To what extent did Disraeli achieve his aims in foreign and imperial policy?

by bethanyannwaltersgooglemailcom (student)

Beth Walters

Disraeli had specific aims in mind when he was dealing with foreign and imperial policy. One of the aims of Disraelian Conservatism was to preserve the British Empire and it’s status abroad. This came with an innate suspicion of all that could threaten the Empire, which at the time included Russia’s designs on the Ottoman Empire and the Dreikaiserbund; he saw the Dreikaiserbund’s alliance of three prominent emperors as seeking to undermine British influence.

The aim to improve the status of Britain through foreign policy was successful in some elements of his Eastern Policy - especially the quick response to Russian forces advancing on Constantinople in 1877. The assertion of British power in the area the Russians were intending on invading helped to diffuse the crisis, and ultimately helped to dismantle the treaty of San Stefano in 1878. A conference in Berlin helped to ensure the treaty of San Stefano, that involved terms that would directly result in Russia’s rise to power, was overturned and replaced with terms that ensure Russia had no administrative powers over Bulgaria, gave Britain a naval base in Cyprus and served to split the Dreikaiserbund among other things. The split of the Dreikaiserbund helped to restore the balance of power in Europe, which Disraeli felt was crucial to the “opera of Europe”; no one power should be too powerful. These quick decisions on foreign policy helped to improve the status of Britain, checked Russia and the potential problems that could arise with Russia’s acquisition of a warm water port, and allowed territorial gains to be made.

This is a preview of the whole essay

However, despite the eventual success of Disraeli’s measures involving foreign policy regarding the Ottoman empire, errors of judgement are visible and led to bad feeling and unrest in Britain. Disraeli’s rejection of the Berlin Memorandum as he felt the Dreikaiserbund had ulterior motives to split the Ottoman empire and saw it as an insult to British power, served to encourage Turkish violence towards Christians and ultimately led to the exacerbation of the Bulgarian Horrors and the advance on Constantinople. This gave Gladstone the incentive to come out of retirement to openly attack Disraeli’s policies in his pamphlet, criticising Disraeli’s foreign policy as wasteful of lives and money. Similarly, the advance of Russia on Constantinople was too close for comfort, the Russian army army reached the suburbs before Disraeli took action. The action Disraeli took was criticised for being impulsive as he entered the fray without any allies to support him. Coupled with the contentious Treaty of San Stefano, which seemed to indicate impending Russian power, Disraeli’s foreign policy caused anxiety at home, not an ideal situation with the election just a year or two away.

Disraeli achieved some success in his imperial policies, most of all with the purchase of the Suez Canal shares. When 7 of 16 shares in the Suez Canal became available to purchase for £4 million, Disraeli was keen to ensure the French couldn’t buy them and manipulate the Suez Canal which provided easy access to the “jewel of the crown” of the British Empire - India. Despite criticism from Gladstone for the fact he didn’t inform Parliament of his intentions to purchase the expensive shares, the shares did turn out to be a very wise and calculated decision. By purchasing a near half majority of the shares, he could ensure he was involved in decision making, including tolls and British access to the canal. The shares were a good investment and increased in value rapidly, and tolls on the canal were reduced. A similar aim to protect India and check Russia was the Royal Titles Act in 1876. This modest success sent a subtle message to Russia that Britain had close and personal links with India by giving them an Empress in Queen Victoria. Gladstone called it “theatrical bombast”, but it is clear that Disraeli saw opportunity to demonstrate Britain’s commitment to India through a reasonably cheap measure, as well as keeping the monarchy onside by giving Queen Victoria a title she coveted.

Perhaps Disraeli’s greatest poorest judgment was in his dealing with imperial issues regarding South African and Afghanistan. The High Commissioner in South Africa acted against Disraeli’s wishes and provoked the Zulu king in 1878, hoping to win an alliance with the Boers who were also concerned about the Zulus. A humiliating defeat in Zululand resulted, and Disraeli was heavily criticised for his poor control of British representatives abroad. The Liberal had an opportunity to point out the loss of life and money, and alongside the problems surrounding the Eastern question in his foreign policy, which only served to undermine his authority and reduce his support at home. Similarly, the Afghan wars were the result of the Viceroy in Afghanistan taking military action against the Russian advance on Kabul, despite orders from Disraeli otherwise. A later murder of a British official sparked war, and this wasn’t resolved during Disraeli’s ministry, and was left to Gladstone to resolve. Again, Disraeli was criticised for his lack of control over the situation, and it certainly didn’t meet his aims of reinforcing British power and prestige.

Disraeli’s judgments regarding the Bulgarian Horrors, South Africa and Afghanistan can be criticised as showing weakness in Disraeli’s policies and a failure to fulfil his aims regarding the balance of power and British power. However, Disraeli was successful in winning prestige for Britain through his quick and decisive dealings with the Suez Canal shares and Russia’s advance on Constantinople, but not without cost. He lost ministers and divided his cabinet over the Bulgarian Horrors, allowing Gladstone to attack him over his imperial issues in his Midlothian campaign. By the time the election came, British defeat in South Africa was at the forefront of the public’s minds, and no doubt influenced his defeat in election. Disraeli was successful in dealing with Russia, effectively asserting British authority over India and preventing the collapse of the Ottoman empire in some ways. Perhaps his oversights in imperial policy were a result of his exuberant style of speaking, which could be said to promote a forward, aggressive imperial policy, leading his representatives abroad to feel they were acting the way he would want them to.