-
@ Gunson
2025-04-24 13:39:26
As I read about the Napoleonic wars it strikes me that calling one of the belligerents the "aggressor" is a peculiar modern term.
It was never done, since it was clear that all were seeking power in different ways due to different interests.
While Napoleon was bringing proto-democracy to regions, he was also an autocrat, and was an economic rival to England. The English funded other countries to confront France, yet it was France who was imposing the Continental System and taxes on their allies which caused them to switch allegiance and declare war.
These wars would usually end with one of the belligerents needing to make major territorial, military and economic concessions.
The modern framing as one of a victim (Ukraine) and an aggressor (Russia) seems like a modern propaganda tactic designed to prolong a war and avoid the historically typical approach of ending it with a peace negotiation where the stronger side militarily has more leverage.