How Russian sovereigns put Europe in place without war

Looking sadly at today's realities, when the heads of the western states are not just asking for something, but are directly demanding from Russia one or the other, it’s nice to remember the times when things were exactly the opposite. No, the West has always put forward claims to our country - not reaching, however, in its impudence, to give instructions on how to deal with some crooks captured when violating Russian borders or something like that. However, the point was that often a few words spoken or written by the All-Russian autocrats were enough for Europe to recall its present place on time. And there was no need to fight ...





The entry of the Russian Empire into a large European policies we are accustomed to calculating from Peter I, which, in general, does not correspond to the truth. Even Ivan the Terrible tried to conclude the most important foreign alliance, which, if successful, would have had a huge impact on the fate of the Old World. That's just the object for "sympathy" this sovereign chose, to put it mildly, unsuccessful - Britain. Towards the end of the first stage of Russian-English relations, which lasted nearly a century, it became completely clear that London was sleeping and seeing how to turn “Muscovite Muscovy” into its own raw materials appendage and territory for the absolute monopoly sale of its own goods.

Insolent British from the borders of Russia under the father of Peter I, Aleksey Mikhailovich was simply thrown out - good and the occasion turned up wonderful: the revolution that happened in Foggy Albion ended in regicide. At the same time, the Sovereign, when signing the corresponding decree, did not forget to mention the ingratitude and "indecent behavior" of English merchants who flooded our country. They didn’t stand on ceremony with him then, so what ... Perhaps pre-Petrine Russia was not such a “dumb house”, which before the cut, needed a “window to Europe”, but, simply, was a state that had its own dignity?

However, Pyotr Alekseevich nevertheless not without reason earned the prefix Great in history. And he did not allow himself to wipe his feet neither about himself, nor about the state at the head of which - what is the story with Frederick III, the Brandenburg-Prussian Elector. Peter I scolded him like a boy for the fact that he, a daredevil, dared to send our congratulations to the courtiers on the birthday of our Emperor, who was visiting Frederick, but didn’t come in person! After that, he refused to conclude any written agreements with the cunning elector who tried hard to use Russia in his own intrigues - they say that only their conscience and the Lord God guarantee any agreements between the sovereigns. What other signatures ?!

One of the best examples of how Peter solved European affairs is his, in modern language, influence on the election of the Polish king in 1696. It must be remembered that the monarch in this country was chosen precisely and the possible "electoral prospects" developed at that time for Russia in the most lousy way. After the death of the previous ruler, Jan Sobieski, the Commonwealth remained in its favorite state - utter bedlam and anarchy. The greatest chance to sit on the throne was the henchman of France - to put it mildly, not at all friendly at that time Russian power. Supporters of the “Parisian party” were already yelling at the streets of Warsaw that right after the “election” they would go “to take Smolensk away from the Russians”, and “wonderful” perspectives about the soap rope were drawn to the envoy of our country Nikitin. Moreover, in the event of the accession to Poland of the “favorite of the election race” of Prince de Conti, our country risked having a military-political alliance of Turkey’s friends, which was carrying out extremely aggressive plans against Russia.

The Frenchman on the Polish throne did not suit by any side and then Austria-Hungary allied to us. Its representatives, preferring to solve the "Polish question" in a tried and tested way - that is, by total bribery of an insane nobility, desperately asked Peter to "send precious sables" for such a thing. However, Peter acted in his own way - he moved the army to the borders of Poland, and he seriously took up the “election campaign”, clearly and clearly setting out to the panam in writing that he did not want to see the French protege on the Warsaw throne. At the same time, Peter, interrupting his own Great Embassy for European countries, was a stone's throw from Poland (just in case!), And his letters came allegedly from Moscow - so as not to show increased interest. Our diplomatic mission in Warsaw, creaking with goose feathers, worked day and night, making copies of them and distributing them “among the masses”. Well, what do you want - without the Internet and social networks ?! Pairs of formidable dispatches widely dispersed in Warsaw, signed by the Russian Emperor, coupled with data on the approach of the Russian troops, were enough to win the election of a candidate pleasing to Moscow and Vienna.

One of Peter's successors, the Empress, who also went down in history with the Great title - Catherine II, with the same Poland suffered a great deal. It was already not enough to put “their” king on the throne - they had to have a lush gentry, without further ado, just take it under your scepter. And also - the annexation of Crimea, utterly beaten Turks and Swedes ... And the phrase remained for centuries by one of the main diplomats of the brilliant Catherine’s era, Count Bezborodko about Europe, where not a single gun dared to shoot without the permission of Russia. It was! It is not for nothing that Catherine II served in France as an object of eternal hatred at the state level, so to speak. During her lifetime, the country's foreign minister, Etienne Choiselle, referred to our Mother of the Fatherland as a “sworn enemy” of France, and subsequently there were several incidents around the name of the great empress that put Paris and St. Petersburg on the brink of war.

This, if you have not guessed yet, is about several incidents that occurred during the reign of Nicholas I, who was extremely sensitive to attempts to bawl both Russia and his royal ancestors. In Paris, they gathered to stage a play, the main plot line of which was the Empress’s amorous adventures, moreover, presented, let's say, in an extremely frivolous form. Having learned about this from intelligence reports, Nikolai gave the Russian envoy in France, Count Palen, the strictest instructions - to make an appointment with the king and set an ultimatum on the immediate prohibition of "this libel." Otherwise - to demand the return of his credentials and immediately leave for St. Petersburg. In fact, this meant a declaration of war ...

If you believe the stories, the count executed the instructions instantly and exactly - he came to some account of Louis, pulling it out from the dining table, and briefly acquainted with the contents of the royal dispatch. When the French king, who at once lost his appetite, began to babble about freedom of speech and other “European values,” and, at the same time, tried to rely on the fact that the Russian tsar was not in control of Paris, Palen announced his own departure in an icy tone. To the royal panic: “But this is a war ?!”, the diplomat threw with dignity: “The Tsar is responsible for the consequences!” This turned out to be more than enough - the crappy play from the repertoire of French theaters disappeared. However, the mind did not last long ...

A few years later - in 1844, they began, again, on the stage, to ridicule another Russian autocrat - Paul I, who, in the "enlightened West", was adored as a madman. This time, Nicholas did not resort to the services of diplomats, but personally wrote to the king of France, demanding to stop the ugliness - to ban the play, and to remove and destroy copies of it. Again from Paris, a verbiage about freedom, creativity, and completely uncontrollable “people of art” flashed back. To this the Emperor replied in a letter in which he agreed with the arguments given ... And he promised - since the production is so successful! - send in the very near future for its viewing "a million spectators in overcoats." True, he suggested that those unfamiliar with French high art, these same spectators could boo it in the most strict manner - but then do not blame me! That worked. Drama-Russophobic delights stopped for a long time.

Perhaps the most successful Russian Emperor in the matter of exclusively verbal “construction” of Europe, which periodically lost its sense of measure, may be considered Alexander III the Peacemaker. Under him, the Empire really did not wage serious wars. However, often this required the personal intervention of the Emperor, and in the harshest form. For example, the ambassador of Austria-Hungary, who had the audacity right at the palace dinner to criticize Russian policy in the Balkans and threaten to mobilize army corps on this issue, almost flew in the face with a silver fork, twisted by the Emperor in a kind of bizarre monogram. It’s not without reason that legends circulated about the heroic strength of Alexander ... “And with your corps I will do just that!” - The Emperor threw this remark in a completely calm tone, but the overwhelming Austrian already had enlightenment about claims and mobilization.

No less well-known is Alexander’s reaction to the report he received that the British sensibly received shortly before hands on the Afghan border of Russia, were seriously offended and, wanting revenge, were preparing an intervention. Having flung around the table with his pood fist, the Emperor literally barked: “The whole treasury - to war!” These words very quickly flew to the British Embassy, ​​and from there to London. They immediately recognized the idea of ​​intervention as extremely unsuccessful. By the way, Alexander III of the British did not stand the spirit at all, rightly seeing in them the worst enemies of Russia. In a letter from the British envoy, who intended for some reason to demand “apology” from Russia, he wrote: “There is nothing to talk about!” And this sovereign was remarkable in that the term “liberalism” was used only with the prefix “lousy” ...

Some of the stories outlined above, some of the readers can regard as historical fables, somewhat exaggerated and embellished. Well ... I agree - not every one of them has strict documentary evidence. However, I allow myself to note that from scratch such stories are not born. The correspondence of the same Nicholas I with the French king about theatrical plays is perhaps no more than a joke. But his intentions to send troops to France in order to “crush the hydra of the revolution” and to restore order by the Russian army in Austria-Hungary, riotous, are undeniable facts. All these stories, at least, serve as an accurate reflection of not only the personal qualities of their main characters - Russian monarchs, but also the memory of the greatness of our country, its enormous weight in world affairs during those days.