Peace of Tilsit — shameful yoke or a missed opportunity alliance with France?

Peace of Tilsit - shameful yoke or a missed opportunity alliance with France?

After the defeat of the Fourth anti-French coalition, Petersburg again had to choose a foreign policy strategy. Surrounded by Alexander formed several batches. Thus, his "young friends" — Czartoryski, Novosiltsev, Stroganov, advocated the strengthening of the alliance with Britain. All of their foreign policy projects take into account the position of London. Many relatives of the ruler, especially his mother — the Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna, and the Foreign Minister of AJ Budberg, Chief of the troops on the west Benningsen felt that the need to preserve and strengthen alliance with Prussia. Third, the Minister of Commerce and NP Rumyantsev, salting in Austria AB Kurakins and M. Speranskii — considered that Russia should return the "hands-free" is not bound by allied relations. They are totally appropriate to consider that the need to abandon the attempt to establish a balance in Europe by force of arms, expressed the need to establish friendly business with France (Paris is not the good times tried to install with St. Petersburg more constructive things) and spending to Britain a more stringent policy. Main tasks of the Russian government, they beheld in the commercial and industrial prosperity, and this was the need of peace and reducing the role of British products in the Russian trade turnover.

In general, all three parties were in favor of peace with France. But if the "young friends" of the ruler wished to use to break the truce, to strengthen the alliance with Britain and other enemies to Paris to continue the struggle against the French (besides, they were opposed to a separate agreement with France, the Russian Federation, without the participation of the UK), the other group believed that the prolonged war with France is time to end, Russia is not profitable to participate in an ancient conflict, Paris and London. And the alliance with Paris St Petersburg could bring tangible benefits.

To the peace with France pushed and prepyadstviya caused Russian-British relations. The calculations of Alexander I on vsepolnotsennuyu military and financial aid Britain did not materialize. For example, in 1806, London has provided the Russian Federation only 300 thousand pounds of of 800 thousand. All samples Russian diplomacy to achieve pay the remaining amount came across a waiver. RF had the most to finance the war. In January 1807 there was a question on the extension of the new Russian-British trade contract — The preceding was concluded in 1797 and the term of his actions ended. In talks with British Ambassador Stewart, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Budberg wanted to change the terms of the contract in favor of St. Petersburg, the old agreement gave the British a huge advantage. Naturally, the British did not want to change the profitable conditions, and negotiations have stalled.

As a result, it became evident that to continue the war with France is very stupid. Prussia was defeated, Austria was not going to act against France, Great Britain initially focused on personal interests rather than the common, Our homeland was at war with Persia and the Ottoman Empire, at the front of the troops suffered a series of setbacks, there was a threat of international isolation, the negative situation was in of money. Ultimately Alexander I, despite personal dislike to Napoleon, was obliged to make peace with France.


Demonstrated a willingness to negotiate and the French government. After the defeat of the Russian army at Friedland, the French army remained inactive and did not run across the border Russia. The talks were held a few steps. Initially Petersburg announced that he was ready to negotiate, if Napoleon accept a condition of maintaining the territorial integrity of Russia. She offered not negotiate separately, and the role of all parties to the conflict. Paris did not apply to the Russian countryside, Napoleon himself called for peace talks, but was opposed to their role in other nations, especially the United Kingdom. 9 (21) June 1807 armistice was signed. Samples of the British to prevent RF truce of success had not.

13 (25), two rulers — Alexander and Napoleon, met on the Neman River. Question of the world did not cause vibration, France Our home tired from the bloody war. Now it was necessary to agree on the degree of convergence 2-majestic powers (Napoleon wanted a real union, and Alexander lusted preserve the "free hand") and the size of mutual concessions. This was not a negotiation, and the triumphant underdog favorite. Alexander agreed to break the case with Britain and recognize the configuration in Europe, but claimed the non-intervention of France in the Russian-Turkish affairs and keep the Prussian State, led by Friedrich Wilhelm. Napoleon wanted real political and military alliance with Russia to secure the supremacy of France in Western Europe, the success of military campaigns, making them long term and end the campaign on the Iberian Peninsula. In addition, he needed an alliance with St. Petersburg to fight with Britain — a minimum of Russia's accession to the continental blockade, but rather the present Russian role in the fight against the British.

Specifically, the question of the Union of Russia and France generated the most controversy Tilsit. Alexander was for peace, but not beheld coming in alliance with France. Russian government did not want to fight a war with England and participate in the continental blockade (turn away from trade relations with Britain), which would hurt the economy. In addition, the alliance with France strengthened the possibility of intervention in the Paris Russian-Turkish affairs.

Alexander initially managed to separate the issue of the difficulty of making peace the creation of 2-union powers. But then talks complicated — Napoleon offered to divide the European possessions of the Ottoman Empire between France and Russia and Prussia to kill. Alexander said that our homeland is not interested in the Turkish dominions, but offers a compromise — the division of spheres of influence in the Balkans, with the participation of Austria. For Prussia, Alexander was adamant — the Prussian state, albeit in a truncated form, should be preserved. Napoleon went to the concession in respect of Prussia, but claimed the highlight of her Polish regions that Berlin was during the Second and the Third Partition of Poland in the late 18th century. French government wanted to return to the Polish state, albeit in a very abbreviated form, and under the protection of Paris.

As a result, Alexander realized that Napoleon did not accept the criterion of the Russian Federation on Prussia and Turkey, without union relations and agreed to the undercover alliance with France. It was eventually signed two contracts for an outdoor sanctuary and a peace treaty agreement.

Terms of the peace agreement

— Our homeland recognize the gains of France. Paris headed for St. Petersburg recognition of Joseph Bonaparte — Bishop of Naples, Ludwig Bonaparte — Dutch master, Jerome Bonaparte — the lord of the Westphalian. As the recognition of Confederation of the Rhine.

— Our homeland agreed that Prussia will lose ground on the left bank of the Elbe and from the region will allocate for the creation of the Duchy of Warsaw. Gdansk was declared free of the contract. Bialystok district departed Russia.

— Petersburg agreed to mediate in the Anglo
-French negotiations.

— France became the mediator in the talks between Russia and Turkey.

— Our homeland of France would pass the Ionian islands and the bay of Cattaro.

In addition, the union contract foresaw joint actions 2-powers against them at least some aggressive third power. Petersburg owed if the UK refuses to put up with France, join the continental blockade. In the case of joint war with the Ottoman Empire, Paris and St. Petersburg agreed to divide her possessions, except for Istanbul and Rumelia.

It is clear that the contract was not favorable of, but at the same time, the agreement was not shameful. Thus, the agreement was not a ban trade with England through neutral countries. Come and join in the war against a third power Our home had after making a special convention. Right until 1812, the parties have not even begun to develop such an agreement. So Makar, the issue of military assistance from France and Russia are still open and give the ability to maneuver.

Alexander himself believed that this peace treaty and alliance only give the time of, only to resume fighting later. Our homeland retained foreign policy independence, won the time to prepare for the latest war, the search for allies. In addition, the Russian government believed that Napoleon's empire has recently faced serious internal difficulties. At that time there was a change close circle of Alexander — "young friends" of the ruler were pushed to the side, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was appointed Rumyantsev, he was a supporter of rapprochement with France and limiting the role of the United Kingdom. Immediately increased role MMSperanskii. However, the Russian public is already accustomed to the resounding victory of the Russian guns, was very unhappy. Resentment in the metropolitan circles was so great that after 14 years of Alexander Pushkin wrote: "Tilsit! .. at the sound of this and annoyingly / ross is not the pale. "

Consequences of the Peace of Tilsit in Europe

This world is somewhat stabilized the situation in Europe, which to him was the scene of fierce war. Austria maintained neutrality. Prussia was occupied by the French and one hundred percent demoralized, remaining as the government only on good will of Russia. At this time, in a number of different conversion went. In RF going reform of the administrative system — a producer was Speranskii. In Prussia, the transformation of the system was associated with the name of von Stein. In Austria I. Stadium and the Archduke Karl conducted military reform.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: