African Entrepreneurship Records

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 game was inherited by the Soviet Union and Russia in the previous life. However, due to the decline of the British national power, the chess player was replaced by the United States.

It can be simply understood as the geographical dispute between the Slavs and the Unsa people for world hegemony. There are three key points in it, namely Europe, the Far East and the Middle East (Asia). Needless to say, Europe has been at war with Russia for hundreds of years. The Middle East and Central Asia are also hot spots for contention, and the Russo-Japanese War is 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 turn its attention to the Middle East and Central Asia, and finally choose the Far East.

In fact, it can 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, that is, from Cape Town to Cairo’s Plan 2C.

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 other countries in the past. If it had been a little later and Britain had intervened through various means, East Africa would not have been established so smoothly.

Compared with East Africa, Tsarist Russia undoubtedly poses a greater threat to Britain. Although East Africa covers 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 take a further step in Eurasia.

Therefore, in order to prevent Russia from becoming bigger, countries around the world must put in a lot of energy, such as in the direction of the Baltic Sea, Central Europe, the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, the Middle East, Central Asia, and 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 attacks from the sea are not as convenient as Tsarist Russia from land. , On the sea, the British could suppress potential enemies with their powerful navy, but Tsarist Russia would not be easily suppressed by the British if it attacked from land.

…

Rhine city.

In response to the changes in the Middle East and Central Asia between Britain and Russia, other government departments in East Africa, including the military, security bureau, etc., 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 Russian-Turkish war and the Afghan war are concrete manifestations of the game between the two sides."

"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 is 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 an empire. Judging 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. However, the fact is exactly the opposite. The empire has been in the Middle East for a long time. and lack of political influence in Central Asia,” said Reich Foreign Minister Friel.

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 closest to the Persian Gulf, most of it is land, and land transportation costs are too high. The United Kingdom is thousands of miles away from the Persian Gulf and has to pass through Gibraltar. Channel, Suez Canal, Bab el-Mandeb Strait or detour around the Cape of Good Hope.

Freer 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 far less powerful than the UK at the moment, the main force of the British navy is concentrated in The Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea, and in the Indian Ocean we have a lot of room for maneuver.”

“As for Russia, we can also block Russia’s southward path through shipping and supporting local forces. Of course, the British do the same, so our intervention in the Middle East and Central Asia does not have completely common interests with the British. "

The stability of the triangle also means that the addition of East Africa will make the situation in the entire Persian Gulf coast more complicated. The relationship between Britain, Russia and East Africa is also quite complicated. Even if East Africa temporarily joins in intervening in the region, it will not have any impact on the region. Geographical influence has been too great. At least in a short period of time, Britain, Russia and East Africa will not be able to 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 do it all at once. It will take a lot of time just to develop its power there, and Britain and Russia will not back down just 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 the two world wars led to the complete decline of the United Kingdom. As a second-rate country, it was a compromise that had to be made, but even so, the British influence on the local area was maintained for at least several decades.

Therefore, if East Africa joins, no effect will be seen in a short period of time, unless both Britain and Russia suddenly decline. This will also have to take into account factors in local countries and regions. For example, in the previous life, the rise of countries such as Persia also made it difficult for the United States to expand in the Middle East. One hand covers the sky, so if East Africa wants to make a difference in the Middle East and Central Asia, it is bound to go through a long process.

"In the Middle East and Central Asia, we must also follow some objective facts. First of all, we must not let Russia profit. If Russia is really allowed to obtain the Indian Ocean outlet because of us, it will be a disaster for the empire, so in the sealing We are in agreement with the UK on blocking Russia.”

(End of chapter)