplomacy, Yale Law School, consulted at
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/frrumil.asp
.

2
. Claude Digeon,
La Crise allemande dans la pensée française 1870–1914
(Paris, 1959), pp. 535–42.

3
. Klaus Hildebrand,
Das vergangene Reich. Deutsche Aussenpolitik von Bismarck bis Hitler 1871–1945
(Stuttgart, 1995), p. 18.

4
. For an acute analysis of this problem, see Paul W. Schroeder, ‘The Lost Intermediaries: The Impact of 1870 on the European System',
International History Review
, 6/1 (1984), pp. 1–27.

5
. J. B. Eustis, ‘The Franco-Russian Alliance',
The North American Review
, 165 (1897), pp. 111–18, here p. 117.

6
. Ulrich Lappenküper,
Die Mission Radowitz. Untersuchungen zur Russlandpolitik Otto von Bismarcks (1871–1875)
(Göttingen, 1990), p. 226.

7
. The quotation is from the famous Bad Kissingen Memorandum of 15 June 1877, which was composed with an eye to the Balkans, but captures many of the central themes of the chancellor's policy; the text is in
GP
, vol. 2, pp. 153–4.

8
. Otto von Bismarck, speech to the Reichstag of 5 December 1876, in Horst Kohl (ed.),
Politische Reden Bismarcks. Historisch-kritische Gesamtausgabe
(14 vols., Stuttgart, 1892–1905), vol. 6, p. 461.

9
. Hildebrand,
Das vergangene Reich
, pp. 50–51; see also Hermann Oncken,
Das Deutsche Reich und die Vorgeschichte des Weltkrieges
(2 vols., Leipzig, 1933), vol. 1, p. 215.

10
. For a good summary of the Bulgarian crisis, see J. M. Roberts,
Europe, 1880–1945
(3rd edn, Harlow, 2001), pp. 75–8.

11
. Herbert von Bismarck to his brother Wilhelm, 11 November 1887, in Walter Bussmann (ed.),
Staatssekretär Graf Herbert von Bismarck: aus seiner politischen Privatkorrespondenz
(Göttingen, 1964), pp. 457–8.

12
. On the Bismarck
fronde
, see J. A. Nicholls,
Germany After Bismarck
(Cambridge, MA, 1958), pp. 101–3, 132–4; Katherine Lerman,
Bismarck. Profiles in Power
(Harlow, 2004), pp. 244–8; Konrad Canis,
Bismarcks Aussenpolitik 1870 bis 1890: Aufstieg und Gefährdung
(Paderborn, 2004), pp. 381–3; Ernst Engelberg,
Bismarck. Das Reich in der Mitte Europas
(Munich, 1993), pp. 309–13; Otto Pflanze,
Bismarck and the Development of Germany
(3 vols., Princeton, 1990), vol. 3,
The Period of Fortification 1880–1898
, pp. 313–16.

13
. William L. Langer, ‘The Franco-Russian Alliance (1890–1894)',
The Slavonic Review
, 3/9 (1925), pp. 554–75, here pp. 554–5.

14
. On the impact in St Petersburg of non-renewal, see Peter Jakobs,
Das Werden des französsch-russischen Zweibundes, 1890–1894
(Wiesbaden, 1968), pp. 56–8; George F. Kennan,
The Decline of Bismarck's European Order. Franco-Prussian Relations, 1875–1890
(Princeton, 1979), p. 398.

15
.
Morning Post
, 1 July 1891 and
Standard
, 4 July 1891, both cited in Patricia A. Weitsman,
Dangerous Alliances, Proponents of Peace, Weapons of War
(Stanford, 2004), p. 109.

16
. Antoine Laboulaye to Alexandre Ribot, 22 June 1890, cited in ibid., p. 105.

17
. Giers to Mohrenheim, 19–21 August 1891, cited in ibid., pp. 105–6.

18
. George F. Kennan,
The Fateful Alliance. France, Russia and the Coming of the First World War
(Manchester, 1984), pp. 153–4.

19
. Francis R. Bridge and Roger Bullen,
The Great Powers and the European States System 1815–1914
(Harlow, 1980), p. 259; on the anti-British orientation of the new alliance (in Russian eyes), see also Jakobs,
Das Werden des französisch-russischen Zweibundes
, pp. 73–8.

20
. Kennan,
Fateful Alliance
, passim.

21
. Weitsman,
Dangerous Alliances
, p. 117.

22
. On the alliance and popular culture, see I. S. Rybachenok,
Rossiia i Frantsiia: soiuz interesov i soiuz serdets,
1891
–
1897
: russko-frantsuzskyi soiuz v diplomaticheskikh dokumentakh, fotografiakh, risunkakh, karikaturakh, stikhakh, tostakh i meniu
(Moscow, 2004).

23
. Thomas M. Iiams,
Dreyfus, Diplomatists and the Dual Alliance: Gabriel Hanotaux at the Quai d'Orsay, 1894–1898
(Geneva, 1962), pp. 27–8.

24
. Conversation between Lamzdorf and Lobanov-Rostovsky recorded on 9 October 1895, in V. N. Lamzdorf,
Dnevnik: 1894–1896
, ed. V. I. Bovykin and I. A. Diakonova (Moscow, 1991), pp. 264–6; D. C. B. Lieven,
Nicholas II. Emperor of All the Russias
(London, 1993), p. 93.

25
. On Hanotaux's view of colonies as crucial to the restoration of lost prestige, see Peter Grupp,
Theorie des Kolonialimperialismus und Methoden der imperialistischen Aussenpolitik bei Gabriel Hanotaux
(Bern and Frankfurt, 1962), esp. pp. 78–84, 122–7, 142–5; see also Alf Heggoy,
The African Policies of Gabriel Hanotaux, 1894–1898
(Athens, GA, 1972), esp. pp. 10–11; Christopher Andrew and A. S. Kanya-Forstner, ‘Gabriel Hanotaux, the Colonial Party and the Fashoda Strategy', in E. F. Penrose (ed.),
European Imperialism and the Partition of Africa
(London, 1975), pp. 55–104.

26
. Cited in Christopher Andrew,
Théophile Delcassé and the Making of the Entente Cordiale. A Reappraisal of French Foreign Policy 1898–1905
(London, 1968), p. 19; M. B. Hayne,
The French Foreign Office and the Origins of the First World War, 1898–1914
(Oxford, 1993), p. 95.

27
. G. N. Sanderson,
England, Europe and the Upper Nile, 1882–1889
(Edinburgh, 1965), pp. 140–61.

28
. Hayne,
French Foreign Office
, p. 97.

29
. Andrew,
Delcassé
, p. 168.

30
. Ibid., p. 171.

31
. Jules Clarétie, ‘Vingt-huit ans à la Comédie-Française – Journal', entry of 8 March 1900,
Revue des deux mondes
(November 1949/6), pp. 122–40, here p. 129.

32
. Ibid., p. 129; Andrew,
Delcassé
, pp. 307–8; Hayne,
French Foreign Office
, p. 113.

33
. Andrew,
Delcassé
, p. 172; on the French reaction to signs of Anglo-German rapprochement in the late 1890s, see also P. J. V. Rolo,
Entente Cordiale. The Origins and Negotiation of the Anglo-French Agreements of
8
April 1904
(London, 1969), p. 73.

34
. Rolo,
Entente Cordiale
, p. 106.

35
. Maurice Paléologue,
Un grand tournant de la politique mondiale (1904– 1906)
(Paris, 1914), p. 196.

36
. Hayne,
French Foreign Office
, p. 55.

37
. Disraeli speech to House of Commons, accessed online at Hansard 1803–2005,
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1871/feb/09/address-to-her-majesty-on-her-most
.

38
. Leader article,
The Times
, 15 February 1871, p. 9, col. C.

39
. ‘The Eastern Question: The Russian Repudiation of the Treaty of 1856, A New Sebastopol Wanted . . .'
New York Times
, 1 January 1871, p. 1.

40
. Disraeli speech to House of Commons, accessed online at Hansard 1803–2005,
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1871/feb/09/address-to-her-majesty-on-her-most
.

41
. Keith Neilson,
Britain and the Last Tsar. British Policy and Russia 1894– 1917
(Oxford, 1995), p. xiii.

42
. For the definitive analysis of the China Question, see Thomas Otte,
The China Question. Great Power Rivalry and British Isolation, 1894–1905
(Oxford, 2007).

43
. Payson J. Treat, ‘The Cause of the Sino-Japanese War, 1894',
The Pacific Historical Review
, 8 (1939), pp. 149–57; Stewart Lone,
Japan's First Modern War. Army and Society in the Conflict with China, 1894–95
(London, 1994), p. 24.

44
. Keith Neilson, ‘Britain, Russia and the Sino-Japanese War', in Keith Neilson, John Berryman and Ian Nish,
The Sino-Japanese War of 1894–5 in its International Dimension
(London, [1994]), pp. 1–22.

45
. Rolo,
Entente Cordiale
, pp. 64, 108.

46
. D. Gillard,
The Struggle for Asia, 1828–1914. A Study in British and Russian Imperialism
(London, 1977), pp. 153–66.

47
. Godley (permanent under-secretary, India Office) to Curzon, 10 November 1899, cited in Neilson,
Britain and the Last Tsar
, p. 122.

48
. Intelligence Department,War Office, ‘Military Needs of the Empire in a War with France and Russia', 12 August 1901, cited in ibid., p. 123.

49
. Cited in ibid., pp. 16–17.

50
. Cited in Otte,
China Question
, p. 71.

51
. Cited from a letter from the British military attaché in Peking to Kimberley in ibid., p. 71.

52
. On British reactions to French encroachments from Indo-China and the link to the policy of entente, see J. D. Hargreaves, ‘Entente Manquée: Anglo-French Relations, 1895–1896', in
Historical Journal
, 11 (1953–5), pp. 65–92; Otte,
China Question
, p. 330.

53
. Neilson,
Britain and the Last Tsar
, p. xiv; Rolo,
Entente Cordiale
, p. 273; on Delcassé, Keith M. Wilson,
The Policy of the Entente. Essays on the Determinants of British Foreign Policy, 1904–1914
(Cambridge, 1985), p. 71.

54
. Cited in Wilson,
Policy of the Entente
, p. 71.

55
. Cited in Neilson,
Britain and the Last Tsar
, p. 22.

56
. Ibid., pp. 124–5.

57
. On the ‘feverish haste' of Russian military preparations near the Indian frontier, see the secret report by the British military attaché H. D. Napier, St Petersburg, 9 November 1904, enclosed with Charles Hardinge to Lansdowne, 10 November 1904, Hardinge Papers, Cambridge University Library, vol. 46.

58
. ‘Demands for Reinforcements by the Government of India', 20 February 1905, cited in Neilson,
Britain and the Last Tsar
, p. 131.

59
. Stanley Wolpert,
Morley and India, 1906–1910
(Berkeley, 1967), p. 80.

60
. Neilson,
Britain and the Last Tsar
, pp. 134–5; Wilson,
Policy of the Entente
, p. 7.

61
. Grey to Spring Rice, London, 22 December 1905, cited in Neilson,
Britain and the Last Tsar
, p. 12.

62
. Otto,
China Question
, pp. 71, 90, 333.

63
. On the German bid for Angra Pequeña, see Hildebrand,
Das vergangene Reich
, pp. 87–8; also Canis,
Bismarcks Aussenpolitik
, pp. 209–17.

64
. On the ‘four months of haughty silence' with which the Salisbury government greeted President Cleveland's note of 20 July 1895 protesting British aggressions in Venezuela, and the ‘condescending' reply of the British government to subsequent US communications, see Bradford Perkins,
The Great Rapprochement: England and the United States 1895–1914
(London, 1969), pp. 13–16; also H. C.Allen,
Great Britain and the United States: A History of Anglo-American Relations (1783–1952)
(London, 1954), pp. 532–41.

65
. Bismarck comment on letter from Count Hatzfeldt to Bismarck, 24 May 1884,
GP
, vol. 4, p. 58.

66
. Bülow to Eulenburg, 2 March 1890, cited in Peter Winzen,
Bülow's Weltmachtkonzept. Untersuchungen zur Frühphase seiner Aussenpolitik 1897–1901
(Boppard am Rhein, 1977), p. 50.

67
. Konrad Canis,
Von Bismarck zur Weltpolitik. Deutsche Aussenpolitik, 1890 bis 1902
(Berlin, 1997), pp. 93–4.

68
. Ibid., p. 124.

69
. Rolo,
Entente Cordiale
, p. 116.

70
. Gordon Martel,
Imperial Diplomacy: Rosebery and the Failure of Foreign Policy
(London, 1986), p. 187.

71
. On German objections to the treaty, see Jacques Willequet,
Le Congo Belge et la Weltpolitik (1894–1914)
(Brussels, 1962), pp. 14–21; Canis,
Von Bismarck zur Weltpolitik
, pp. 134–5; cf. A. J. P. Taylor, ‘Prelude to Fashoda: The Question of the Upper Nile, 1894–5',
English Historical Review
, 65 (1950), pp. 52–80.

72
. Canis,
Von Bismarck zur Weltpolitik
, pp. 142–3.

73
. Full text of the Kruger telegram is in
GP
, vol. 11, doc. 2610, pp. 31–2.

74
. On the course and consequences of the Transvaal crisis, see Harald Rosenbach,
Das deutsche Reich, Grossbritannien und der Transvaal (1896–1902). Anfänge deutsch-britischer Entfremdung
(Göttingen, 1993).

75
. Friedrich Kiessling,
Gegen den grossen Krieg? Entspannung in den internationalen Beziehungen 1911–1914
(Munich, 2002), p. 137.

76
. P. Winzen, ‘Zur Genesis von Weltmachtkonzept und Weltpolitik', in J. C. G. Röhl (ed.),
Der Ort Kaiser Wilhelms in der deutschen Geschichte
(Munich, 1991), pp. 189–222; here pp. 192–3.

77
. Jan Rüger,
The Great Naval Game. Britain and Germany in the Age of Empire
(Cambridge, 2007).

78
. Gregor Schöllgen,
Imperialismus und Gleichgewicht. Deutschland, England und die orientalische Frage, 1871–1914
(Munich, 1984), p. 76; Christopher Clark,
Kaiser Wilhelm II. A Life in Power
(London, 2008), p. 184.

79
. Jonathan Steinberg,
Yesterday's Deterrent; Tirpitz and the Birth of the German Battle Fleet
(London, [1965]), pp. 71, 101–2, 109; Ivo Nikolai Lambi,
The Navy and German Power Politics, 1862–1914
(Boston, 1984), pp. 68–86.

80
. Steinberg,
Yesterday's Deterrent
, p. 201; also pp. 125–48.

81
. Cited in Rosenbach,
Transvaal
, p. 70.

82
. The text of this memorandum is given in Steinberg,
Yesterday's Deterrent
, pp. 209–21. See also Volker R. Berghahn and Wilhelm Deist (eds.),
Rüstung im Zeichen der wilhelminischen Weltpolitik
(Düsseldorf, 1988), esp. docs. II/11, II/12 and VII/1.

83
. See James Ainsworth, ‘Naval Strategic Thought in Britain and Germany 1890–1914', PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, 2011; on the persistence of the British fear of French naval power around 1900 and the relatively low priority assigned to the ‘German threat', see Andreas Rose,
Zwischen Empire und Kontinent. Britische Aussenpolitik vor dem Ersten Weltkrieg
(Munich, 2011), pp. 209–11.

84
. Even Lord Selborne, often cited as crown witness for the thesis that the fear of German naval power transformed British strategy, was as concerned about the Russian and French fleets as he was about the German, see Dominik Geppert and Andreas Rose, ‘Machtpolitik und Flottenbau vor 1914. Zur Neuinterpretation britischer Aussenpolitik im Zeitalter des Hochimperialismus',
Historische Zeitschrift
, 293 (2011), pp. 401–37, here p. 409; Rose,
Zwischen Empire und Kontinent
, pp. 223–6.