The Realpolitik Foreign Policy Of Otto Von Bismarck

The majority of people thought Bismarck was a German enthusiast but in reality he was Prussian. The idea of creating a unified Germany developed only gradually in his mind as an addition the strengthening of Prussia. With this objective in mind, Bismarck transformed the small country of Prussia into a large European superpower with an unbeatable army. To Bismarck, enemies and alliances were only considered important if they were convenient at the time. He was practical and an opportunistic, taking advantage of situations as they developed and prepared to act in many different directions depending on the outcome. For instance, In 1862 Bismarck was appointed chief minister of Prussia; however this title alone was

Bismarck used realpolitiks in his diplomacy and policies, which allowed him to utilize different political ideologies to achieve his goals. In document 5, the socialist actions that Bismarck took are presented. Bismarck insured “workers against industrial accidents” (doc 5). This is an example of realpolitik. Bismarck gained support from the workers, so he could pass Anti-Socialist laws without disorder. This was a way to preserve the traditional order. The Kaiser had intended for his speech to connect with the working class; the working class had previously been ignored and manipulated, but now they were being favored. In Bismarck’s speech, he argues that the state had a duty to provide support for the nation’s “helpless fellow citizens” (doc 6). Furthermore; this exemplifies Bismarck’s practice of realpolitik and his view that “ lasting guarantees of internal peace” was ppossible Bismarck made a serious effort to better the working conditions as a way to avoid a similar event to the radical socialist Paris Commune gaining control. Finally, both sides of the spectrum criticized Bismarck’s shift policies to appeal with differing political groups. In document 2, Wilhelm Liebknecht, who is a socialist, expressed the contempt caused by Bismarck’s

As president, Bismarck led Germany into unification through his opportunism and his various policies. Charismatic yet aggressive by nature, Bismarck was known for his ability to seize opportunities and manipulate situations to his advantage. It is debatable whether or not Germany would have achieved unification under the power of anyone other Bismarck. In his 1996 book The Problem of the German Nation State, Wolfgang Mommsen said, “Bismarck’s policies- admirable or satanic... occupy centre stage.” This is particularly true for his infamous policy of “blood and iron”. Also, Bismarck’s diplomatic abilities are able to be seen when looking at his foreign policy of 1871 to 1890. Bismarck’s policies and opportunism are predominantly evident when looking at the Three Wars.

Otto von Bismarck is widely known as the first modern politician. Because of this, his interpretation of conservatism is different and is the first of its kind. The reason Bismarck represents a new and different kind of conservatism is that unlike traditional conservatives, Bismarck is willing to adapt his views to fit the people's current needs. While Bismarck's methods can be considered traditionally conservative in his early days as a political leader, with things such as the Anti-Socialist Acts, by looking deeper and analyzing what he did later in life shows that he was a more modern conservative. Some examples of Bismarck’s modern conservatism were his restraint on letting Germany go to war with any other country, and his policy of separation of church and state. Compared to other leaders like Napoleon III, Bismarck had the ability to plan and invest in Germany’s future. Bismarck supported this by being able to change his views and ideas when it became necessary. Bismarck’s time was born when the Franco-Prussian war began. This is what led to Bismarck becoming so famous at the time, as his military victories were heard of all over

Wilhelm II: Our policy have both pros and cons. The pro of the policy of Germany is, its diplomatic works successfully delayed the final war for about 40 years. The con is, since Germany is a monarchy state which control by conservative nobles and powerful officials group, it haven’t enough flexibility to solve unexpected events such as the betray of Russia. It finally cause the failure of Germany because of the pressure from both France and Russia.

Weltpolitik, an extension of Kaiser Wilhelm II’s ‘New Course’ initiative, directly contradicting the quiet policies of Bismarck. Through Weltpolitik, the Kaiser sought to begin an expansionist period in Germany. Where Bismarck had favored a quiet foreign policy, Kaiser Wilhelm II had a contrary view. Weltpolitik involved an aggressive foreign policy, primarily through the acquisition of colonies in Africa (Mittelafrika). In order to do so, naval improvement had to take place, thus leading to the Naval Race involving both Germany and Britain, an important factor when considering the escalation of tension in pre-WW1 Europe. A second key importance of Weltpolitik, was that it sought to justify Germany’s place as a leading power in central Europe (Mitteleuropa). Most German people craved “a place in the sun”, and

Bismarck determined that this cause should be a war, (Richards, 1977, 142) for there is no better bonding agent then that of the threat to one's livelihood. Bismarck used the Danish war to help consolidate his internal position in Prussia and to strengthen Prussian military transportation. (Christopher, 1991, p.103) "Liberal sentiment in Germany had always been stirred by a desire to separate Schleswig- Holstein from Denmark. The liberals called for a repudiation of international agreements by Prussia (such as the 1852 Protocol which put the Danish issue on ice), while Bismarck declared in the Diet that he would not be a party to a breach of international obligations. So Bismarck made an agreement with Austria, the avowed enemy of German unity, to proceed within the context of the 1852 Protocol.

Bismarck had brought Germany closer to unification, Thus, meaning Bismarck had an important role in the progression of the unification of Germany. Some historians argue whether or not Bismarck was an opportunist or a planner. In the case of the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 it is evident that Bismarck deliberately planned the outbreak of war against Austria. In William Carr’s Germany 1815-1945 he quotes a conversation between Bismarck to Disraeli in 1862: “when the army has been brought to such a state as to command a respect then I shall take the first opportunity to declare war with Austria” proving that Bismarck had planned to go to war with Austria. but he also took advantage of an opportunity which enabled him to go to war with Austria as he stated. Therefore Bismarck can be viewed as both a planner and an opportunist. The wars of unification helped unite Germany as all members of the Bund came together and fought as one in all of these wars.

Prince Otto von Bismarck was seen as both a political genius and a power monger, like a German version of Alexander the Great by the people. Bismarck was a conservative, who used the people around him to reach his goals; and in doing so, he pitted people against one another. According to the book 19th Century Germany by John Breuilly, modern historians have found it very hard “to separate the man from his achievements” (Breuilly 172). The historians have run into a roadblock that consists mostly of “Bismarck’s individuality and his responsibility for the political development of the Empire” (Breuilly 172). Bismarck was known to support nationalism and patriotism, and he believed in the Burschenschaften or student organizations. He also believed in the concept of faith in power, more in ideas. Bismarck only cared for two things: Prussia and Prussian power, and he would do anything to obtain Prussian domination. Although Bismarck did not care for Germany, he was all for German Unification. Historians cannot decide if Bismarck’s legacy is positive or negative but they agree that he was a “brilliant and shrewd tactician who succeeded in postponing the problem of political mobilization for 60 years” (Breuilly 172). In Otto von Bismarck, some people saw a great man who was ahead of his time, while others saw nothing more than a bloodthirsty power monger, who wanted a united Germany to

Otto von Bismarck was the prime minister of Germany during the time of German unification, formerly the prime minister of Prussia. Bismarck struck quite the nationalist chord in the German peoples, convincing the southern German states to join the the northern ones. He was known as a hardcore conservative, however he was a practitioner of realpolitik, and was able to approve policies that appealed to different ideologies for the sake of the country. Otto von Bismarck’s specific brand of conservatism was different than classic conservatism in that Bismarck attempted to appeal more to the working class, and he had a good few liberal policies. However, Bismarck also had traditionally conservative ideas, such as suppressing opposing views.

Bismarck was an unrivalled diplomat during his reign. His German Reich constitution of April 1871 allowed him to dictate the government on his own terms. However, the parliament only “had the power to initiate debate upon any point of his (Bismarck’s) policy, but neither he nor any other minister was responsible to the assembly for his actions" (T. A. Morris, p116). Furthermore, the constitution was designed to give the impression that

Germany's industrial emphasis can be seen as heightening in this period as a result of their unification; now they had the means of exploiting materials as well as manufacturing it. Part of the reason that during this period, Germany was not seen as an aggressor is due to its Chancellor, Bismarck, who was conscious of the importance of pursuing a peaceful foreign policy and abstained form excessive Imperialism. Berlin, in 1894-95, was the centre for the diplomatic partition of Africa, with Bismarck heading up the talks between the powers. Germany's approach to other countries, and its foreign policy underwent a dramatic change in 1890, when Bismarck was dismissed from office and Caprivi was instated to the position. In

Prussia played a large and important role in the unification of Germany. Without Prussia pushing unification along, Germany as we know it today would not exist. The Germanic states would not have unified as they did and the resulting wars that came about never would have played out. World history, not just European history, would be far different without modern day Germany, and the state that led to its emergence; however, Prussia did not unify Germany overnight. Prussia worked up to unification with a series of wars and interactions throughout their history.

Kaiser Wilhelm’s foreign policy differed from Bismarck’s in many ways. Whereas Bismarck did things based on logic Kaiser Wilhelm did things more based on emotion. This resulted in incoherence and inconsistency in the German relations with other nations. He wanted an empire that could rival the size of the british. He also managed to alienate the English by aggressively expanding the navy. He was more aggressive and wanted Germany to be the best.

Purpose: The purpose is to learn more about Bismarck’s personal life and personality. Since Taylor had already written two previous books describing Bismarck’s foreign policy this biography helps to understand his policies better.