To what extent was napoleon III’s foreign policy a failure?
By observing and evaluating Louis Napoleon’s foreign policy from the period of 1849-71, his aims and also the expectations of the French for their Emperor have to be considered. Most concerning for Napoleon was the wish to restore France to its years of greatness, in terms of a European power as well as international standing and prestige. By revising the territorial settlement of Vienna in 1815, it was hoped that land could be acquired and the French borders extended. This was particularly important for the French, but Napoleon wasn’t thrilled with the idea of going to war or losing men, and therefore wasn’t his greatest worry to attain more land. He was keen to have Catholic support however, and this can be seen in both foreign and domestic policy, including Rome in 1849 and the “Loi Falloux” in 1850.
Arguably the period of 1849-60 was more successful in terms of foreign affairs that that of 1861-71, but collectively there isn’t a great deal to show from the timeframe altogether and can be described, largely, as a failure.
Despite the latter part of Napoleon III’s reign being a complete disaster, there are some, although few, redeeming features of foreign policy, most specifically the Italian War in 1859-60.
Nice and Savoy were the only pieces of European land that Louis Napoleon secured for France in his time as Emperor. Whilst winning popular acclaim and prestige for France to some extent, it also undermined the Vienna settlement because of the extension of territories. Thus succeeding to cover some of his aims for foreign policy as discussed in the beginning of the essay. It did however alienate Austria and Italy and caused disruption with French Catholics and Liberals, a down-side to this event.
The Crimean War (1854-56) also undermined the Vienna Settlement as it established France as a power among Europe. By holding the Peace Treaty, France was able to show off its new façade and gave them the claim as victors. Because of the Paris Peace Conference (1856) there was an establishment of international co-operation as well.
In contrast a particularly unsuccessful area of foreign policy was Mexico between 1863-67, initially raising concern when Juarez (leader of Mexico) owed money to Britain, France and Austria. This became not only an opportunity but an excuse for the French to send troops when it became clear this money was not going to be given back. More importantly, the French Emperor wanted to establish European relations and build up areas of investment, therefore also hoping for support from Catholics and businessmen in France. By putting brother of the Hapsburg Emperor, Maximilian as ruler, France were promised paid military expenses and 270 million francs if the economy of Mexico was sorted out. Louis Napoleon decided it was an affordable risk to take advantage of the American Civil War, and used 30,000 troops to establish and maintain a monarchical rule in Mexico.
Despite this the imtervention was misjudged and Napoleon III lost much nationalist support in France, particularly when suffering an embarrassing defeat when America became involved. France had no choice but to withdraw when the USA supported Juarez, leaving behind Maximilian, who was executed shortly after (19th June 1867). By 1866 French attention was mostly turned to the Austro-Prussian war anyway.
The cost to France was not only a loss of pride and national humiliation but also 6,000 men and £45,000,000. Their excuse being that they couldn’t have predicted the passions of the Mexican people (Rouher), a further damaging comment from a member of the Legislative Body. It aroused hostility of both Catholics and Liberals in France whilst alienating Austria, and finally the fact that France had nothing to show for the incident was effectively the icing on the cake.
Another prime example of foreign policy that didn’t go accordingly was the Luxemburg Crisis in 1867 in which the Netherlands