Maximum realistic territorial gains for the Russian Empire?

May 2014
19,746
SoCal
#61
So, having more robots won't fix their problems?

Poland had an inefficient system of government that gave the nobles too much power and left the central authority weak and often with foreign kings that had little interest in the good of the country. Without any real central authority Poland became backward and isolated, not involving themselves in foreign affairs. In the decades before the partition they were an effective puppet state of Russia.
This does provide a Russian argument against giving Austria any parts of Poland, no? Why split Poland when you can have the whole thing for yourself?
 
#62
So, having more robots won't fix their problems?

This does provide a Russian argument against giving Austria any parts of Poland, no? Why split Poland when you can have the whole thing for yourself?
Robots can help with labor shortages but that won't fix the problem of income, fewer people means less income to the government to pay for benefits for older people who are retired.

Dominating a puppet state isn't the same as owning the whole thing. There was always the threat of the puppet cutting the strings.
The background for the partition was that Austria was growing angry over Russia's success against the Ottomans (taking territory they wanted), Prussia was allied with Russia and an Austrian-Russian war would force a still recovering Prussia into another war with Austria. So Prussia convinced them to instead partition Poland, something they could all benefit from. This then prevents a major war (in which Russia may not win) and translates theoretical territory into real territory.
 
Likes: Futurist
May 2014
19,746
SoCal
#63
Robots can help with labor shortages but that won't fix the problem of income, fewer people means less income to the government to pay for benefits for older people who are retired.
Robots could increase output and productivity, no?

Dominating a puppet state isn't the same as owning the whole thing. There was always the threat of the puppet cutting the strings.
The background for the partition was that Austria was growing angry over Russia's success against the Ottomans (taking territory they wanted), Prussia was allied with Russia and an Austrian-Russian war would force a still recovering Prussia into another war with Austria. So Prussia convinced them to instead partition Poland, something they could all benefit from. This then prevents a major war (in which Russia may not win) and translates theoretical territory into real territory.
That makes sense.

BTW, which Ottoman territories did Austria want back then?
 
Apr 2017
1,378
U.S.A.
#66
Interesting.

What about building even more advanced robots?

Why'd the Austrians want it?
Why not build replicators, limitless power sources and instant regeneration devices? Because we don't have the technology yet. There is no real way to bypass the concept of large aging populations short of massive economic boosts but these tend to be short lived and their length unpredictable (which is needed to plot decade long economic budgeting). Generating such massive economic boosts are very difficult and advanced robots would not necessarily be one of them.

Edit: Forgot to respond to second part.
Romania would lead to the black sea (and a defensible frontier) and is, of course simply more territory. Everyone wants more territory.
 
Likes: Futurist
Dec 2017
293
Regnum Teutonicum
#67
I think the territory Russia would try to acquire in a non-world war scenario, would follow the following logic:
1) Access to warm water ports
2) Add as much territory between its capital and the border, where there are no natural barriers
3) Tsargard

Concerning access to warm water ports, this could be achieved in different regions.
a) First the chinese part of Manchuria and than via northern China or Korea to the Yellow Sea
b) Through Afghanistan and Persia to the Indian Ocean
c) Via Anatolia to the Mediterranean Sea
d) Via the Balkans to the Mediterranean Sea

Concerning possible invasion routes
1. Tuva, Outer Mongolia and Inner Mongolia, so there is a desert to the South
2. Bessarabia, Moldavia, Bukovina and Wallachia, so there are the Carpathians and Danube as borders
3. Galicia and the austro-hungarian part of Little Poland (Cracow region) for a border with the Carpathians
This leaves mainland Scandinavia, the north german plain and north east China as problematic zones

Concerning Tsargrad aka Istanbul:
This city was the golden apple. It would simultaneously fullfill the first two criteria. Additionally it had an immense cultural and religious significance for Russians and Orthodox Christianity. Additionally it is a choke point. So if Russia could acquire Thrace and Bithynia with Istanbul, it would have an exellent hand.

Maybe Russia could opportunistically pick up a few other territories here and there, like Svalbard, Jan Mayen, Posen, Alaska, British Columbia, Victoria Island or Washington (bonus warm water port).

Needles to say it would have been impossible to get all of them.

If the scenario involves World War One or a similar World War against other great power or another combination, we can look at Russias plans irl:
"So altough it is a complicated plan, the russians have big ideas. And what we see is an inflation of war aims. There being huge costs, it‘s not clear what the general situation is and what will happen. In the beginning of the war they are talking about possible annaxations of austrian and prussian territory in Silesia. They are talking about, they want free passage to the straits in Constantinopel. Then look what happens… Galicia, this means the break-up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. They eventually start to say we also gonna want german districts of german imperial territory ….Then they start to say, by the way those , we don’t want just a sphere of influence in the area that we‘ve conquered in the Caucasus, we are gone be annexing those territories. And then in 1915 they announce that they are no longer interested in free passage to the straits, they want to annex Tsargrad , which is their name for Constantinople.“
Gary Armstrong, 2015
 
Likes: Futurist
Sep 2012
3,835
Bulgaria
#68
Tsarigrad is archaic term indeed. Its meaning is 'the city of of the caesar' and we still used it in historical context, because it was the seat of the Ottoman sultan. I suppose Serbians still use it also. I doesnt make sense Russians to call Istanbul Tsarigrad. Their princes and tzars were in Moscow and emperors/ empresses in Sankt Peterburg. Russians called it Constantinople at least during the time of the empire / In the official Russian texts of the Treaty of Constantinople 1724, the Treaty of Paris 1856, the San Stefano peace treaty of 1878 and the Berlin Treaty of 1878, Constantinople is used.
 
Likes: Futurist
May 2014
19,746
SoCal
#69
Tsarigrad is archaic term indeed. Its meaning is 'the city of of the caesar' and we still used it in historical context, because it was the seat of the Ottoman sultan. I suppose Serbians still use it also. I doesnt make sense Russians to call Istanbul Tsarigrad. Their princes and tzars were in Moscow and emperors/ empresses in Sankt Peterburg. Russians called it Constantinople at least during the time of the empire / In the official Russian texts of the Treaty of Constantinople 1724, the Treaty of Paris 1856, the San Stefano peace treaty of 1878 and the Berlin Treaty of 1878, Constantinople is used.
The Russian Tsar might declare himself the new Kaiser (Caesar) of Rome if Russia conquers Constantinople, though.