Good news in London and Egypt is frequent, but Prime Minister Gladstone is not happy.

The rebels did not fight all the way to the Suez Canal area, as they expected, threatening the safety of the canal, and did not even touch the side of the canal.

There is no way, and the top brass of the rebel army is not all fools. At least the leader Mahdi was very sober and knew that running to the canal would kill him before he drove the French away.

Coupled with the strict defense of the French, they would rather watch the cities in Egypt fall and prioritize the safety of the Suez Canal.

This hurt the British government, which wanted to intervene in the Suez Canal.

The canal was not threatened, and the British naturally had no excuse to meddle in the affairs of the canal. No matter how powerful Britain is, France and Austria will not buy their account.

Now that the French reinforcements have arrived in Egypt, the rebels have no chance to fight even if they want to fight by the canal.

The ultimate goal was not achieved, and no matter how much the French were weakened, it would be useless, after all, France was no longer the primary target of the British government's suppression at this time.

Gladstone: "The Egyptian plan has failed, we have lost the opportunity to intervene in the Suez Canal, and if we continue, we will have to face off against France and Austria."

Given the current situation, it is time for us to think about the aftermath. Continuing to weaken France is only helping Austria, which is not conducive to the balance of the continent. ”

As much as I don't want to admit it, the facts are the facts. Lieutenant General Jereth was known for his reputation and was in fact able to command the troops, mainly on the basis of Mahdi's trust.

But this trust was not unconditional, at least allowing the rebels to block the Suez Canal was rejected by Mahdi.

No one is a fool, Mahdi is well aware of the consequences of blocking the Suez Canal, which offends not one or two countries, but all the beneficiary countries of the canal.

The British did not dare to do things in person, and Mahdi did not dare to do anything. Even if it is a chess piece, it is a thinking chess piece, and not all situations have to be controlled by the standard-bearer.

Foreign Secretary George: "The Prime Minister is right, the French reinforcements have arrived, and our plan has failed.

Going on, it will be difficult for us to make a bigger gain other than to increase our losses.

But we can't let it go now, and if we miss this opportunity, it will be even more difficult for us to meddle in the canal affairs in the future.

Judging from the current situation, with the support of us and Austria, the rebel army may not be unable to divide one side.

Laying a nail in Egypt is still necessary for our future Suez Canal land.

Besides, even if we let it go now, the Austrians will not stop.

With their strength on the African continent, with or without our involvement, the difference in essence is not much.

As for the French, they have already been offended anyway, and they don't care if they are offended more deeply. ”

This is very much in line with the British diplomatic norms, and everything is in line with interests. As for offending potential quasi-allies, that's not a problem, and even John Bull, who is a pit for allies, doesn't care about these at all.

Hearing this answer made Prime Minister Gladstone very uncomfortable.

The intention to send a note to Lieutenant General Jerez was already very obvious, but it was ruthlessly rejected by the Foreign Secretary, and it would be uncomfortable for anyone to be replaced.

However, the Cabinet is not Gladstone's word, and the foreign secretary's opinion must also be carefully considered.

If the rebels were abandoned, the Austrians would have taken advantage of the situation, and finally a part of the rebels would have been retained, and Britain would have been wronged.

When the time comes, the opposition parties will certainly take advantage of the opportunity to make trouble. The spit of the people can make them step down.

To put it bluntly, there has never been a so-called friendship between Britain and France, only hatred.

This is already the consensus of the people of the two countries, and whether the London government wants to admit it or not, the concept has been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people.

Gladstone frowned, and said very dissatisfied: "Sizz, don't forget that Fao's strength has been unbalanced.

Continuing to weaken the French will only make Austria's advantage more apparent, and the fragile continental balance can easily be upset in the long run. ”

Foreign Secretary George shook his head: "Your Excellency, this is only a possibility, not a necessity.

In essence, Austria's advantages are also limited to economics. Militarily, they did not have much advantage over the French.

This can be seen from the Vienna government's plan for the reunification of Germany.

If the strength was enough, they would have done it a long time ago, and they wouldn't have to wait until now.

Don't look at Russia and Austria as allies, in fact, they also have a strategic conflict, if Austria really has the strength to overwhelm the French to dominate the European continent, the Russian-Austrian alliance can also become a Franco-Russian alliance.

Before the unification of the German region, Austria did not have the strength to fight two enemies. It is impossible for the Vienna government to be unaware of this, so the continental balance is essentially stable. ”

Prime Minister Gladstone had nothing to say for this reason. On the face of it, Austria did have an advantage on the continent, but it was offset by its poor strategic position.

If there is a dominance, then Austria will not only face the Franco-Austrian alliance, but also the Triple Alliance of Britain, France and Russia, and possibly even North Germany.

Seeing the embarrassment of the scene, Chancellor of the Exchequer Xiaoji Childers reminded: "Both, this issue can be put on hold for the time being and discussed later."

Now we must seriously consider food self-sufficiency plans. Recently, there has been a growing call for food self-sufficiency in China.

If it continues, the parliament has a 95 percent chance of passing the proposal. When the time comes, it will be difficult for us to oppose it. ”

Undoubtedly, the most opposed to the "food self-sufficiency plan" in the London government is the Ministry of Finance. Britain is indeed a big family, but high income comes with high expenses.

The Royal Navy is the biggest gold eater, and its annual expenditure is no less than the total military expenditure of the Austrian Army and Navy.

Now it is another project to carry out a food self-sufficiency plan, which is a huge loss. And it's not a loss of a year or two, but a loss for many years.

For a deal that is destined to lose money and has no return on it, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is naturally reluctant to waste money.

Colonial Chancellor Primrose retorted: "Sir, you are too pessimistic. There are two sides to everything, and although the food self-sufficiency plan cannot be recouped in the short term, its collateral value is not low.

The plan is not only about agriculture, but also about a lot of infrastructure, including water conservancy projects and road transportation.

Once the supporting facilities are completed, the colony's attractiveness to immigrants will increase dramatically.

The influx of a large number of laborers will further promote the development of the colonial economy, and the finances of the colonial government will be greatly improved.

Many colonies that were originally losing money will also turn losses into profits because of this. Overall, our investment is not a loss. ”

Sounds great, but in fact it's only theoretical. The prosperity of the colonial economy increased the government's revenues at the same time, but also attracted a chaotic mind.

There is no doubt that national independence will definitely spread in the shortest possible time.

Although it was agreed not to spread revolutionary ideas, it would be nice to listen to this. Perhaps, in order to avoid being burned, everyone on the European continent will be restrained, but the colonies will definitely not consider the scope and so on.

Once nationalism spread, the rule of the colonial government was bound to increase considerably.

It is difficult to say whether a high income is accompanied by a higher expense, whether it is a loss or a gain.

However, it takes time for the idea of national independence to spread, and it is still advantageous in the short term. This means that the troubles are all latecomers, but the political achievements are now.

Chancellor of the Exchequer Childes reminded: "The Russians have made it clear that they will withdraw from the free trade system as soon as we implement a food self-sufficiency plan.

We have to consider the possible knock-on effects of the withdrawal of the Russians. If all food-exporting countries withdraw from the free trade system, the consequences will be severe. ”

It is not necessary for all grain exporting countries to withdraw, as long as Russia and Austria withdraw from the free trade system together, the system will not be able to be played.

In this era of the law of the jungle, the free trade system relies more on the support of force in addition to political and diplomatic means.

Many small countries joined this system in order not to be excluded by everyone and to avoid being suppressed by foreign powers.

This is also the reason why everyone is powerless about the withdrawal of the French. France is a big country with strong strength, and if you want to suppress it, you will inevitably pay a big price.

The benefits are not proportional to the pay, and naturally no one is the first bird.

If Russia and Austria withdraw again, the land force of the free trade system will be directly abolished. No matter how powerful the Royal Navy is, it can't go ashore, and the deterrent power is simply not enough.

Foreign Secretary George: "There is no such thing as perfection in this world, and there are gains and losses.

If because the Russians are threatening to withdraw from the free trade system, we will make a compromise, where will we put Britain's face?

What if something like this happens again in the future? Do you continue to compromise, or do you reject it outright? ”

Britain also wants to save face, and compromise and concessions cannot hurt their face, and it is a pity that the Russians did not realize this.

It should have been negotiated and communicated in secret, but it was brought to the table for talks, and the British government had to think twice before making a compromise.

If it stimulates the fragile nerves of the people in the country and is held on to by the opposition parties, then the matter will be a big deal.

In a sense, the Tsarist government's strong stance strengthened the British government's decision-making to a certain extent.

Prime Minister Gladstone sighed to himself and said helplessly: "Our trade with the Russians is limited, and it is best to keep this market."

It's really not good, then there is no need to be polite to the Russians. In any case, Austria also has a vested interest in the free trade system, and it is impossible for the Vienna government to withdraw from it. ”

……