Karl Marx

From the English.

New-York Daily Tribune. No. 4030, March 18, 1854

London, Friday, March 3, 1854

In my last letter I mentioned that Sir Charles Napier owed his appointment as commander-in-chief of the Baltic fleet to his publicly expressed distrust of the French alliance and his accusation that France had betrayed England in 1840, while in reality the English Government had then been conspiring with Nicholas against Louis Philippe. I should have added that the second admiral in the Black Sea, Sir Edmund Lyons, during his stay as English envoy in Greece, showed himself a declared enemy of France and was removed from that post on the representations of Lord Stratford de Redcliffe. The Ministry therefore did everything it could, by its appointments, to sow discord not only between the French and English commanders, but also between the admirals and the English envoy at Constantinople.

These facts are not denied, and certainly not refuted by the fact that Bonaparte, in his opening speech to the Deputies, congratulated himself on his close alliance with England. The entente cordiale is certainly somewhat older than the restoration of the imperial etiquette. The most remarkable thing about Bonaparte’s speech is neither this reminiscence of Louis Philippe’s addresses, nor that he exposes the ambitious plans of the Czar, but rather that he publicly declares himself the protector of Germany and especially Austria against the internal and external enemy.

The instruments of ratification of the treaty between the Porte and the Western Powers, which contains the clause that the Porte may not conclude peace with Russia without their co-operation, were hardly exchanged at Constantinople on February 5, when negotiations already began between the representatives of the four powers and the Porte as to the future position of the Christians in Turkey. The *Times* of Wednesday divulges the real purpose of these negotiations:

“The conditions in various parts of the Turkish Empire, to which by firmans and treaties a full internal administration of their affairs has already been granted, while they continue to acknowledge the suzerainty of the Porte, form precedents which can be further extended without detriment to either side, and perhaps offer the best way of providing for the provinces in their present situation.”

In other words, the Coalition Cabinet intends to secure the integrity of the Turkish Empire in Europe by transforming Bosnia, Croatia, Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Albania, Rumelia, and Thessaly into as many Danubian Principalities. If the Porte accepts these conditions, it must, if the Turkish armies prove victorious, infallibly lead to civil war among the Turks themselves.

It is now known that the discovery of the conspiracy in Vidin only precipitated the Greek explosion, which was already regarded in Bucharest before its outbreak as an accomplished fact. The Pasha of Scutari is concentrating all his troops in order to prevent the Montenegrins from uniting with the insurgent Greeks.

The Anglo-French expedition may be regarded as a new swindle, as far as the *present* intentions of the British Government are concerned. Rodosto has been designated as the landing-place for the French, Enos for the British. The latter town lies on a small peninsula at the entrance of a marshy bay, the background of which is formed by the extensive marshes of the Maritsa valley, which will no doubt contribute extraordinarily to the health of the camp. It lies not only *outside* the Bosporus, but also the Dardanelles, and the troops, in order to reach the Black Sea, must either re-embark and accomplish a sea voyage of about 250 miles against the currents of the straits, or march 160 miles over trackless country—a march which could undoubtedly be accomplished in 14 days. The French in Rodosto are at least on the Sea of Marmara and only seven days’ march from Constantinople.

What, then, are the troops to do in this incomprehensible position? Well, they are either to march to Adrianople, there to cover the capital, or, at worst, to unite on the isthmus of the Thracian Chersonese to defend the Dardanelles. So writes “The Times” “with higher permission” and even quotes Marshal Marmont’s strategic remarks in support of the wisdom of this plan.

A hundred thousand French and English troops to defend a capital that is not threatened and cannot possibly be threatened in the next twelve months! They might really just as well have stayed at home!

Should this plan be carried out, it is certainly the worst that could be devised. It is based on the worst kind of defensive warfare, namely one that seeks its strength in absolute inactivity. Assuming the expedition were to bear a predominantly defensive character, it is clear that this object would best be attained by enabling the Turks, supported by such a reserve, to pass over to the offensive, or at least to take up a position in which an occasional and partial offensive could be assumed wherever circumstances permitted. But in Enos and Rodosto the French and English troops are completely useless.

The worst of it is that an army of 100,000 men with an ample number of transport steamers and supported by a fleet of twenty ships of the line constitutes in itself a force capable of the most resolute offensive action in any part of the Black Sea. Such a force must either take the Crimea and Sevastopol, Odessa and Kherson, blockade the Sea of Azov, destroy the Russian fortifications on the Caucasian coast, and bring the Russian fleet safely into the Bosporus, or it has no notion of its strength and its duty as an active army. The partisans of the Ministry assure us that such operations will be undertaken as soon as the 100,000 men are concentrated in Turkey, and that the landing of the first divisions at Enos and Rodosto is intended only to deceive the enemy. But even in that case it is a needless waste of time and strength not to land the troops at once at some point of the Black Sea. The enemy cannot be misled. As soon as Emperor Nicholas hears of this boastfully announced expedition of 100,000 men, he must send every soldier he can spare to Sevastopol, Kaffa, Perekop, and Yenikale. One cannot frighten one’s adversary first with immense armaments and then try to make him believe that one intends to harm nobody. The trick would be too transparent, and if they count on misleading the Russians with such pitiful manoeuvres, British diplomacy has only committed a new colossal blunder.

I therefore believe that those who devised this expedition mean to cheat the Sultan outright and, under the pretext of frightening Russia as much as possible, will strive hard to do him as little harm as possible.

If England and France occupy Constantinople and part of Rumelia, Austria occupies Serbia and perhaps Bosnia and Montenegro, and Russia is able to strengthen her position in Moldavia and Wallachia, that looks very like a possible partition of Turkey in Europe. Turkey finds herself today in a worse position than in 1772. In order to induce the Empress Catherine to withdraw from the Danubian Principalities, whose occupation threatened to lead to a European conflict, the King of Prussia, Frederick II, then proposed the first partition of Poland to cover the costs of the Russo-Turkish war. Recollect that at that time the Porte originally rushed into war with Catherine to defend Poland against Russian aggression, and that in the end Poland was sacrificed on the altar of the “independence and integrity” of the Ottoman Empire.

The treacherous policy of procrastination pursued by the Coalition Cabinet has given the Muscovite emissaries the opportunity to hatch and foment the Greek insurrection, which Lord Clarendon so eagerly awaited. The insurrection had begun on January 28 and, according to the latest Vienna despatches, was assuming more threatening proportions on February 13. The districts of Acarnania and Aetolia and parts of Ilbessan and Delonia are said to be in revolt. In Egripo, the capital of Euboea, an insurrection is said to have broken out which is not inferior in gravity to that in Albania. That the towns of Arta and Janina have been abandoned by the Turks and occupied by the Greeks is of less significance, since the commanding citadels remain in the hands of Ottoman troops and, as we know from the many wars between Christians and Turks in Albania, the final possession of these towns has always depended on possession of the citadels. A state of siege will be proclaimed for the districts of Contessa and Salonika and the Albanian coast. I remarked in my last letter that one of the results of the Greek insurrection which the Porte has most to fear is that it provides the Western Powers with the opportunity to interfere in the affairs between the Sultan and his subjects instead of fighting the Russians, and thus to drive the Greek Christians into an alliance with the Czar. How greedily the powers seize this opportunity can be seen from the fact that the same post brings the news that the Porte has accepted the treaty proposed by France and England, and that the French and English envoys have sent the Turks two steamers to their assistance, while the British minister at Athens has informed the cabinet of King Otto that England intends to intervene in the insurgent districts.

The immediate result of the insurrection from the military standpoint is described by the Vienna correspondent of *The Times* quite clearly as follows:

“In the last few days a certain discouragement has become noticeable at headquarters in Vidin, as the reinforcements that had been announced have received counter-orders and are now on their way to the south-western districts of Turkey. The news of the insurrection of the Christians in Epirus has made a disturbing impression upon the Arnauts and the Albanians on the Danube, and they have loudly demanded permission to return home. The brigadier generals Hasan Bey and Suleiman Pasha had lost all influence over their wild troops. If an attempt were made to hold them back by force, open mutiny was feared; if they were permitted to return, they would devastate Christian territory on their way home. Should the hostile movement of the Christian population in the west assume still more threatening proportions, the western wing of the Turkish army would be forced to make a retrograde movement, which would more than outweigh the blow the Russians have sustained through the entry of the allied fleets into the Black Sea.”

This is some of the first results of that policy of procrastination which the Grahams, the Russells, the Claringdons and the Palmerstons extol so bombastically in justification of the Ministry’s policy in the Eastern question. When they were informed late on Friday evening that the Tsar had dismissed Sir Hamilton Seymour, in the rudest and most discourteous manner, without awaiting his recall on the part of England, they held two Cabinet meetings, one on Saturday and one on Sunday afternoon. The result of their deliberations is that a further delay of three to four weeks is granted to the Tsar; this delay is to be granted him in the form of a demand in which

“the Tsar is required, within six days of the receipt of this communication, solemnly to promise and pledge himself that he will cause his troops to evacuate the Danubian Principalities on or before April 30.”

It should be noted, however, that this demand
is not
followed by the threat of a
declaration of war,
in the event that the Tsar should refuse. One may of course say, and The Times does so, that, in spite of this granted delay, the war preparations are being zealously continued. But it
must be observed that, on the one hand, the resolution held out by the Western powers of directly participating in the war prevents any decisive action by the Porte on the Danube—and every day of delay in this area worsens the position of the Turks, since it enables the Russians to strengthen themselves on the front, and renders the Greek insurgents in the rear of the Danubian army ever more dangerous; while, on the other hand, the embarkation of troops for Enos and Rodosto may embarrass the Sultan, but will certainly not detain the Russians.

It was agreed that the British expeditionary army is to consist of some 30,000 men, and the French of some 80,000. Should it emerge in the course of events that Austria, while apparently standing on the side of the Western powers, was merely attempting to cloak her understanding with Russia, Bonaparte would have great cause to rue this most reckless splintering of his forces.

There is yet another insurrection which may be regarded as a diversion in Russia’s favour—the insurrection in
Spain
. Every movement in Spain is sure to provoke dissension between France and England. The French intervention in Spain of 1823 was, as we know from Chateaubriand’s Congrès de Vérone, instigated by Russia. That the Anglo-French intervention of 1834, which finally led to the rupture of the entente cordiale between the two states, derived from the same source, we may conclude from the fact that Palmerston was its author. The “Spanish Marriages” paved the way for the overthrow of the Orleans dynasty. At the present moment, a dethronement of the “innocent” Isabella would assist a son of Louis-Philippe, the Duke of Montpensier, in asserting his claims upon the Spanish throne, while, on the other hand, Bonaparte was reminded that one of his uncles once resided in Madrid. The Orleanists would be supported by the Coburgs and fought by the Bonapartists. A Spanish insurrection, which by no means signifies a revolution of the people, would therefore prove an exceedingly powerful driving force for dissolving so superficial a bond as the Anglo-French alliance.

It is reported that a treaty of alliance has been concluded between Russia, Khiva, Bokhara and Kabul.

As regards Dost Mahomed Khan, the Emir of Kabul, it would be only natural if he were now to seek revenge upon England, his faithless ally. For, in 1838, he had offered England to declare eternal blood-feud against Russia, if it suited the English government, by having the agent whom the Tsar had sent to him put to death; and his wrath against England blazed up anew over the part she played in the Afghan expedition of 1839, when he was driven from the throne and his country laid waste in the most cruel and unscrupulous manner. But since the populations of Khiva, Bokhara and Kabul belong to the orthodox Mohammedan faith of the Sunnites, whereas the Persians profess the schismatic doctrines of the Shiites, it is not to be assumed that they would ally themselves with Russia, the ally of the Persians whom they abhor and detest, against England, the ostensible ally of the Padishah, whom they regard as the supreme sovereign of all believers.

With some probability, Russia might have allies in Tibet and in the Tartar Emperor of China, if the latter were forced to fall back into Manchuria and renounce the sceptre of China proper. The Chinese rebels, as is well known, have undertaken a regular crusade against Buddhism, destroyed its temples and slain its bonzes. The religion of the Tartars, however, is Buddhism, and Tibet, which acknowledges the suzerainty of China, is the seat of the Grand Lama and the Holy of Holies of the Buddhist faith. If, therefore, Taip’ing T’ien-wang succeeds in expelling the Manchu dynasty from China, he will become involved in a religious war with the Buddhist forces of the Tartars. Now, since Buddhism is professed on both sides of the Himalayas, and England cannot avoid supporting the new Chinese dynasty, the Tsar will certainly take the side of the Tartar tribes, incite them against England and stir up religious risings in Nepal itself. We learn from the latest Oriental mail that

“the Emperor of China, foreseeing the loss of Peking, has instructed the governors of the various provinces to forward the imperial revenues to Jehol, the old family seat and present summer residence in Manchuria, some eighty miles north-east of the Great Wall.”

Consequently, the great religious war between the Chinese and the Tartars, which will extend across the frontiers of India, is to be expected in the near future.

Karl Marx