How England killed Russian sovereigns


Assassination of Emperor Paul I. French engraving

Accusing Russia of

“Crimes against the state”

England is displaying monstrous hypocrisy.

Over the past 300 years, England has been Russia’s worst enemy. And only by the middle of the 20th century did it share this place with the United States. The British are behind the untimely deaths of several Russian tsars. And the English trace can be noted in almost all the wars of Russia that our country has waged over the past centuries.

Russia and England did not have disputed territories, historical traditions of enmity. Like, for example, the British and the French, or the French and the Germans. Both powers could live in peace. And, if not in agreement and cooperation, then at least not noticing each other. As, for example, Russia and the Spanish colonial empire.

However, Britain was behind almost all wars, conflicts, uprisings, revolutions. And behind the famous murders directed against Russia (such as the murder of Tsar Paul I and Nicholas II, Grigory Rasputin).

The fact is that Britain claimed to be dominant in the world. And she constantly pitted her competitors.

With the help of Russia, the British eliminated the threat from France and Germany.

At the same time London was trying with all its might to solve the “Russian question” – to dismember and destroy Russian civilization.

Sweden and Russia: play off!

After the “discovery” of Russia by the British under Tsar Ivan the Terrible, relations between the two powers were built mainly on the foundation of trade and economic relations. The British first sought a northeastern passage to China and India. Then they tried to monopolize the Volga-Caspian route to Persia. As a result, England gradually took first place in Russia’s foreign trade.

Under Peter I, Russia became an empire and one of the leading powers in European politics. From that time on, the British began to pit the Russians against other European peoples, trying to oust us from the Baltic.

Thus, Britain supported Sweden’s efforts to drive Russia off the shores of the Baltic Sea in the wars of 1700-1721, 1741-1743, 1788-1790.

True, this ended with the fact that Russia only strengthened on the shores of the Varangian Sea, returning the Baltic states to its sphere of influence.

From the same 18th century, the British began to incite Turkey against Russia.

The Russians were returning their ancient lands on the shores of the Northern Black Sea region (including the Crimea). Britain was not threatened by this process.

However, from that time to the present day (London’s contacts with the “Sultan” Erdogan), London has been trying to incite Turkey against Russia.

To prevent the Russians from gaining a foothold on the northern and Caucasian coast of the Black Sea, to liberate Constantinople-Constantinople, the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles from the Ottomans, to include the Balkan Peninsula in their sphere, to return the historical lands of Greece, Georgia and Armenia.

For all the Russian-Turkish wars of the 18th – 19th centuries. you can see the British footprint.

In the southern direction, preventing the Russians from breaking through to the southern seas, Britain also began to incite Persia – Iran (1804–1813, 1826–1828) against Russia.

It is interesting that the wise Empress Catherine II was well aware of the role of England in Europe and the world.

When the British wanted to hire Russian soldiers to suppress the revolt in the American colonies (War of Independence), Petersburg refused. Moreover, Russia in 1780 initiated the creation of a large bloc of powers, in essence, directed against politics.

“Mistress of the seas”

Britain.

In 1780, Russia declared armed neutrality. Denmark and Sweden joined him, in 1781 – Holland, Prussia and Austria. Its principles were recognized by Spain, France and the United States. Thus, the European powers expressed their readiness to defend their maritime trade by armed means from possible attacks by England.

The naval blockade of the United States was broken, England had to retreat.

Thus, the Russians had a hand in the emergence of the United States.

France and Russia: play off!

After the French Revolution on the continent, a new threat arose for England – revolutionary France. And then the empire of Napoleon.

The French began to create a “European Union” led by Paris. It is clear that the British did not like this. They themselves could not appease the French. They began to look for “cannon fodder”. The best solution was to confront two of Britain’s most dangerous adversaries: Russia (although the Russians did not threaten London) and France.

Sovereign Paul I, following the idealistic ideals of chivalry, in the fight against the revolutionary infection, sent troops to Holland, Switzerland and Italy to help his “allies” – the British and Austrians.

But it soon became clear that the “partners” were using Russia’s disinterested aid to expand their sphere of influence.

At the same time, the Austrians and the British were afraid of the Russians, their successes in the same Italy. Russian corps were exposed in Holland and Switzerland.

Our brilliant commander Alexander Suvorov saved the army with incredible moral and physical efforts (and finally undermined his health).

Paul I realized the stupidity of this war.

Russia and France had nothing to share. The Russians fought in the interests of England and Austria. When the “partners” decided that the days of revolutionary France were numbered, they tried to deprive the Russian laurels of victory.

The brilliant victories of Suvorov and Ushakov gave Russia nothing.

But they helped the Austrian Empire to return to Italy.

Interestingly, they also benefited General Napoleon. Having conquered Egypt, the French general could not take the Syrian fortress of Akru and retreated. British Admiral Nelson burned down the French fleet. The British deprived the French army in Egypt of communication with the mother country. Napoleon, without reinforcements, supplies and support of the fleet on the coast, could hold out for several months, then – a shameful surrender.

Now Napoleon could safely return to his homeland and overthrow the decayed Directory, which had lost the war in the European theater.

The population of France is tired of the endless war, instability, theft of the new government, the stupid policy of the Directory. The French wanted a strong hand and got it in the face of Napoleon.

“Died of a snuff blow to the temple”

Paul I recalled Suvorov’s troops.

Having become the first consul, Napoleon Bonaparte immediately drew attention to the stupidity of the situation: Russia was at war with France without having common borders. And, in general, no controversial issues, except for ideology (monarchy and republic).

Napoleon expressed a desire to make peace with Russia. The same thoughts entered the mind of Emperor Paul I.

On a report dated January 28, 1800 by the Russian envoy to Prussia Krudner, who reported on the peace signal of France that was passing through Berlin, the emperor wrote:

“As for the rapprochement with France, I would have wanted nothing better than to see her come running to me, especially as a counterbalance to Austria.”

Meanwhile, a French garrison in Malta surrendered to the British in October 1800.

Petersburg immediately demanded permission from London for the landing of Russian troops on the island. Paul I was the Master of the Order of Malta, the sovereign master of his domains.

London ignored this appeal.

In response, the Russian sovereign imposed a sequestration on English goods in the country, stopped debt payments to the British, ordered the appointment of commissars to eliminate debt settlements between Russian and English merchants.

In December 1800, St. Petersburg signed treaties with Prussia, Sweden and Denmark, which renewed the system of armed neutrality in 1780.

In response, the British tried to bargain with Petersburg.

They reported that England had no views of Corsica. And the conquest of Corsica would be of great importance for Russia.

That is, the British proposed replacing Malta with French Corsica. And along the way, infuriate the first consul of France – Corsican Napoleone Buonaparte (from Italian Napoleone Buonaparte).

The Russian Tsar-Knight Paul I was not led to this provocation by the English traders.

In December 1800, the Russian emperor wrote to Bonaparte:

“Mr. First Consul.

Those who have been entrusted by God with the authority to govern nations should think and care for their welfare. ”

Addressing Napoleon directly and recognizing his authority was a sensation in Europe.

Direct correspondence between the two heads of state meant, in fact, the establishment of peace between the two powers. It was also a complete violation of the principles of legitimism, for which the weak successor of Paul I, Alexander I, would lay a lot of Russian heads on the battlefields of Europe to the joy of Vienna, Berlin and London.

In February 1801, Napoleon began to study the possibility of a joint Russian-French campaign in India. And Paul I already in January 1801 sent the ataman of the Don Army Orlov an order to start a campaign in India. The Cossacks have already begun their march, they left the Don for 700 miles. The campaign was poorly organized, but it showed the whole world that one word of the Russian tsar is enough – and the Cossacks will enter India.

London responded by organizing regicide: on the night of March 11-12, 1801, the Russian Tsar Paul I was killed by a group of conspirators at the Mikhailovsky Castle.

The English ambassador Charles Whitworth played a very active role (possibly leading) in this murder.

In particular, Whitworth was the lover of Olga Alexandrovna Zherebtsova, the sister of Platon Zubov. It was Zubov who was the direct murderer of the sovereign, having pierced his head with a gold snuffbox.

British gold and instructions went through Zherebtsova to the conspirators.

Curiously, Napoleon immediately realized who was behind the assassination of Paul I.

He fell into a rage and blamed England for everything:

“They missed me …

But they hit me in St. Petersburg. ”

Tsar Alexander I became a figure in the great game of London

The new emperor Alexander I immediately faced the British threat.

The British government ordered the seizure of all Russian ships in British ports. The British treacherously attacked our allies, the Danes, destroying and capturing their fleet in Copenhagen. At the same time, Denmark adhered to strict neutrality in the war going on in Europe.

In May 1801, the English fleet reached Revel.

But it didn’t come to war. Tsar Alexander I actually capitulated to England. The Don Army was called back. England was not called to account for the death of Paul I.

The “English Party” in Russia itself was not cleaned out. The embargo was immediately lifted on British merchant ships and goods in Russian ports. The principle of armed neutrality was violated.

But the worst thing was that the “true Byzantine” Alexander I again involved Russia in the war with France. The Russians became England’s cannon fodder in the war against France.

This war did not correspond to the national interests of either the French or the Russians. And it was conducted exclusively in the interests of the British and Germans, who lived in Austria and Germany.

The “English and German” parties in St. Petersburg dragged us into a criminal, anti-national war with France. At this time, almost all the forces, energy, resources (including human resources) of Russia were spent on the war with Napoleon’s France.

For a whole generation we have lost the magnificent opportunities that opened up to Russia in the southwest (the Balkans and the region of Constantinople), south and east.

Strategically, the alliance with Napoleon promised enormous benefits. For example, even a short-term alliance between Alexander I and Napoleon after Tilsit allowed us to annex Finland and completely resolve the issue of the security of the capital and the north-western strategic direction.

Thus, with the cordial agreement between Petersburg and Paris, which was planned under Paul I, we could crush Britain’s hopes for world domination. At the same time, keeping England as a counterweight to France and the German world.

They could reach the southern seas, gain a foothold in Persia and India. Completely solve the Caucasian problem. Get Constantinople, the Strait Zone, making the Black Sea, as of old – Russian. Restore the Christian and Slavic powers in the Balkans, taking them under our wing. Send forces and resources to strengthen the Far East and Russian America.

Alexander I (and his entourage) preferred the European vector, to get headlong into the affairs of Germany.

We were drawn into a new anti-French coalition. Petersburg set a goal – to restore the Bourbon dynasty in France. Why does the Russian state and the people need Bourbons?

A Russian peasant paid for British and German interests. A lot of blood.

The Russian army suffered heavy losses in Europe, near Austerlitz and Friedland.

Due to the mediocre policy of St. Petersburg, the Russian Baltic and Black Sea fleets have lost the best ships in the Mediterranean.

It all ended in a bloody Patriotic War, when all the people had to pay for the mistakes of the tsar and his entourage.

France was “pacified”. The Russian army entered Paris. Napoleon was sent into exile.

But who appropriated almost all the fruits of victory?

England, Austria and Prussia.

And Russia was gratefully named

“Gendarme of Europe”,

instructing to crush new revolutions.

To be continued…

Recommended For You

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *