The Rise Of Australasia

Chapter 788: 588: 1924_1

Chapter 788: Chapter 588: 1924_1

How to capitalize on the current European situation to earn ample benefits?

Arthur first set his sights on Russia Nation, now divided into several parts. Compared with other European regions where the situation was nearing stability, Russia Nation, though currently enjoying peace, was in a state where much reconstruction was needed— an excellent opportunity for intervention.

Russia Nation needed to rebuild its industry and economy, and the essential condition for this recovery was loans from other countries.

Clearly, both parts of Russia Nation were now impoverished and needed support from other countries to restore their domestic affairs.

It wasn’t just the newly divided Russia Nation; the nascent small and medium-sized countries were like freshly baked cakes, tempting the Powers and European Nations.

The good news was that for Latvia, Estonia, and Finland, the three major powers of Britain, France, and Australia had already reached a tacit agreement. Arthur could confidently enter into any cooperation with Finland without worrying about interference from other countries, at least for the time being.

As for the newly born European power Poland, that was clearly the cake of the United Kingdom and France. Arthur had no interest in meddling, nor was it necessary to go out of his way to establish cooperation with the Poles.

The last two months of 1923 were harvest time for the Powers. Disregarding the now isolated United States, the strongest three Powers—Britain, France, and Australia—were still reaping abundantly.

Although nominally under the control of Poland, Lithuania, one of the Baltic States, had the support of Britain and France behind it.

In other words, the Baltic States were essentially under the control of Britain and France, greatly extending their influence and becoming the current two strongest nations in fragmented Europe.

Whether it was Germany, Russia Nation, Italy, or that entity which retained the name Austro-Hungarian Empire in name only but was actually just the Austrian Empire, none could compare with the current might of Britain and France.

Under these circumstances, the economic growth of Britain and France was proudly referred to by the media of the two countries as: “The New European Era!”

Was it the new era of Europe? Compared to the past Europe, it probably was. Yet, the hidden dangers of this era posed a fatal threat to the current Britain and France.

As time entered 1924, the European situation once again underwent changes.

First was the British Government, with MacDonald leading the Labour Party to successfully form the new British Cabinet, the first Labour Party Prime Minister in the history of the British Empire.

Setting aside what later generations may say of MacDonald, he had opposed war before World War I. His appointment indicated that the British Government’s goals would unlikely be too aggressive in the near future, and would probably prioritize development and recovery.

As a friendly ally of the British Empire, the Australasian Government expressed its concern for the new Cabinet of the British Empire and made contact with the new Prime Minister of the United Kingdom at the first opportunity after MacDonald’s successful formation.

Fortunately, no matter how the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom may change, the relationship between Australasia and the United Kingdom remains unaffected.

Unless competitors like France and the United States splinter as Russia Nation did, or Australasia rapidly grows to surpass the United States as the second major power, which is simply impossible in a short time frame, this defines the era’s relationship tone between Australasia and the United Kingdom.

In the same month, former US President Woodrow Wilson was pronounced dead, and the American Government expressed its condolences.

But in the eyes of the American People, whose reputation had already been tarnished, Wilson’s death did not cause much regret, nor did it have a significant impact.

The history of this region can be traced back to over a hundred years ago to Novgorod; dominating this region requires more than just recklessness and radicalism.

Arthur’s precedent in Australasia cannot be copied either, for at that time he had the support of the British Empire, and since the Australian Region had been a colony of the British Empire, Arthur’s rule was natural.

But Finland is different—Dmitry is an outsider in comparison to Finland. Rather than seizing government power too early, it’s more sensible to garner as much support from the Finnish people as possible, which is what an external monarch should prioritize.

Once the hearts of the people are won, acquiring power becomes a natural progression. With the support of Australasia, even a very mediocre monarch would have a great chance of acquiring high power, let alone the seemingly prudent Dmitry.

After learning all this, Arthur was quite reassured about Dmitry’s rule in Finland, and he naturally shared this good news with Queen Mary.

Queen Mary was naturally very pleased and was happy to see her brother proliferate in Finland, although it was a small country; the advantage of a small country is stability.

As long as Dmitry’s successors in ruling Finland do not harbor excessive ambition and focus on development within Finland, securing their monarchical status should pose no issue.

However, if Dmitry or a subsequent Finnish monarch wanted to establish a highly powerful absolute monarchy, then Arthur could only say that timing and fate would tell.

Arthur’s high monarchical power was not for emulation, not even something he considered preserving in the next King of Australasia.

Such high monarchical power might greatly increase the efficiency of national administration, but a single misstep could lead to disaster.

When the monarch holds power, it means their rule is laid bare for all to see.

The success or failure of policies is tied to the monarch’s reputation, and one failure could potentially bring the era of monarchical rule to an end.

This had already been demonstrated in Germany and Russia. Had it not been for the intervention of Australasia and Britain, these two countries would have abolished monarchism by now.

This is actually the main difference between absolute monarchy and constitutional monarchy. When government power is centralized within the Cabinet and Parliament, it is extremely difficult for the monarch to govern the country, but the upside is that they can assign blame to the government and Parliament, avoiding bearing substantial infamy.

Should the government’s reputation tarnish, simply stepping forward to announce the dismissal of the government can even earn the popularity and approval of the people; this system of controlling everything from behind the scenes is safe for monarchism.

However, this approach has one problem: one cannot place the continuance of monarchism on the government.

If a certain Prime Minister feels the monarch is dispensable and wishes to dismiss the monarch, that might well be the greatest crisis for constitutional monarchy.

Based on over 20 years of ruling experience, Arthur had a certain understanding of the powers that future Kings of Australasia should hold.

Power should not be too great, as it is improbable that every monarch of Australasia will be a wise and just ruler.

But power should also not be too little; it is necessary to hold certain trump cards in hand to ensure that the monarch’s position is not threatened by excessive ministerial power.

Currently, institutions like the Royal financial group, Royal Parliament, and the Guards, among others, are the trump cards Arthur has left for the later generations of Australasian monarchs.

Most times, they can operate behind the scenes of the government, leaving the work of governance entirely in the hands of the government. In times of danger, these trump cards also suffice to ensure the monarch’s position, preventing monarchism from being threatened.