"The Third Republic in France survived only because every alternative was discredited". Discuss with reference to 1870-1914.

The Third Republic underwent many problems in its time, but it survived for the principal reason that its opponents failed to fully take advantage of these situations. There are reasons which are important; and these are described in detail later. The Third Republic was set up, rather than any other kind of government, because that was what the people decided on, repeatedly in elections. If they had not disliked it then they would not have created it or continued to support it; so this public support was important.

The Third Republic was established in 1870, and it was still the same French system of government in 1914, 44 years later, even though it had lots of opposition. Unfortunately it was set up under unusual circumstances. Before France lost the war, a government was set up in Bordeaux. It later moved to Versailles and finally to Paris; but only after the Commune had been defeated by the army with a great deal of bloodshed. The government now set up a constitution under the lead of Thiers (a conservative Monarchist) and the National Assembly. Its first problem occurred immediately and threatened its survival: the Monarchists were split into two camps. Even though they had been given a huge majority when they were elected during the fighting, their delay enabled new elections to be carried out, this time after the war, when the people voted for more Republicans. Thiers now became convinced that a Republic was the only way the country could continue. Thus the Republic only survived its initial years because of the Monarchists' incompetence. But then they had another chance; they convinced enough Deputies to get rid of Thiers (who they felt had betrayed them) and ruled the country themselves, led by the duc de Broglie (P.M.) and the army leader Marshal MacMahon (President) because they had few political ambitions of their own. Previously Thiers had held both posts.

The title statement asks whether the opposition's weaknesses or mistakes were the only reason why it survived. Its opposition were mainly the far left, who included the socialists and the right, the Monarchists and the Church. In 1870 when the far left took over Paris to set up a Commune, and it failed and was ruthlessly crushed they were humiliated and weakened in the public's eyes. By the time the Monarchists had sorted their ideas out in 1877, their 'Republic of Dukes' had failed. They had set up a constitution favourable to them in 1875 (it took two years to sort this out!), but the Republicans had gained more support and they retook control when MacMahon's compromise was rejected. The Republicans were quite moderate and so they did not alarm the peasants when they took power. They installed their own President, Grevy, who also promised not to bring about radical reforms. Later Boulangism (see below) underlined the lack of an alternative regime which had more support (as in the Monarchists' situation), as this represented the temporary union of all the forces hostile to the Republic, yet they still failed to destroy the regime. This was because of their moderate reforms, and in the case of Boulangism a man who lacked the necessary leadership skills. This also helped consolidate the Republic's position and make republicanism more determined to keep the Republic. Even after the 'Panama Scandal' led many to believe the French government was corrupt, it still survived.

The reason why it survived in these two cases, was due to another reason; how the ministers were elected and the powers they had. It was startling difficult to make any decisions in the Chamber, whilst the President's powers had been severely limited. Between 1870 and 1914 there were over 60 different ministries and 500 ministers. This meant, if one ministry or minister was discredited, another would soon take its place, and any problems would be forgiven. Similarly the people who actually did the work in the government were rarely changed or affected by affairs, so the overall policies of the governments were quite consistent, and those running them were quite experienced.

Unfortunately this weakness of the constitution had other consequences: it led to Grevy resigning; his popular successor, Gambetta, ended up splitting the Chamber even more and having to resign as well. He was a strong man who could have been the leader the Chamber needed, but his failure indicated the entrance of Jules Ferry. He had to manage the Chamber whilst issuing the reforms that were called for. This created an important enemy of the Third Republic: the Church. Ferry made the state responsible for education, which reduced the Church's influence. They now joined the right to bring down his government. He changed the constitution which the Monarchists had established in their best interests (thus angering them) whilst, under pressure from more radical Republicans, issued further reforms of the press, trade unions and of the civil service. These increased his support by the Republicans which then meant that his position, and that of the Third Republic became stronger.

After defeat by Prussia, the Third Republic was seen as being weak, not only at home, but abroad. After attempting to solve the domestic problems as described above, Ferry tried to increase France's international standing through colonialism, under the pretext that he was just doing it to increase France's industrialisation and economy as other European powers were doing. This worked and France became a great power again, after the humiliating defeat by Prussia. This prestige helped the Third Republic to survive.

But it suffered a huge embarrassment when General Boulanger, a hugely popular anti-German army General secured enough support from all sides of the political spectrum to stage a bloodless coup. But he did not do this, and the government went on the offensive and recovered, thus surviving. The reason was Boulanger's personality: he was just a hero, not a politician. So in a way the Republic survived through a slice of luck; but then a politician would not have managed to become a hero, so maybe there was no danger. Either way the Third Republic's survival strengthened its resolve and the government handled the situation well when it recovered.

The best example of the opposition failing to take advantage of a promising situation to take power occurred during the Panama Scandal. It involved a company building a Canal in Central America which went bust, mainly through poor leadership which misjudged almost everything. It ended up with the government being attacked because people claimed the reason why the project collapsed was because a lot of shareholders' money had been wasted on bribing politicians, or it had been stolen by the financiers who were corrupt. One of these financiers was Jewish and he gave the anti-Semites a chance to attack him. This promoted a lot of racism amongst other consequences. These were that the reputations of those who were bribed (even though they were eventually cleared) were tarnished, although many were still re-elected in the following elections; meanwhile the working-class saw the Republic as being corrupt and voted in many socialists. But none of these had a really bad influence on the Republic and most people forgot about it.

Another reason why it survived is that in times of crisis, especially the Dreyfus Affair, the Republic survived. This involved a long, drawn out fiasco:

The Minister of War was under attack and needed a success to fend off his political allies. Rumours had been circulating about a 'leak' in the government and some slim evidence was discovered in Germany which incriminated someone named Dreyfus. What confirmed it was him in the Major's mind was his poor personality and his race- Jewish. He was convicted and sent away. The government was congratulated on its handling of the 'spy'. However Dreyfus' family thought some evidence had been kept hidden and pressurised the army authorities to reveal it. They refused. Meanwhile a Major in the same section as Dreyfus found that the actual spy; a Major Esterhazy, was still sending articles to the Germans. His superiors thought it better to ignore the evidence and thus not arouse more suspicion. Major Henry then forged a letter (thefaux Henry) to prove the army was right, because he did not want the army to ever be dishonoured. Meanwhile he had to forge more articles to discredit the other Major and his evidence, whilst Esterhazy would lie to stay safe. The papers thought that something was amiss, so Henry then ensures the Major was dismissed and Esterhazy was proved innocent. But not everyone believed him. The importance of the affair and its affects, so far, on the Republic, came when an article appeared on the front of a national paper entitled J'accuse which:

"put into words the misgivings which had been circulating in the previous months and generalised the issue from the guilt or innocence of one man to questions of the rights of the individual against the all-powerful state and of whether the army was above the law or was subject to it. It struck the educated Frenchmen who also worried that the State, especially its military, was becoming too powerful at the expense of individual freedoms." [K. Randell]. The issue became of national concern. The government made it worse when they tried Zola, giving him more publicity. The Affair split the country into those for and against Dreyfus' innocence. Anti-Semites, nationalists, militarists, disciplinists and Catholics faced up to Republicans, socialists, pacifists and anti-clericals. The army began losing their case two years later (Henry's note was shown to be fake and he committed suicide) and extremists badly attempted riots, demonstrations and a coup. However a new President: Waldeck-Rousseau acted decisively (in 1899) and, while promising to protect the army, declared a re-trial. He was only just pronounced guilty this time (with a reduced sentence) and pardoned; everyone else arrested because of the affair was pardoned too. However Dreyfus's family continued protesting and eventually (in 1906) he was declared innocent:

"Good sense had prevailed among the leading politicians and generals and the regime was safe" [K. Randell]. Although I stated earlier that the Republic survived; disagreements arise over this issue whether it ever recovered from this Affair. The Affair highlighted the splits between those for and against the Republic, but for those supporters of the regime, these years re-affirmed their devotion to the regime, and they pushed ahead with their republican policies; but they were fortunate; if their opposition actually knew what alternative regime they wanted, they could have easily implanted it and overthrown the present one, but they did not. The Affair led to the 'Anti-Dreyfusards' trying to get more support for the army, to stop it ever happening again, and they were furious that people supported a Jew over their country. The ensuing anti-semitism was massive, and the results for society were long-lasting. As Cobban said:

"The struggle for justice in the Dreyfus Affair had united as perhaps nothing else could have done, the Republican forces in France", which undoubtably led to the Third Republic's survival.

The issue with the church was another one which almost split the Republic when Ferry introduced his religious reforms, but afterwards a lapse in anti-clerical action (many radical Republicans wanted to reduce the Church's power) encouraged a ralliement by the Pope, who tried to rally Catholics to the regime. However this was largely a failure, and the Dreyfus Affair worsened the situation. In 1902, a new Premier, Emile Combes, began attacking the Church reducing its efforts at providing education further (although the beginning of the war arrested his plan short of completion) and in 1905 issued a Separation Law, cutting the Church's funds. But this did less harm than predicted, and the administration of the acts was poor. All it did was make the left lose one of their principal points of unison (they ran out of political anti-clerical measures); and more importantly it made most Catholics a fierce enemy of the Republic.

After the left's destruction in 1871, they regained support in the Chamber of Deputies alarmingly quickly for the regime's supporters. The Left split in two, which weakened it just when Boulanger needed their joint support; but then supported revolutionary syndicalism from 1905 -1908. Fortunately their leaders could not organise strikes effectively enough to launch a serious challenge on the Republic. The Government made a resolute stand behind the new Prime Minister, Clemenceau, and stood strong which helped control the destruction the strikes caused. As usual one of the reasons why the Socialists achieved so little in Parliament was because they had a policy of 'all or nothing'. Thus the government ensured they got nothing. If the socialists had tried other methods they may have achieved more, and changed the Republic to suit them.

When the government was under attack, and the army severely embarrassed, all the different parties banded together to defend it against its attackers. When the government feared that the army and the church were becoming too powerful they took big steps to reduce this, which were effective in the short term, and consolidated the Third Republic, by protecting it from any coup d'etats. Even when the scandal of the Dreyfus Affair was revealed, the Republicans replied by becoming more resistive to outside attacks on it. They then installed strong leaders to implement their policies, which they did successfully.

This was largely due to the economical advance of France. Since the Commune incident and the defeat by Prussia, France had to pay a fine, lost its principal areas of raw materials, and Paris lost its commercial value (a lot of it was destroyed by 1871). But the recovery led to France ending the 1870-1914 period in a 'comfortable' way. By no means excellently advanced because the various scandals of late 1880s and 1890s hampered this. Protectionism was introduced to help improve France's infrastructure and industries; whilst the French standard of living improved and the long-lasting agricultural depression finished.

Another reason supports this last point. The advancement of colonialism gave many more trade markets and boosted French morale which still angry after losing Alsace and Lorraine. The French worried that they may be beaten again by the new Germany and so the Prime Ministers were pressurised to do something to prevent this. By 1900, the various Prime-Ministers, such as Clemenceau, began initiating friendships with Italy, Britain and Russia leading to a good international situation for France by 1914 when the first World War broke out .

Even though Boulanger had appealed to many Frenchmen when he promised revenge on Germany, the realistic statesmen knew it was wise not to antagonise them, because they were far superior militarily. Unfortunately the French had little foreign policy success up to 1900. Germany was successful in forcing France to look abroad for expansion which brought conflicts with Britain and Italy; the French preferred this to annoying Germany. However the Franco-Russian alliance of 1894 grew in strength as they both had a natural fear of Germany. But it did not enter the minds of the French to form a partnership with anyone against Germany. But after the 1898 Fashoda Crisis with Britain the French statesmen changed their mind. They saw the sense that they needed British support against Germany even if they lost some colonial disputes with them. At the same time the British came to the same conclusion; especially when the Naval race began, and from 1904 they began making closer relations. It was at this time, when the Dreyfus Affair still lingered in France, that the Third Republic became stronger because of Germany. The French foreign ministry became bolder (because of their two friendships) and by standing up to the Germans, they gained prestige. Their diplomatic victories against Germany in Morocco confirmed this. By the time they were invaded again in 1914, they were well prepared: they had allies, a sound economy, a reorganised military and confidence (since the Dreyfus Affair was now sorted out). Thus the Third Republic survived not just because it responded well to domestic challenges, but also because it managed well abroad (although the 1880s were not very successful).

All the events from 1870-1914 show that the end of the 19th Century was an important turning point in French history and France began to gain, rather than lose, international respect. But the main reason why it had survived so much up until then was as the title statement suggests principally due to the Republic's enemies failing to take advantage of various situations, whilst its enemies abroad were soundly fended off. And after each crisis the Republic's resolve was strengthened. But all the other reasons are influential too in 'France's success': the slow recovery of its industry, economy and the respect of the army (which is very important to French people) and through colonialism. Also the early changes to the set-up of the Third Republic, which after the Monarchists lost their good position, would not let them retrieve it. The advance of socialism also provided another enemy for all the other parties to join up against to protect their Republic, because this idea was universal throughout the parties. I believe that an important factor in the Third Republic's survival was the spirit of the French people who so fiercely defended it, even when it came under attack. The best example of this was the Dreyfus Affair which, make no mistake about it, did have far reaching consequences and could easily have brought about another low pint in French history but it did not.