Your Favourite Diplomats

in my opinion you all have a very idealistic view of Bismarck, Bismarck was a warmonger, there's not the least question about that, secondly he was a man formed by the Napoleonic age, he did not understand the importance of colonies and the connection to the rising industrial power, thus leading to Imperialism.

in the late 19th century, only an Imperial power was a real power, and to become an Imperial power one has to have a huge fleet, Wilhelm II understood this, and thus alienated britain, unfortunately...but ultimately I wouldnt blame him for destroying the alliance with Russia, it was Russia herself that destroyed it by conflicting with Austria-Hungary for control over the Balkans, and the Germany-Austria alliance that dragged Germany into WW1 was ultimately formed by Bismarck. Italy also had differences with Austria-Hungary back from the time Austria was controlling northern Italy, thus they violated the alliance they had with the central powers.

One of my favorites is Swedish diplomat RAOUL WALLENBERG

He saved thousands of Jews in Hungary from German extermination by giving them Swedish passport, and had done all this under a fascist administration.Nazis couldnt kill them as they carried a neutral country's passport. Later, Soviets caught and executed Wallenberg

His father was also an ambassador!

He was obsessed with the hatred of political and social change.Plus fear of russia.Therefore i would not call him ''definately''..Although the system established at the congress of vienna did work and metternicht seems to number 1 of this congress,it was also incomplete,Tobadai.

1-Near East question.Russia and Austria both directed to expand towards the Ottoman Empire.A Balance of Power established in Europe but the Ottoman Empire omitted from even being discussed?

Russian and Austrian interets were to stem a conflict for sure.And it happened in the end..which led to World War I and the final end of the Vienna System

2-National borders werent exactly drawn.The Poles remained in Prussia,Austria lands as well as Russia..The divideness of Poland lasted during the 19.Century.

no, someone interested in peace doesn't start ANY war first fo all. second, he only restrained from waging more wars just because the european powers would have regarded Prussia as an expansionist power which it was. the three wars of Bismarck brought only minor territorial changes for Prussia itself, whcih was Hosltein in the Danish war and Alsace-Lorraine in the French war. but the ultimate reason for all three wars was to form a new German Empire, which suceeded after the French war 1871. thus his main goal was achieved and thereafter everythign he sought for was consoldiation of his achievements by creatign a strogn defensive alliance.

well, the real breaktrough only came after Wilhelm II took over the throne and had kicked Bismarck out of office.

OK, it was a bad move not to renew the alliance with Russia, but Wilhelm was naive enough to believe that blood bondage alone would keep the alliance intact and peace secured, that was his only fault. and in fact Wilhelm did not destroy the alliance system, it were its neighbours that became scared and jealous by Germanys fast rise to become the new superpower, central europe hadn't been a major power since Karl V. times. and unlike Bismarck he was not a Prussian, he did believe in federalism and did not regard the other German countries as vassals but equals of Prussia. I don't know why but Wilhelm get's a lot of bad press by people but he was much better than Bismarck or later Hindenburg. not to forget that hardly anyone talks about Wilhelm I. because he was a weak king/emperor being totally dominated by Bismarck, Wilhelm II was the first and last strong ruler of Prussia since Frederick II.

I feel that Bismarck is somewhat misunderstood, especially in this forum. Having read A.J. P Taylor's Bismarck: The Man and the Statesman, it is clear that he was no different than many other diplomats of the 19th century, including Clemens Von Metternich. Bismarck provoked some wars in order to put Prussia in a better position on the European continent and that is something that every nation wants.

So, he cannot be blamed for it. Sure, he began some wars, but he detested war and he wanted it over just as soon as it began. Yes, he was a dispicably shrewd and manipulative man, but he was a very capiable diplomat at the same time and deserves his place in history. 

Mmm, that's a tasty moment.