Holy Roman Empire

The Prusso-Russian negotiations had concluded, and the Vienna Peace Conference had reached its most critical moment: disarmament, establishing a new international order.

The disarmament progressed relatively smoothly, with everyone agreeing that disarmament was necessary. The crux of the dispute centered on the specific number of troops to maintain.

For small countries, it barely mattered. Their military forces were limited in number and posed no threat to anyone, so whether they disarmed had little impact.

The core contradiction lay with the Russia, Austria and France alliance. Austria proposed a military force ratio of 10:10:7, that is, Russia and Austria would maintain a total army strength of 500,000 each, while France would keep 350,000 troops.

The French representative, David Provencal, vehemently opposed, saying, "As a major country, this is an insult to France.

We cannot accept this ratio. France must have an army that matches its strength. I propose that the France-Russia-Austrian alliance maintain armies of equal size!"

The Austrian Foreign Minister Weisenberg shook his head and smiled, "Envoy Excellency, the essence of disarmament is to save military expenditures and to maintain the military balance in Europe, to prevent the outbreak of war.

If your army’s fighting capability is the best in the world, with equal force, who can be your opponent? How can this balance be maintained then?"

This flattering explanation quelled the anger in David Provencal’s heart, but he still insisted, "No!

France has numerous colonies to maintain. We cannot simply consider the combat capability of the army. We must consider comprehensive factors in our deliberation."

In this age of the survival of the fittest, strength was a reflection of status. What was being distributed was not merely the share of military force but also the right to speak on the European Continent.

If France obtained the same amount of troops as Russia and Austria, with its advantage in combat capability, even if not the hegemon of Europe, France would still be the uncrowned king.

"Military capability advantage," well, the French’s self-confidence in this area is indeed sky-high, always priding themselves on having the best army in the world.

Perhaps at one time, the French Army really was the world’s best. But since the Italians joined in, no one knows what their rank is now.

Austria had no objections to this issue that did not involve specific interests, and since it had been chanted for a long time, everyone simply accepted it.

Weisenberg nodded, "Your Excellency has a point, indeed we need to consider all factors comprehensively.

However, there are too many aspects to consider, such as population, economy, number of colonies, territory size, national defense pressures, and so on.

Which factor shall we take as the reference standard, or should we consider them all and calculate a comprehensive value?"

This is a maddening topic; no matter which factor France compared itself with, it found itself at a disadvantage.

David Provencal calculated carefully and embarrassingly discovered that his mention of colonies was a mistake.

The leading Colonial Empire in the world now was Britain, followed by Austria, with France only ranking third. Moreover, this third place was far behind the second, not even half as much.

Using colonies as the standard would mean letting the British maintain the world’s largest army size, wouldn’t it?

The European countries might not have opinions, but John Bull is unlikely to agree to it; it would turn them from a maritime power into a land power.

In terms of population, economy, and territory size, France could not prevail. Based on these data, they might not even be able to obtain 70% of Austria’s military force allocation.

National defense pressure wasn’t even worth mentioning; France has always been the one putting pressure on others, and David Provencal was really embarrassed to raise this point.

After some hesitation, David Provencal mustered his courage and responded, "Of course, we need to consider a composite calculation, but we can focus on maintaining military balance."

The British representative, Edward, suggested, "I propose that we consider regional military balance after primarily meeting the needs.

For example, France, with only 350,000 troops, that’s simply insufficient."

It’s the usual style of a troublemaker, and prioritizing needs sounds nice. However, how do we define the standard for ’needs’?

If we meet the troop requirements of all countries first and then consider the military balance, we’d only end up with the higher numbers, and the 500,000 cap would surely not hold; we might even end up with an increase rather than a decrease in troops.

The British conspiracy is naturally not so easy to succeed. Other countries might not have a big problem maintaining a few more soldiers, but the Russian Empire certainly can’t afford it.

Russian representative Nikita Khrushchev immediately retorted, "Sir, this is a disarmament conference, not one for expanding the army.

If we satisfy the military needs of all countries, are you sure that we can still disarm?"

Disarmament, why disarmament?

From the perspective of the British, it’s best for the European countries to maintain the current situation, each spending a large amount of military expenditure on land forces, rendering them powerless to dispute maritime supremacy with Britain.

If we go by the proposal of Austria, with the army numbers of France and Austria being suppressed to 350,000 and 500,000 respectively, this would mean that both governments could save tens of millions of British Pounds in military expenses each year.

The money would certainly not just lie in the bank earning interest; a large part would flow into the navy, which could seriously disrupt Britannia’s maritime hegemony.

Edward remained unmoved, feigning confusion, "Of course, this is a disarmament conference. The very fact that we can all sit here is the best proof.

The number of troops a sovereign nation retains should be a matter of freedom, not subject to foreign interference. Disarmament should rely on voluntary cooperation, not compulsion."

The British meddling increased the pressure on David Proval. Everyone else could "volunteer," but France alone could not.

This was a historical legacy issue; more than half the nations present were members of the Anti-French Alliance.

Even now, everyone was still wary of France. Without a leader to head the movement, against a ragtag assembly, the French government would not be cowed.

Unfortunately, things were different now; there was an unpressed Austria on the European Continent, and a Britannia across the Channel.

If France refused to disarm, it could easily be misinterpreted by the outside world, potentially sparking a new round of international tensions.

The French representative David Proval retorted, "The sovereignty of independent nations must be respected, but as a responsible country, we must also consider world peace. Nôv(el)B\\jnn

Excessive freedom is actually the root of chaos. Disarmament is imperative for the prosperity and stability of Europe."

David Proval’s words scored points. France was not opposing disarmament, only the disproportionate military sizes of the France-Russia-Austrian alliance.

The pit the British dug was deftly avoided by him. He brought the focus of controversy back to the original point.

Arguing with reason, presenting evidence, a new round of verbal sparring began. But this time, the dispute was not about the ratio of forces but about the rules of calculation.

In comprehensive consideration, the actual fear is comprehensiveness. The wider the direction involved, the more problems arise, and the longer the dispute drags out.

…

While everyone was squabbling, a crisis loomed over the capitalist world.

The catalyst was the defeat of the Prusso Federation, which caused turmoil in the London Financial Market.

However, with the effort of the British Government, debtors were preserved, and some debt shifting was achieved, reducing financial risk and restoring market confidence, enabling this wave of crisis to be resolved.

One could dodge Easter, but not Halloween.

The Berlin Government was still in office, and debts were being served normally. However, with the war’s end, the factories’ orders disappeared.

Not only that, but many businesses’ last batch of orders had not been delivered when the Berlin Government defaulted.

Order defaults are a business act, at most compensating with a breach of contract fee—precisely speaking, forfeiting the deposit.

The consequence of the default was a backlog of large quantities of materials. Ordinary products were manageable; entering the civilian market for discounted sales could recover some costs.

Strategic materials specifically produced posed a problem; capital was willing to sell them off, but now there were simply no buyers.

It wasn’t just Britain that faced issues; most European countries had a backlog of strategic materials, precisely at the time of major disarmament, causing market demand to sharply decline.

Production enterprises with weak financial strength, due to the backlog of a large amount of goods, were now on the verge of bankruptcy.

The impact was not just on these companies producing strategic materials; virtually all industries were affected.

Post-war export orders declined, and businesses that grew through export trade had to turn around to compete in the domestic market, making market competition brutal.

Overproduction became a common problem in the capitalist world. Businesses, in order to survive, began to utilize every trick in the book. Discount promotions were inevitable.

Taking Austria as an example, post-war, domestic goods prices all declined: daily necessities dropped by 24%, clothing items decreased by 31.6%, hardware goods fell by 18.5%, machinery equipment reduced by 9.8%, and food items decreased by 6.4%…

A drop in prices was not necessarily a good thing; behind the falling prices lay brutal market competition.

Looking at the recent economic data, Franz knew an economic storm was coming.

Most businesses were gritting their teeth and hanging on; if the market did not improve for a long time, small and medium enterprises with weaker strength would be the first to collapse.

Once a wave of bankruptcies appeared, the economic situation would rapidly deteriorate.

Putting down the data in his hands, Franz sighed, "Notify the Cabinet and the heads of the economic departments to come for a meeting."

…