The Fox of France - Chapter 352: Playing with Fire

The collaboration between France and Austria surprised many nations. Generally, on the European continent, Austria was seen as the greatest threat to French hegemony. According to this perspective, France should have worked diligently to exploit Austria’s natural weaknesses as a multi-ethnic country, supporting internal turmoil, ideally leading to Austria’s disintegration. This would have solidified France’s dominance in Europe.

However, the French made the surprising choice to support the Austrian government in this event. It seemed as though they had foregone the opportunity to dismember Austria, leaving many armchair politicians disappointed. Some British newspapers even expressed a mix of relief and disdain, suggesting that Joseph Bonaparte, swayed by immediate minor gains, had let go of an unprecedented opportunity. This indicated that while he indeed lived up to the reputation of “White Plume” on the battlefield, politically, he seemed too naive.

Of course, French media wouldn’t attack their leader in such a manner, but their rebuttals were confined to a moral standpoint. French newspapers emphasized that this demonstrated France’s commitment to peace, portraying itself as a pillar of global peace, unlike aggressive entities like England.

In discussing this matter, the pinnacle perspective was found in “The Scientific Truth Gazette.” The Gazette acknowledged that the French government should protect its interests but pointed out that France’s interests extended beyond the visible. For France, intangible aspects held greater value. These intangibles were the spirit of the French Republic.

“The spirit of France embodies the persistence in ‘democracy,’ ‘freedom,’ and ‘benevolence.’ Under this spirit’s influence, the French people united, establishing the great French Republic. This spirit forms the foundation of France, uniting its people. For France, there’s no greater interest than upholding this spirit. However, such reasoning might be lost on those fixated solely on mundane interests.”

Indeed, Austria didn’t align with the criteria of a progressive nation, unlike the North Italian Republic and the Rhine Federation, being considerably more conservative. But who stood against Austria in this affair?

We mustn’t assume that opposition to a regressive, backward force necessarily represents a progressive one. At times, it might signify an even more regressive, backward force. What did the Hungarian nobility, revolting against Austria, truly seek? Not democracy or freedom but to ‘uphold tradition’—to maintain their privileges of oppressing the people, indulging in their whims, even bathing in virgins’ blood! (A reference to the legend of Elizabeth Báthory, associated with using young women’s blood for her beauty, referenced in the game “Diablo II” through the Countess in the Forgotten Tower.)

Hence, the actions of the Hungarian nobility were outright rebellion, not just a threat to the interests of the Hungarian populace but to all Austrians and to the interests of freedom-loving people worldwide. It directly threatened the creed on which France was founded. Thus, supporting Emperor of Austria in quelling this rebellion was primarily to uphold our beliefs—France’s most cherished asset.

The article in “The Scientific Truth Gazette” wasn’t entirely lofty, as ‘democracy, freedom, and benevolence’ were indeed among France’s most cherished assets. Joseph once discussed with his two brothers, dividing a nation’s power into two facets: hard power, including economic prowess, industrial development, and military strength, and soft power, which encompassed French culture, arts, and ideology’s influence on other nations.

“Mr. Mencius once said: ‘If aspiring politicians worldwide wish to serve in your country, farmers aspire to till your land within your borders, merchants desire to trade in your markets, and travelers long to walk your roads, while those oppressed by their own king seek solace in your land, who else can contend with you?'”

While battling Italians and Austrians, the Italian populace sided with us, offering critical support, facilitating our resounding victory. Even in Belgium, the people initially welcomed us with bread and beer. If not for the foolish missteps, we would have conquered them in ’93. Why were we so warmly welcomed by these foreigners? It was our slogan, our banner, and the impact of our soft power. We must cherish our soft power, avoiding its destruction for petty gains. This aids in cultivating more individuals in other countries willing to guide our troops in times of war. Lucien, this is the crux of your work.”

Thus, France’s actions aligned with the persona of ‘progress.’ A nation can have a persona, and a successful one brings numerous unseen, long-term benefits. However, this persona is fragile; even a nation’s persona, if mishandled, could collapse. Consequently, opponents would rejoice at the missteps, hoping to award them a ton-weight medal for picking sesame and shaking watermelons.

However, maintaining this persona wasn’t the sole reason for the French siding with the Austrians this time. Their actions had more pragmatic, darker undertones.

Firstly, according to the research of the three brothers, they believed that, in the long term, only the Germanic people posed a threat to France’s position on the European continent. In general, the Germanic population was large and reasonably educated. If they ceased being fragmented and unified into a single country, a Germany would undoubtedly challenge France’s status.

Presently, Germany was divided into three parts: the Rhine Federation, Prussia, and Austria. The Rhine Federation and Prussia were Protestant, while Austria was Catholic. So, although the Rhine Federation was currently an ally of France, the concern was whether they would eventually align with Prussia, potentially forming a Germany—a worry for France. However, in the current scenario, France could stop this using its hard power. Yet, doing so would damage France’s persona. Hence, to maintain Germany’s fragmentation, France preferred not to weaken Austria excessively.

Moreover, Austria faced deep internal conflicts. To sustain the empire and counter North Germany, the Habsburgs increasingly relied on France. Consequently, they became advocates for French interests or, to put it more bluntly, ‘collaborators.’

These factors combined were the reasons behind France’s actions. As for Austria’s national debt maneuvering, fundamentally, it was merely a ploy to catch rabbits while embracing the grass.