Editing Crimean War (section)

==Eastern question==
{{see also|Eastern question}}
[[File:Southeast Europe 1812 map en.PNG|thumb|Southeastern Europe after the [[Treaty of Bucharest (1812)]]]]
As the Ottoman Empire [[decline and modernization of the Ottoman Empire|steadily weakened]] during the 19th century, the Russian Empire stood poised to take advantage by expanding southward. In the 1850s, the British and the French Empires were allied with the Ottoman Empire and were determined to prevent that from happening.<ref>Matthew Smith Anderson, ''The Eastern Question, 1774–1923: A Study in International Relations''. p. 37.</ref> The historian [[A. J. P. Taylor]] argued that the war had resulted not from aggression, but from the interacting fears of the major players:
{{blockquote|In some sense the Crimean War was predestined and had deep-seated causes. Neither Nicholas I nor Napoleon III nor the British government could retreat from the conflict for prestige once it was launched. Nicholas needed a subservient Turkey for the sake of Russian security; Napoleon needed success for the sake of his domestic position; the British government needed an independent Turkey for the security of the Eastern Mediterranean... Mutual fear, not mutual aggression, caused the Crimean War.{{sfn|Taylor|1954|pp=60–61}}}}

===Weakening of the Ottoman Empire: 1820–1840s===
In the early 1800s, the Ottoman Empire suffered a number of existential challenges. The [[Serbian Revolution]] in 1804 resulted in the autonomy of the first [[Balkan]] Christian nation under the empire. The [[Greek War of Independence]], which began in early 1821, provided further evidence of the empire's internal and military weakness, and the commission of atrocities by Ottoman military forces (see [[Chios massacre]]) further undermined the empire. The disbandment of the centuries-old [[Janissary]] corps by Sultan [[Mahmud II]] on 15 June 1826 ([[Auspicious Incident]]) helped the empire in the longer term but deprived it of its existing standing army in the short term.{{clarify|date=February 2017}} In 1827, the Anglo-Franco-Russian fleet destroyed almost all of the Ottoman naval forces at the [[Battle of Navarino]]. In 1830, [[Kingdom of Greece|Greece]] became independent after ten years of war and the [[Russo-Turkish War (1828–29)]]. The [[Treaty of Adrianople (1829)]] granted Russian and Western European commercial ships free passage through the [[Dardanelles|Black Sea straits]]. Also, the Danubian Principalities ([[Moldavia]] and [[Wallachia]]) became territories under Russian protection.

France took the opportunity to [[French conquest of Algeria|occupy Algeria]], which had been under Ottoman rule, in 1830. In 1831, [[Muhammad Ali of Egypt]], the most powerful [[vassal]] of the Ottoman Empire, declared independence. Ottoman forces were [[Egyptian–Ottoman War (1831–1833)|defeated in a number of battles]], which forced Mahmud II to seek Russian military aid. A Russian army of 10,000 landed on the shores of the [[Bosphorus]] in 1833 and helped prevent the Egyptians from capturing [[Constantinople]].

[[File:Navarino.jpg|thumb|left|The naval [[Battle of Navarino]] (1827), as depicted by [[Ambroise Louis Garneray]].]]

"The reasons for the Tsar's disquietude are not obscure. Not Turkey alone was threatened by the advance of [[Ibrahim Pasha of Egypt|Ibrahim]]. The rights secured to Russia by a succession of treaties were also directly jeopardized. The substitution of a virile Albanian dynasty at Constantinople in place of the effete [[Ottoman dynasty|Osmanlis]] was the last thing desired by the Power which wished, naturally enough, to command the gate into the Mediterranean".{{sfn|Marriott|1917|p=222}} Russia was satisfied with the weak government in Constantinople (Istanbul).

As a result, the [[Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi]] was signed and greatly benefited Russia. It provided for a military alliance between the Russian and the Ottoman Empires if one of them was attacked, and a secret additional clause allowed the Ottomans to opt out of sending troops but to close the Straits to foreign warships if Russia were under threat. [[Egypt Eyalet|Egypt]] remained nominally under Ottoman sovereignty but was ''de facto'' independent.{{citation needed|date=August 2020}}

In 1838 in a situation similar to that of 1831, Muhammad Ali of Egypt was not happy about his lack of control and power in [[Ottoman Syria|Syria]], and he [[Egyptian–Ottoman War (1839–1841)|resumed military action]]. The Ottomans lost to the Egyptians at the [[Battle of Nezib]] on 24 June 1839 but were saved by Britain, [[Austrian Empire|Austria]], [[Prussia]] and Russia, who signed a [[Convention of London (1840)|convention in London]] on 15 July 1840 that granted Muhammad Ali and his descendants the right to inherit power in Egypt in exchange for the removal of Egyptian forces from Syria and [[Lebanon]]. Moreover, Muhammad Ali had to admit a formal dependence on the Ottoman sultan. After Muhammad Ali refused to obey the requirements of the convention, the allied Anglo-Austrian fleet blockaded the [[Nile Delta]], bombarded [[Beirut]] and [[Battle of Acre (1840)|captured Acre]]. Muhammad Ali then accepted the convention's conditions.
[[File:Interview with Mehemet Ali in his Palace at Alexandria, by David Roberts and Louis Hague.jpg|thumb|[[Muhammad Ali of Egypt]] deposed the Ottoman governor and seized control of Egypt for himself]]
On 13 July 1841, after the expiry of the Treaty of Hünkâr İskelesi, the [[London Straits Convention]] was signed under pressure from the European countries. The new treaty deprived Russia of its right to block warships from passing into the Black Sea in case of war. Thus, the way to the Black Sea was open for British and French warships during a possible Russo-Ottoman conflict.

Russian historians tend to view that history as evidence that Russia lacked aggressive plans. The Russian historian V. N. Vinogradov writes: "The signing of the documents was the result of deliberate decisions: instead of bilateral (none of the great powers recognized this Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi), the new Treaty of London was obligatory for all, it closed the Bosphorus and Dardanelles. In the absence of expansion plans, this was a sound decision".<ref name="Vinogradov">{{Cite journal |last=V. N. Vinogradov |year=2006 |title=Lord Palmerston in European diplomacy |journal={{Interlanguage link|New and Recent History|ru|Новая и новейшая история}} |language=ru |issue=5 |pages=182–209}}</ref>{{verify source|date=August 2020}}

In 1838, Britain lost interest in crushing the Ottoman Empire. On the contrary, after the conclusion of the trade treaty of 1838 (see [[Treaty of Balta Liman]]), Britain received unlimited access to the markets of the Ottoman Empire. "Britain imposed on the Porte a Tariff Convention which in effect transformed the Ottoman Empire into a virtual free-trade zone.{{sfn|Figes|2011|p=32}} 
Therefore its trade interests pushed it to protect the integrity of the Ottoman Empire. In the long term, the Ottoman Empire lost the opportunity to modernize and industrialize, but in the short term, it gained the opportunity to receive the support of European powers (primarily Britain) in opposing the desire of the conquered peoples for self-determination and Russia, which sought to crush its influence in the [[Balkans]] and Asia.

Publicly, European politicians made broad promises to the Ottomans. Lord [[Henry John Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston|Palmerston]], the British [[Foreign Secretary (United Kingdom)|Foreign Secretary]], said in 1839: "All that we hear about the decay of the Turkish Empire, and its being a dead body or a sapless trunk, and so forth, is pure and unadulterated nonsense. Given 10 years of peace under European protection, coupled with internal reform, there seemed to him no reason why it should not become again a respectable Power".{{sfn|Marriott|1917|p=214}}

[[Orlando Figes]] has claimed that "The motives of the British in promoting liberal reforms were not just to secure the independence of the Ottoman Empire against Russia. They were also to promote the influence of Britain in Turkey", also: "to promote British free-trade interests (which may have sounded splendid but was arguably damaging to the Ottoman Empire)".{{sfn|Figes|2011|p=58}}

"British exports to the Ottoman Empire, including Egypt and the Danubian principalities, increased nearly threefold from 1840 to 1851 (...) Thus it was very important, from the financial point of view, for Britain to prevent the Ottoman Empire from falling into other hands."{{sfn|Badem|2010|p=59}}

"From this moment (1838) the export of British manufactured goods to Turkey rose steeply. There was an elevenfold increase by 1850".{{sfn|Figes|2011|p=32}}

Assistance from Western European powers or Russia had twice saved the Ottoman Empire from destruction, but the Ottomans also lost their independence in foreign policy. Britain and France desired more than any other states to preserve the integrity of the Ottoman Empire because they did not want to see Russia gaining access to the [[Mediterranean Sea]]. Austria had the same fears.

===Russian expansionism===
[[File:Siege of Varna 1828.jpg|thumb|Russian [[Siege of Varna (1828)|siege of Varna]] in [[Ottoman Bulgaria|Ottoman-ruled Bulgaria]], July–September 1828]]
Russia, as a member of the [[Holy Alliance]], had operated as the "police of Europe" to maintain the [[balance of power (international relations)|balance of power]] that had been established in the [[Congress of Vienna]] in 1815. Russia had assisted Austria's efforts in suppressing the [[Hungarian Revolution of 1848]], and expected a free hand in settling its problems with the Ottoman Empire, the "[[sick man of Europe]]". However, Britain could not tolerate Russian dominance of Ottoman affairs, which would challenge its domination of the eastern Mediterranean.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Seton-Watson|first=Hugh|author-link=Hugh Seton-Watson|title=The Russian Empire 1801–1917|publisher=Clarendon Press|year=1988|isbn=978-0-19-822152-4|location=Oxford|pages=280–319}}</ref>

Starting with [[Peter the Great]] in the early 1700s, after centuries of Ottoman [[Ottoman wars in Europe|northward expansion]] and [[Crimean–Nogai slave raids in Eastern Europe|Crimean-Nogai raids]], Russia began a [[Russo-Turkish War (1686–1700)|southwards expansion]] across the sparsely-populated "[[Wild Fields]]" toward the warm water ports of the Black Sea, which does not freeze over, unlike the handful of ports controlled by Russia in the north. The goal was to promote year-round trade and a year-round navy.{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=11}} Pursuit of that goal brought the emerging Russian state into conflict with the [[Ukrainian Cossacks]] and then the [[Crimean Tatars|Tatars]] of the [[Crimean Khanate]]<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lincoln |first=W. Bruce |url=https://archive.org/details/romanovsautocr00linc/page/114 |title=The Romanovs |publisher=Dial Press |year=1981 |isbn=978-0-385-27187-5 |location=New York |pages=[https://archive.org/details/romanovsautocr00linc/page/114 114–116]}}</ref> and [[Circassians]].<ref name="James Stanislaus Bell">{{Cite web |last=Bell |first=James Stanislaus |date=1840 |title=Journal of a residence in Circassia during the years 1837, 1838, and 1839 |url=https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator:%22Bell,%20James%20Stanislaus%22 |access-date=25 January 2015 |via=archive.org |publisher=Edward Moxon |location=London |oclc=879553602}}</ref>

"The plan to develop Russia as a southern power had begun in earnest in 1776, when [[Catherine the Great|Catherine]] placed [[Grigory Potemkin|Potemkin]] in charge of New Russia ([[Novorossiya]]), the sparsely populated territories newly conquered from the Ottomans on the Black Sea's northern coastline, and ordered him to colonize the area".{{sfn|Figes|2011|p=23}} 
When Russia conquered those groups and gained possession of their territories, the Ottoman Empire lost its buffer zone against Russian expansion, and both empires came into direct conflict. The conflict with the Ottoman Empire also presented a religious issue of importance, as Russia saw itself as the protector of history of the Eastern Orthodox Church under the [[Christianity in the Ottoman Empire|Ottoman Orthodox Christians]], who were [[Dhimmi|legally treated as second-class citizens]].{{sfn|Figes|2010|loc=ch. 1}} The [[Ottoman Reform Edict of 1856]], promulgated after the war, largely reversed much of the second-class status, most notably the [[jizya|tax that only non-Muslims paid]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lapidus, Ira M. (Ira Marvin) |title=A history of Islamic societies |date=2002 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=0-521-77056-4 |edition=2nd |location=Cambridge |oclc=50227716}}</ref>

Britain's immediate fear was Russia's expansion at the expense of the Ottoman Empire. The British desired to preserve Ottoman integrity and were concerned that Russia might make advances toward [[British India]] or move toward [[Scandinavia]] or [[Western Europe]]. A distraction (in the form of the Ottoman Empire) on the Russian southwest flank would mitigate that threat. The [[Royal Navy]] also wanted to forestall the threat of a powerful [[Imperial Russian Navy]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Strachan |first=Hew |date=June 1978 |title=Soldiers, Strategy and Sebastopol |journal=The Historical Journal |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=303–325 |doi=10.1017/s0018246x00000558 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |jstor=2638262|s2cid=154085359 | issn=0018-246X }}</ref>{{page range too broad|date=January 2022}} Taylor stated the British perspective:
{{blockquote|The Crimean war was fought for the sake of Europe rather than for the Eastern question; it was fought against Russia, not in favour of Turkey.... The British fought Russia out of resentment and supposed that her defeat would strengthen the European Balance of Power.{{sfn|Taylor|1954|p=61}} }}

[[File:Kars 1828.jpg|thumb|Russian siege of [[Kars]], [[Russo-Turkish War (1828–29)|Russo-Turkish War]] of 1828–1829]]
Because of "British commercial and strategic interests in the Middle East and India",<ref name="RCowley">{{Cite book|editor-last1=Cowley|editor-first1=Robert|editor1-link=Robert Cowley|title=The Reader's Companion to Military History|editor-first2=Geoffrey|editor-last2=Parker|editor2-link=Geoffrey Parker (historian)|date=2001 |publisher=Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Trade & Reference Publishers |isbn=978-0618127429 |edition=1st  |location=Boston}}</ref> the British joined the French, "cement[ing] an alliance with Britain and... reassert[ing] its military power".<ref name="RCowley" /> Among those who supported the British strategy were [[Karl Marx]] and [[Friedrich Engels]].<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Kissin |first=S. F. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-gzMDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT29 |title=War and the Marxists: Socialist Theory and Practice in Capitalist Wars, 1848–1918 |year=2020 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-000-00980-4}}</ref> In his articles for the ''[[New-York Tribune]]'' around 1853, Marx saw the Crimean War as a conflict between the democratic ideals of the west that started with the "great movement of 1789" against "Russia and Absolutism". He described the Ottoman Empire as a buffer against a pattern of expansionism by the Tsar.<ref>{{Cite book|first1=Karl|last1=Marx|author1-link=Karl Marx|first2=Frederick|last2=Engels|author2-link=Frederick Engels|title= The Russian Menace to Europe |editor-first1=Paul |editor-last1=Blackstock |editor-first2=Bert |editor-last2=Hoselitz |publisher=George Allen and Unwin |location=London |date=1953 |pages=121–202 |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/subject/russia/crimean-war.htm|access-date=2021-06-16|via=www.marxists.org |quote=Originally published in ''[[New-York Tribune|New York Tribune]]'', 7 April 1853}}</ref> Marx and Engels also accused Lord Palmerston of playing along with the interests of Russia and being unserious in preparing for the conflict.<ref>Franz Mering. "Karl Marx. His life story". Moscow. Gospolitizdat. 1957. p. 264 (in Russian)</ref><ref name=":02">{{Cite book |last=Wheen |first=Francis |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RY85Wf7jeEMC&pg=PA211 |title=Karl Marx: A Life |date=2000 |publisher=W. W. Norton|isbn=978-0-393-04923-7 |page=211 |language=en}}</ref><ref name=":1" /> Marx believed Palmerston to be bribed by Russia, and shared this belief with [[David Urquhart]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Story of the Life of Lord Palmerston by Karl Marx |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1853/palmerston/ch06.htm |access-date=2022-05-21 |website=www.marxists.org}}</ref><ref name=":02" /> Urquhart, for his part, was a British politician who was a major advocate for the Ottoman Empire.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Karl Marx: A Life|quote=Chapter 7 |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/bio/marx/wheen/ch07.htm |access-date=2022-05-21 |website=www.marxists.org}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=When the West wanted Islam to curb Christian extremism|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/10/15/when-the-west-wanted-islam-to-curb-christian-extremism/ |access-date=2022-05-21}}</ref>

[[Mikhail Pogodin]], a professor of history at [[Moscow State University|Moscow University]], gave Nicholas I a summary of Russia's policy towards the Slavs in the war. Nicholas' answer was filled with grievances against the West. Nicholas shared Pogodin's sense that Russia's role as the protector of [[Christianity in the Ottoman Empire|Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire]] was not understood and that Russia was unfairly treated by the West. Nicholas especially approved of the following passage:{{sfn|Figes|2011|page=134}}

{{blockquote|[[French conquest of Algeria|France takes Algeria from Turkey]], and almost every year [[Company rule in India|England annexes another Indian principality]]: none of this disturbs the balance of power; but when Russia occupies [[Moldavia]] and [[Wallachia]], albeit only temporarily, that disturbs the balance of power. [[Roman Republic (19th century)#French siege|France occupies Rome]] and stays there several years during peacetime: that is nothing; but Russia only thinks of occupying Constantinople, and the peace of Europe is threatened. [[First Opium War|The English declare war on the Chinese]], who have, it seems, offended them: no one has the right to intervene; but Russia is obliged to ask Europe for permission if it quarrels with its neighbour. England threatens [[Kingdom of Greece|Greece]] to support the [[Don Pacifico affair|false claims]] of a miserable Jew and burns its fleet: that is a lawful action; but Russia demands a treaty to protect millions of Christians, and that is deemed to strengthen its position in the East at the expense of the balance of power. We can expect nothing from the West but blind hatred and malice.... (''comment in the margin by Nicholas I'': 'This is the whole point').|Mikhail Pogodin's memorandum to Nicholas I, 1853<ref name="slate">{{Cite news |date=21 March 2014 |title=The Long History of Russian Whataboutism |work=Slate |url=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/03/russia-and-western-double-standards-the-long-history-of-russian-complaints-about-unfair-treatment.html}}</ref>}}

Russia was militarily weak, technologically backward and administratively incompetent. Despite its grand ambitions toward the south, it had not built its railway network in that direction, and its communications were poor. Its bureaucracy was riddled with graft, corruption and inefficiency and was unprepared for war. Its navy was weak and technologically backward. Its army, although very large, suffered from colonels who pocketed their men's pay, from poor morale, and from a technological deficit relative to Britain and France. By the war's end, the profound weaknesses of the Russian armed forces had become readily apparent, and the Russian leadership was determined to reform it.<ref>Barbara Jelavich, ''St. Petersburg and Moscow: Tsarist and Soviet Foreign Policy, 1814–1974'' (1974) p. 119</ref><ref>William C. Fuller, ''Strategy and Power in Russia 1600–1914'' (1998) pp. 252–259</ref>

However, no matter how great the problems of Russia were, Russia believed those of the Ottomans were greater. "In a one-to-one fight Nikolai (Tsar) had no doubt of beating the Ottoman armies and navy".{{sfn|Badem|2010|p=62}} Russian foreign policy failed to understand the importance of Britain's trade interests and did not understand the changes in the situation after the conclusion of the Anglo-Ottoman Treaty in 1838 (see [[Treaty of Balta Liman]]). Russia attempted to "honestly" negotiate with the United Kingdom on the partition of the Ottoman Empire and made concessions in order to eliminate all objections from the United Kingdom.

"The Tsar Nicholas had always, as we have seen, been anxious to maintain a cordial understanding with England in regard to the Eastern Question, and early in the spring of 1853 he had a series of interviews with Sir [[George Hamilton Seymour]], then [[British Ambassador to Russia|British ambassador]] at St. Petersburg."{{sfn|Marriott|1917|p=229}} Emperor Nicholas I assured that he did not intend to seize Constantinople and territories in the Balkans, he himself offered Britain to take over Egypt and Crete.{{sfn|Marriott|1917|p=230}} Concessions at the conclusion of the [[London Straits Convention]] were made earlier in 1841. "By signing the convention, the Russians had given up their privileged position in the Ottoman Empire and their control of the Straits, all in the hope of improving relations with Britain and isolating France".{{sfn|Figes|2011|p=68}} But Britain after 1838 was interested in preserving the integrity of the Ottoman Empire and rejected all Russian proposals. "The fall of the Ottoman Empire was not, however, a requirement of British policy in the East. A weak Ottoman state best suited British interests".{{sfn|Badem|2010|p=68}}

===Immediate causes of war===
[[File:Napoleon3.PNG|thumb|upright|French Emperor [[Napoleon III]]]]

French Emperor [[Napoleon III]]'s ambition to restore France's grandeur<ref>{{Cite book |title=Revolutionary situations in Europe, 1917–1922 : Germany, Italy, Austria-Hungary = Situations revolutionnaires en Europe, 1917–1922 : Allemagne, Italie, Autriche-Hongrie : proceedings &#91;of the&#93; 2nd International Colloquium &#91;held&#93; March 25, 26, 27, 1976 |publisher=Interuniversity Centre for European Studies |year=1977 |editor-last=Bertrand |editor-first=Charles L. |location=Montreal |pages=201–233 |oclc=21705514}}</ref> initiated the immediate chain of events that led to France and Britain declaring war on Russia on 27 and 28 March 1854, respectively. He pursued [[Catholic]] support by asserting France's "sovereign authority" over the Christian population of [[Palestine (region)|Palestine]],{{sfn|Royle|2000|p=19}} to the detriment of Russia{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=103}} (the sponsor of [[Eastern Christianity|Eastern Orthodoxy]]). To achieve that, he in May 1851 appointed [[Charles, marquis de La Valette]], a zealous leading member of the Catholic clericalists, as his ambassador to the [[Sublime Porte]] of the Ottoman Empire.{{sfn|Figes|2010|pp=7–9}}

Russia disputed that attempted change in authority. Referring to two previous treaties (one from 1757 and the [[Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca]] from 1774), the Ottomans reversed their earlier decision, renounced the French treaty and declared that Russia was the protector of the [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Orthodox Christians]] in the Ottoman Empire.

Napoleon III responded with a show of force by sending the [[ship of the line]] ''[[French ship Charlemagne (1851)|Charlemagne]]'' to the Black Sea and thereby violated the London Straits Convention.{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=104}}{{sfn|Royle|2000|p=19}} The [[gunboat diplomacy]] show of force, together with money{{citation needed|date=October 2018}}, induced Ottoman Sultan [[Abdülmecid I]] to accept a new treaty confirming France and the Catholic Church's supreme authority over Christian holy places, including the [[Church of the Nativity]], which had been held by the [[Greek Orthodox Church of Jerusalem|Greek Orthodox Church]].{{sfn|Royle|2000|p=20}}

Tsar [[Nicholas I of Russia|Nicholas I]] then deployed his 4th and 5th Army Corps along the River [[Danube]] in Wallachia, as a direct threat to the Ottoman lands south of the river. He had Foreign Minister Count [[Karl Nesselrode]] undertake talks with the Ottomans. Nesselrode confided to Seymour:

{{blockquote|''[The dispute over the holy places]'' had assumed a new character—that the acts of injustice towards the Greek church which it had been desired to prevent had been perpetrated and consequently that now the object must be to find a remedy for these wrongs. The success of French negotiations at Constantinople was to be ascribed solely to intrigue and violence—violence which had been supposed to be the [[ultima ratio]] of kings, being, it had been seen, the means which the present ruler of France was in the habit of employing in the first instance.{{sfn|Royle|2000|p=21}} }}
[[File:Count Nesselrode.jpg|thumb|upright|For forty years (1816–56) [[Karl Nesselrode]] as foreign minister guided Russian policy]]
The agreement referred to by the French was in 1740.{{sfn|Royle|2000|p=18}} At present most historians (except for the new Russian Orthodox nationalists) accept that the question of the holy places was no more than a pretext for the Crimean War.{{sfn|Badem|2010|p=65}} As conflict emerged over the issue of the holy places, Nicholas I and Nesselrode began a diplomatic offensive, which they hoped would prevent either British or French interference in any conflict between Russia and the Ottomans and prevent both from forming an anti-Russian alliance.

Nicholas began courting Britain by means of conversations with Seymour in January and February 1853.{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=105}} Nicholas insisted that he no longer wished to expand the Russian Empire{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=105}} but that he had an obligation to the Christian communities in the Ottoman Empire.{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=105}}
{{Anchor|Sened}}
He next dispatched a highly-abrasive diplomat, [[Alexander Sergeyevich Menshikov|Prince Menshikov]], on a special mission to the Ottoman Sublime Porte in February 1853. By previous treaties, the sultan had committed "to protect the (Eastern Orthodox) Christian religion and its churches". Menshikov demanded a Russian protectorate over all 12&nbsp;million Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire with control of the Orthodox Church's hierarchy. A compromise was reached regarding Orthodox access to the Holy Land, but the Sultan, strongly supported by the British ambassador, [[Stratford Canning, 1st Viscount Stratford de Redcliffe]], rejected the most sweeping demands.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Jelavich |first=Barbara |title=Russia's Balkan Entanglements, 1806–1914 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-521-52250-2 |pages=118–122 |author-link=Barbara Jelavich}}</ref>

Russian historian Vinogradov V.N. point out that Menshikov's demands did not go beyond the limits of previous treaties. "The agreement was reached on the administration of church rites of both clergy in respected temples and, secondly, that the tsar rejected the idea of expanding his right of patronage and, in fact, insisted on confirming the terms of the Kucuk-Kaynardzhiy treaty of 1774, which allowed giving advice to the Sultan, but did not oblige them to accept".<ref name="Vinogradov"/>

"By the early 1850s Stratford Canning had become far more than an ambassador or adviser to the Porte. The 'Great Elchi', or Great Ambassador, as he was known in Constantinople, had a direct influence on the policies of the Turkish government. (...) His presence was a source of deep resentment among the Sultan's ministers, who lived in terror of a personal visit from the dictatorial ambassador".{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=64}}

Nicholas fumed at "the infernal dictatorship of this Redcliffe" whose name and political ascendancy at the Porte personified for him the whole Eastern Question,<ref>Lord Kinross The Ottoman Centuries</ref> The British and the French sent in naval task forces to support the Ottomans, as Russia had prepared to seize the [[Danubian Principalities]].{{sfn|Figes|2010|pp=111–115}}

All the calculations of the Russian emperor turned out to be erroneous. Britain refused his proposals, it was not possible to prevent the Anglo-French rapprochement, Austria opposed his policy, the Ottoman Empire showed intransigence. On the contrary, a favourable situation was developing for Britain. Britain had great naval power and a powerful economy, but did not have a strong land army. The alliance with France, which had a strong land army, made it possible to strike at Russia. "With the help of French infantry, it was possible to overturn Russia's positions with one blow"<ref>V. N. Vinogradov (2006). "Lord Palmerston in European diplomacy". New and Recent History [ru] (in Russian) (5): 182–209.</ref>

===First hostilities===
[[File:The Allied Fleets anchored in the Bosphorus, 1853.jpg|thumb|British warships anchored in the [[Bosporus|Bosphorus]], late 1853; the prelude to the Crimean War. Painted by [[Amedeo Preziosi]].]]
In February 1853, the British government of Prime Minister [[George Hamilton-Gordon, 4th Earl of Aberdeen|Lord Aberdeen]] reappointed Lord Stratford as British ambassador to the Ottoman Empire.{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=110}} Having resigned the ambassadorship in January, he had been replaced by [[Hugh Rose, 1st Baron Strathnairn|Colonel Rose]] as ''[[chargé d'affaires]]''. Lord Stratford then turned around, sailed back to Constantinople, arriving there on 5 April 1853 and convinced the Sultan there to reject the Russian treaty proposal as compromising Ottoman independence. The [[Leader of the Opposition (United Kingdom)|Leader of the Opposition]] in the British [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]], [[Benjamin Disraeli]], blamed Aberdeen's and Stratford's actions for making war inevitable, which started the process that would force the [[Aberdeen ministry|Aberdeen government]] to resign in January 1855 over the war.

Shortly after the Tsar had learned of the failure of Menshikov's diplomacy toward the end of June 1853, he sent armies under the commands of Field Marshal [[Ivan Paskevich]] and General [[Mikhail Dmitrievich Gorchakov|Mikhail Gorchakov]] across the River [[Prut]] into the Ottoman-controlled [[Danubian Principalities]] of Moldavia and Wallachia. Fewer than half of the 80,000 Russian soldiers who crossed the Prut in 1853 survived. By far, nearly all of the deaths would result from sickness, rather than action,{{sfn|Figes|2010|pp=118–119}} since the Russian Army still suffered from medical services that ranged from bad to none.

Russia had obtained recognition from the Ottoman Empire of the Tsar's role as special guardian of the Orthodox Christians in Moldavia and Wallachia. Russia now used the Sultan's failure to resolve the issue of the protection of the Christian sites in the Holy Land as a pretext for Russian occupation of those Danubian provinces. Nicholas believed that the European powers, especially Austria, would not object strongly to the annexation of a few neighbouring Ottoman provinces, especially since Russia had assisted Austria's efforts in suppressing the Hungarian Revolution in 1849.

The United Kingdom, hoping to maintain the Ottoman Empire as a bulwark against the expansion of Russian power in [[Asia]], sent a fleet to the Dardanelles, where it joined a fleet sent by France.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lawrence Sondhaus |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aYcUQ4XRqOoC&pg=PA1852-IA16 |title=Naval Warfare, 1815–1914 |publisher=Routledge |year=2012 |isbn=978-1134609949 |pages=1852–1855}}</ref>

====Battle of Sinop====
{{main|Battle of Sinop}}
[[File:Battle of Sinop.jpg|thumb|The Russian destruction of the Ottoman fleet at the [[Battle of Sinop]] on 30 November 1853 sparked the war (painting by [[Ivan Aivazovsky]]).]]
The European powers continued to pursue diplomatic avenues. The representatives of the four Great Powers (the United Kingdom, France, Austria and [[Kingdom of Prussia|Prussia]]) met in [[Vienna]], where they drafted a note, which they hoped would be acceptable to both the Russians and the Ottomans. The peace terms arrived at by the four powers at the Vienna Conference (1853) were delivered to the Russians by Austrian Foreign Minister [[Count Karl Ferdinand von Buol|Count Karl von Buol]] on 5 December 1853. The note met with the approval of Nicholas I, but Abdülmecid I rejected the proposal since he felt that the document's poor phrasing left it open to many different interpretations. The United Kingdom, France and Austria united in proposing amendments to mollify the Sultan, but the court of St. Petersburg ignored their suggestions.{{sfn|Figes|2010|p=143}} The United Kingdom and France then set aside the idea of continuing negotiations, but Austria and Prussia did not believe that the rejection of the proposed amendments justified the abandonment of the diplomatic process.

On 23 November, a small Russian naval force discovered the Ottoman fleet harboured in [[Sinop, Turkey|Sinop]] and began a blockade. Once the Russian blockade was reinforced, a squadron of 6 Russian ships of the line supported by 5 smaller warships, assaulted the harbour on 30 November 1853. During [[Battle of Sinop]], the Russian squadron destroyed a patrol squadron of 11 Ottoman warships—mostly frigates—while they were anchored in port under defence of the onshore artillery garrison.{{sfn|Tucker|2009|p={{page needed|date=November 2022}}}} The Ottoman fleet suffered a crushing defeat. The Russian victory in the naval battle in Sinope was called "the massacre of Sinope".{{sfn|Marriott|1917|p=234}} Although Russia and the Ottoman Empire were already at war, and there was no evidence of Russian atrocities, the phrase was used as propaganda in the West.<ref>O.Figes, The Crimean War. Metropolitan Books. New York. 2014, p. 137</ref> The press in both United Kingdom and France used Sinop as the ''[[casus belli]]'' ("cause of war") to shape the public opinion in favour of war against Russia. By 28 March 1854, after Russia ignored an Anglo-French ultimatum to withdraw from the Danubian Principalities, the United Kingdom and France had both declared war.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |first=Andrew |last=Lambert |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=GCVyIZEdc6kC&pg=PA94 |title=The Crimean War: British Grand Strategy Against Russia, 1853–56 |publisher=Ashgate |year=2011 |isbn=978-1409410119 |pages=94, 97}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |first=Christopher John |last=Bartlett |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aXi7AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA51 |title=Defence and Diplomacy: Britain and the Great Powers, 1815–1914 |publisher=Manchester UP |year=1993 |isbn=978-0719035203 |pages=51–52}}</ref>

===Dardanelles===
Britain was concerned about Russian activity and Sir [[John Fox Burgoyne|John Burgoyne]], a senior advisor to Lord Aberdeen, urged for the [[Dardanelles]] to be occupied and works of sufficient strength to be built to block any Russian move to capture Constantinople and gain access to the Mediterranean. The [[Corps of Royal Engineers]] sent men to the Dardanelles, and Burgoyne went to Paris and met with the British ambassador and the French emperor. [[Henry Wellesley, 1st Earl Cowley|Lord Cowley]] wrote on 8 February to Burgoyne, "Your visit to Paris has produced a visible change in the Emperor's views, and he is making every preparation for a land expedition in case the last attempt at negotiation should break down".{{sfn|Porter|1889|p=411}}

Burgoyne and his team of engineers inspected and surveyed the Dardanelles area in February. They were fired on by Russian riflemen when they went to [[Varna, Bulgaria|Varna]]. A team of [[sapper]]s arrived in March, and major building works commenced on a seven-mile line of defence, which was designed to block the [[Gallipoli Peninsula]]. French sappers worked on half of the line, which was finished in May.{{sfn|Porter|1889|p=412}}

===Peace attempts===
[[File:Valley of the Shadow of Death, 2.jpg|thumb|''[[Valley of the Shadow of Death (Roger Fenton)|Valley of the Shadow of Death]]'', by Roger Fenton, one of the most famous pictures of the Crimean War<ref>Figes 2012, p. 307.{{incomplete short citation|date=October 2022}}</ref>]]
Nicholas felt that because of Russian assistance in suppressing the [[Hungarian Revolution of 1848]], Austria would side with him or at the very least remain neutral. Austria, however, felt threatened by the Russian troops in the Balkans. On 27 February 1854, the United Kingdom and France demanded the withdrawal of Russian forces from the principalities. Austria supported them and, without declaring war on Russia, refused to guarantee its neutrality. Russia's rejection of the ultimatum proved to be the justification used by Britain and France to enter the war.

Russia soon withdrew its troops from the Danubian Principalities, which were then occupied by Austria for the duration of the war.{{sfn|Arnold|2002|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=_UreS--MoD0C&pg=PA13 13]}} That removed the original grounds for war, but the British and the French continued with hostilities. Determined to address the Eastern Question by putting an end to the Russian threat to the Ottomans, the allies in August 1854 proposed the "Four Points" for ending the conflict in addition to the Russian withdrawal:
* Russia was to give up its protectorate over the Danubian Principalities.
* The Danube was to be opened up to foreign commerce.
* The [[London Straits Convention|Straits Convention of 1841]], which allowed only Ottoman and Russian warships in the Black Sea, was to be revised.
* Russia was to abandon any claim granting it the right to interfere in Ottoman affairs on behalf of Orthodox Christians.

Those points, particularly the third, would require clarification through negotiations, which Russia refused. The allies, including Austria, therefore agreed that Britain and France should take further military action to prevent further Russian aggression against the Ottomans. Britain and France agreed on the invasion of Crimea as the first step.{{sfn|Small |2007 |pp=23, 31}}