readx;

86_86661 David said that the strategic adjustment of Wilhelm II of Germany directly led to the rapid departure of Germany in the wrong direction. Pen "Fun" Pavilion www.biquge.info

They blindly set huge strategic goals, and before they are fully fledged, they have already attracted too many enemies, so that you will never have a chance to catch up with them under the watchful eye of your opponents.

Chen Zhong said: A strategic mistake by a country or region is fatal. If the direction of the strategy is deviated, then even if you try hard, you will not be able to escape the end of failure.

In fact, in this world, direction is always more important than effort. If you go in the wrong direction, every step you take is a huge step back. If a country or region formulates the right strategic direction, no matter how slow its development is, it will always stand in an undefeated position.

Wilhelm II of Germany not only deviated from his strategic direction and failed to understand the core interests of his country, but also showed the purity of an absolute power, which to a large extent demonstrated the extremely immature political character of Wilhelm II.

Threat judgment is a prerequisite for developing a strategy. Threat judgment is to clarify the main, secondary, and potential threats to national security. At the same time, it is necessary to make it clear that there are direct and indirect allies.

In a complex world environment, it is not easy to identify the main threats. Once the main enemy is identified, it is quite stable and long-term. Unless there is a fundamental change in the international situation, we should not change it lightly.

At that time, Bismarck knew very well that Germany was located in Central Europe, had a complex strategic environment, and was surrounded by strong neighbors, and that only by skillfully handling the relations between major powers, avoiding two-front warfare, and concentrating on attacking the main enemy could he ensure an invincible position.

For this reason, he has always regarded France, which has a strong sense of revenge, as the main enemy, and has co-opted and won over all forces that can be united to strike at France.

However, his successors did not understand Bismarck's profound intentions and the complexities of great power diplomacy, and adopted a simplistic and emotional approach of "all or nothing", which led to Germany's defeat after defeat in the struggle with France for allies.

The first was the refusal to renew the Reinsurance Treaty with Russia, which objectively contributed to the establishment of the Franco-Russian alliance. The treaty was an important part of Bismarck's great power diplomacy, and although it did not guarantee Russia's support for Germany in the Franco-German war, it could prevent France and Russia from approaching because it could tie Russia's hands and feet.

The refusal to renew it was tantamount to giving Russia freedom of action, which contributed to the close and even the alliance between France and Russia. In 1893, after the formal alliance between France and Russia, Germany's security environment deteriorated sharply, and it faced the danger of being attacked on both the eastern and western fronts.

Second, to fight for another defeat for Britain. After the Franco-Russian alliance, two major military blocs were formed on the European continent, with Germany, Austria, and Italy and France and Russia as opponents of each other. The British boss is in the position of "four or two thousand pounds", and whoever can win the support of Britain will surely multiply his strength.

At that time, the contradictions between Britain and the Franco-Russian bloc were far greater than those with the German-Austrian-Italian bloc. It should be said that Germany has better conditions for winning over Britain. There were strong advocates of an Anglo-German alliance in the cabinets of both countries. From 1898 to 1901, Britain and Germany negotiated an alliance, with Britain aiming to form a regional alliance against Russia, while Germany aimed to establish a comprehensive alliance between Britain and the Triple Alliance.

The direct cause of the failure of the Anglo-German negotiations was Germany's attitude of "not having everything at all." Germany believed that Britain had a sharp contradiction with France and Russia and that reconciliation was impossible, so it came to the conclusion that Britain needed Germany more than Germany needed Britain. This was a complete miscalculation.

The fact is: Britain has greater freedom of action, it is Germany that needs Britain, not Britain that needs Germany. Excessive demands on Britain not only deprived itself of the opportunity to reach a compromise with Britain, but also made Britain suspicious of Germany's strategic intentions.

Of course, the fundamental reason for the failure of the Anglo-German negotiations was Germany's ambition to build a "world empire," vigorously develop its navy, provoke a naval competition with Britain, and challenge Britain's strategic red line. Britain recognized that whoever wanted to seize sea supremacy was the main threat. Last year, Britain and France signed an entente declaring Germany defeated in the race for Britain.

I believe that Germany will be extremely lonely in the near future by dealing with the situation in an emotional way in the political game of the great powers, which leads to the enemy's back, and in the political game of the great powers, which has always been handled in an emotional way and prefers to abandon its own vital interests.

In addition, the geopolitical environment has always been an important constraint affecting national strategies. To a large extent, a country's geopolitical environment determines the direction of its strategic resources and the choice of its strategic direction.

The land and sea powers competed for sea power with the maritime powers, but they all ended in failure.

There are three main reasons for this:

First, sea power is related to the life and death of the great maritime powers, and they will inevitably go all out to develop their sea power, and the land and sea powers will develop both sea power and land power, resulting in the dispersion of resources and the eventual passivity.

Second, the geopolitical environment of major land and sea countries is relatively complex, and it is easy for major maritime countries to engage in "offshore balancing". Britain used Austria, Prussia, and Spain to contain France on many occasions; Later, France and Russia were used to counterbalance Germany.

Chen Zhong said that the purpose of General David's visit to Hainan this time is not without such factors. General David laughed but did not answer, in fact, this is a secret that is not open between smart people, this is the so-called logic of interests.

Third, the ocean-going navy consumes a huge amount of money, and logistical supply is difficult, requiring a network of bases all over the world, which is difficult for major land and sea powers to bear.

Germany's geopolitical environment determined that it was primarily a land power, its main enemy was France, and its main resources should be invested in land forces.

However, Wilhelm II was a fanatical believer in the "sea power theory" of the American theorist Mahan, who declared as early as 1897 that "the future of Germany lies at sea". At that time, the gap between the German-British navies was 1:7.

In March 1898, the Reichstag passed the Naval Act, which planned to build warships on a large scale. Germany's frenzied shipbuilding plan not only put itself in a position of opposition to Britain, the maritime hegemon, but also consumed a lot of resources, seriously affecting the investment in the army.

These erroneous inputs will inevitably make Germany taste the bitter fruit of defeat in the future great power game.

The origin of this world determines the logic of this world, whether you believe it or not, it will always be linked to interests, and without interests, there will never be development and progress.

Even if many people will nobly ridicule this as a utilitarian logic, but facts are facts after all, and all bonds woven with emotions will eventually break, or even turn against each other.

Only interests are the most eternal principle in this world, and if the logic of this interest is discarded, all ways of acting will be extremely immature.

...