After half a year of negotiations, Britain, France and Austria finally reached a preliminary agreement. On December 12, 1875, representatives of Britain, France and Austria signed the Memorandum on the Mediation of International Conflicts in Paris.

This memorandum can in fact also be seen as a draft of an international convention that specifies the rules for the contention of colonies. The law of the jungle is still indispensable, but it is only covered with a layer of legal principles.

Namely:

1. Based on the actual occupation, first served;

2. Mutual recognition of each other's sovereignty in accordance with the current colonial sphere of influence;

3. Mutual interference in the internal affairs of the colonies is prohibited; (Note: Specifically, it is forbidden to support local forces, prohibit the smuggling of weapons, and prohibit the export of nationalism...... ）

4. The battle for the Borderland depends on each person's ability, and on the premise that it does not involve its own interests, allies are obliged to provide certain help;

……

The first three points are the main point, which can alleviate the colonial conflict between the three countries, and the fourth point depends on how to understand it.

There must be help, but how strong this is and whether it will help depends on the actual situation.

For example, if the colony team has an accident and is left in the colony as an ally, it is estimated that everyone will be happy to do a favor and provide them with supplies.

If you want to fight for a strategic location, or a rich colony, you need the help of allies, or you still have to talk about interests.

Otherwise, there would not be a precondition in the treaty that "no self-interest is involved", which in itself would be an exemption clause, because the concept of interest is too big.

This is also normal, if the allies really help in vain, it is estimated that everyone will not be relieved. Britain, France and Austria are not vegetarians, and if they want to take advantage, how can there be such a good thing?

Maybe you earned it here, and you lost it somewhere else. In the game of international diplomacy, we must always think twice before acting.

Many times it seems to take advantage, but in fact it is a huge pit dug by competitors for you. Franz is definitely the best at this, and he is the best at making his competitors jump into the pit with joy.

The British, by contrast, are at the other extreme, and they are the best at sowing discord. You have to be careful when dealing with the British, otherwise you can easily be led astray.

France's diplomacy is relatively balanced, and it has performed well in all aspects, but it has nothing particularly outstanding.

In contrast, the Pop-Po Federation and the Russian Empire were much easier to deal with, and they were diplomatically impulsive, especially prone to being provoked or falling into the pit.

This is Franz's personal summary, also based on factual sources. The Russian Empire was ostracized by European society for a long time, and the lack of diplomacy was the main reason.

Otherwise, the period of the war against France would have been their best chance to integrate into the European world.

After the war, as the saviors of European countries, the Russians became the hegemon of the European continent, and they were still excluded from the mainstream circle, and there was no one else in this diplomacy.

The Berlin government was so superstitious about force that it neglected the development of diplomatic relations. This can be seen in many ways, during the Russo-Prussian War, the Kingdom of Prussia, as a thug, did not even get an alliance with Britain and France.

This is simply an opportunity to be sent to the door without knowing how advantageous it is, and there is no need for the terms of the covenant to be beneficial, as long as there is a nominal covenant, you can reap a lot of benefits in the post-war negotiations.

It can be said that without Bismarck, the diplomacy of the Berlin government would not have been up to par. Of course, this is also tradition, and the diplomacy of the Kingdom of Prussia has always been poor.

Otherwise, the boss of the German region would have changed hands in the last century.

Unfortunately, the Kingdom of Prussia won the military and lost the diplomacy, and Austria was not defeated, but completed its internal reforms because of the external war.

The Kingdom of Prussia, as the winner, seemed to expand its territory, but in fact it was more than worth the loss.

Not only did he add an enemy, but he also lost the hearts and minds of the German princes, and became a treacherous "thief" and "robber" in everyone's hearts.

Such an image naturally can't be the boss, and then the Habsburgs were resurrected with full blood, and even annexed Hungary, once again widening the gap in strength between the two sides.

……

"When is the international conference convening?"

Franz did not ask the location, Napoleon IV seems to have inherited the showmanship of Napoleon III, and after his succession to the throne he was particularly keen to convene international conferences.

The French are particularly generous in this regard, as long as France holds an international conference, then they will cover all the relevant expenses.

Of course, this fee is limited to the daily life of the delegation in France, accommodation and the cost of holding meetings.

It seems that the number of participants in international conferences in this era is not large, and the cost is not much, but the cost is not small over time.

Britain and Austria are all interested in practical interests, unless it is a special case, they usually do not compete with the French for the venue of the meeting, and everyone is not a star, so there is no lack of exposure.

Foreign Secretary Wesenberg: "The meeting is at the ministerial level, and everyone needs to coordinate the schedule, and the plan is for February next year, and the specific date has not yet been determined." ”

Franz nodded, when it comes to the distribution of interests and the establishment of a new international order, the meeting must be of high standard.

If it is low and sends a group of domestic delegations that can't be the masters and have to consult on everything, then what is there to talk about?

Negotiations usually involve interests and are relatively time-consuming. On the contrary, high-level government officials have much more power, they can decide many things themselves, and the negotiation efficiency will be much higher.

It is imperative to ease international contradictions, and every day that drags on, the colonial government will have to suffer huge economic losses, and everyone is in a hurry.

"There is no sign of Britain and France getting closer, I mean covertly contacting."

Before each international conference, everyone will show their talents and try to win over allies to seek support in order to get more benefits from the international conference.

This time it involves little interest in Austria, and the Vienna government naturally cannot spend a lot of money on public relations, but it is still necessary to keep an eye on Britain and France.

Wesenberg shook his head: "Britain and France have contact, but they should not be able to reach an agreement, and now Britain and France are competing for interests in the two colonies.

Had it not been for the 'Anglo-Boer War' that we had fought with the British, both countries would have feared that the losses would have been too great to have already begun to work in the colonies.

Especially in Sudan, the two sides are already on fire. It is said that Britain and France also had a conflict of interest in the Indochina Peninsula and the Far Eastern Empire, which was too far away for us to pay much attention to, and the specific reasons are not clear.

This also involves civilian colonial companies, and in the face of interests, I am afraid that both sides will not let go easily. Even if the two governments tried to intervene, it would be difficult for them to stop. ”

The civil colonial company is a unique product of the historical stage, the most famous is naturally the "East India Company" of the British, and the armed forces of the company at its peak are comparable to that of a medium-sized country.

In a way, the East India Company was more of a country than a business.

So the "country" was swallowed up by the bureaucracy, because of bureaucracy and corruption, which led to serious losses in the enterprise, and the famous East India Company was dissolved last year.

There are many such colonial companies under the banners of various countries, and they are the vanguard of overseas colonial movements. Influenced by, but not fully controlled, by governments.

Most of those engaged in overseas colonization and expansion are outlaws who want to make a fortune. In the face of interests, the government's orders are often not easy to use.

Most of the conflicts that broke out in the colonies of various countries were caused by civilian colonial teams. As long as there are interests, there is nothing they dare not do.

Not only externally, but also in the same country's colonial companies, the competition is fierce. Don't be nervous or surprised if you find two colonial companies fighting, it's a good thing that they have made a big discovery.

The fierceness of the rush is generally proportional to the benefits. If an open-pit gold mine is discovered, there is a possibility of a fight within the colonial team.

On the contrary, colonial governments under the direct leadership of various countries are more restrained, usually thinking about international image, thinking twice before doing things, and rarely recklessly ignoring them.

Now Britain and France are constantly in conflict over the colonial issue, in the final analysis, it is because of interests, first come, first served, right, but at the same time?

This is also the reason why France and Austria want to divide the sphere of influence in Africa, if they do not make a clear distinction in advance, with the long border line of the two colonies, God knows how many conflicts there will be.

No, it should be said that the desert saved Franco-Austrian relations. Because of the dividing line between the colonies of the two countries, most of the area is desert.

The value of the desert area is low, and normal people will not risk crossing the desert to find excitement, and they can't meet each other if they are blocked by the desert, so the conflict will naturally be small.