|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Apr 25, 2023 0:19:34 GMT
What if Austria-Hungary never gave up the occupied Sanjak of Novi Pazar in 1908-09 as part of its annexation of Bosnia?
Austria-Hungary had been occupying and administering both Bosnia and Hercegovina, and the Sanjak of Novi Pazar (which sits southeast of Bosnia, northwest of Kosovo, and in between Serbia and Montenegro) for thirty years by 1908, since the 1878 Treaty of Berlin, while leaving both under titular Ottoman sovereignty.
As part of concluding the controversies brought about by Austro-Hungarian annexation of Bosnia-Hercegovina in 1908, which saw the Serbs mobilize and threaten war and demand 'compensation', and the Austrians threaten war in turn, Vienna ended its thirty year occupation of the Sanjak of Novi Pazar and returned this strip of land to Ottoman actual administration, in addition to nominal sovereignty.
About four years later, in the First Balkan War (1912), Serbia and Montenegro attacked the Ottomans in Novi Pazar and quickly occupied and partitioned the area, achieving a common border with each other.
What if Austria-Hungary felt a bit more confident and that it had no need to appease any of the foreign critics of its Bosnian annexation, Slavic, Turkish, Italian, British or French, with this self-denying gesture of appeasement - the evacuation of Novi Pazar?
Vienna instead simply continues the old status quo administration/occupation regime in nominally Ottoman Novi Pazar, or Vienna outright annexes Novi Pazar alongside Bosnia and Hercegovina.
What consequences and reactions flow from this?
Would this be a 'final straw' causing the Serbs (possibly with the Montenegrins, and possibly the Russians), to declare war on Austria-Hungary?
Would this be a 'final straw' causing the Ottoman Young Turks to declare war on Austria-Hungary?
Both of the above?
Would greater demonstrated Austrian greed in 1908-1909 spur competitive moves by other powers at *Ottoman* expense at that time? Perhaps by Italy against Tripoli or Albania, or by newly independent Bulgaria against Macedonia?
Presuming there are no *immediate* geographic-political consquences, except perhaps more background resentment for Austria-Hungary that isn't expressed by force, what happens a couple years later? If the Balkan League forms like OTL and all members attack the Ottomans in 1912, how does the Austro-Hungarian Army's presence in Novi Pazar, jutting between Montenegro and Serbia, and obstructing much of their potential frontage with the Ottoman forces, obstruct or hinder Serb and Montenegrin operations in the Balkan war, and how does it affect intra-Balkan League bargaining (with Bulgaria and Greece) over division of potential spoils before during, and after the Balkan War?
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 64,807 
Likes: 45,941
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 25, 2023 3:09:20 GMT
What if Austria-Hungary never gave up the occupied Sanjak of Novi Pazar in 1908-09 as part of its annexation of Bosnia? Austria-Hungary had been occupying and administering both Bosnia and Hercegovina, and the Sanjak of Novi Pazar (which sits southeast of Bosnia, northwest of Kosovo, and in between Serbia and Montenegro) for thirty years by 1908, since the 1878 Treaty of Berlin, while leaving both under titular Ottoman sovereignty. As part of concluding the controversies brought about by Austro-Hungarian annexation of Bosnia-Hercegovina in 1908, which saw the Serbs mobilize and threaten war and demand 'compensation', and the Austrians threaten war in turn, Vienna ended its thirty year occupation of the Sanjak of Novi Pazar and returned this strip of land to Ottoman actual administration, in addition to nominal sovereignty. About four years later, in the First Balkan War (1912), Serbia and Montenegro attacked the Ottomans in Novi Pazar and quickly occupied and partitioned the area, achieving a common border with each other. What if Austria-Hungary felt a bit more confident and that it had no need to appease any of the foreign critics of its Bosnian annexation, Slavic, Turkish, Italian, British or French, with this self-denying gesture of appeasement - the evacuation of Novi Pazar? Vienna instead simply continues the old status quo administration/occupation regime in nominally Ottoman Novi Pazar, or Vienna outright annexes Novi Pazar alongside Bosnia and Hercegovina. What consequences and reactions flow from this? Would this be a 'final straw' causing the Serbs (possibly with the Montenegrins, and possibly the Russians), to declare war on Austria-Hungary? Would this be a 'final straw' causing the Ottoman Young Turks to declare war on Austria-Hungary? Both of the above? Would greater demonstrated Austrian greed in 1908-1909 spur competitive moves by other powers at *Ottoman* expense at that time? Perhaps by Italy against Tripoli or Albania, or by newly independent Bulgaria against Macedonia? Presuming there are no *immediate* geographic-political consquences, except perhaps more background resentment for Austria-Hungary that isn't expressed by force, what happens a couple years later? If the Balkan League forms like OTL and all members attack the Ottomans in 1912, how does the Austro-Hungarian Army's presence in Novi Pazar, jutting between Montenegro and Serbia, and obstructing much of their potential frontage with the Ottoman forces, obstruct or hinder Serb and Montenegrin operations in the Balkan war, and how does it affect intra-Balkan League bargaining (with Bulgaria and Greece) over division of potential spoils before during, and after the Balkan War? |
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Apr 25, 2023 11:06:09 GMT
It is showing up complete on the After 1900 listing, it is showing up complete on the blue banner, it is just not showing up complete on the top gray banner, and the "last post" display. That's OK with me.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 64,807
Likes: 45,941
|
Post by lordroel on Apr 25, 2023 11:28:30 GMT
It is showing up complete on the After 1900 listing, it is showing up complete on the blue banner, it is just not showing up complete on the top gray banner, and the "last post" display. That's OK with me. Still if you can make it a shorter thread title it would be fine. |
|
miletus12
Squadron vice admiral
To get yourself lost, just follow the signs.
Posts: 7,470 
Likes: 4,287
|
Post by miletus12 on Apr 25, 2023 18:10:50 GMT
|
|
nomommsen
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 40
Likes: 40
|
Post by nomommsen on May 11, 2023 15:20:21 GMT
... don't you think your prerogative is maybe a wee bit ... faulty?
Bosnia-herzegovina was under full austro-hungarian determined adminsitration and only titulary under ottoman souvereignity. For the Sanjak Austo-Hungaria had only the right - if wished - to garrison troops there (and if wished to build-up some infrastructure aka a railline). It executedthis right only on a rather small level in the north-eastern parts of the Sanjak while the complete administration - and souvereignity - stayed with the ottomans. The latter even changed administrative organisation during this timeand not only once wihtout any interference of questioning by or in Vienna.
... now ... how would you like to have this changed without any further 'amendments' necessary to the Treaty of Berlin of 1878 (which way the full Souvereignity of AS-H over Bosnia-Herzegovina was juridically reassured) ? ... wihtou too much of an upheaveal leading to another war scare already then ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on May 13, 2023 21:54:35 GMT
An Egon Friedell wrote during the 1920s that A-H made a mistake giving up Novipazar, suggesting they could have expanded further south from there - down to Thessaloniki, giving them access to the Med.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 23,418
Likes: 12,034
|
Post by stevep on May 14, 2023 11:44:47 GMT
An Egon Friedell wrote during the 1920s that A-H made a mistake giving up Novipazar, suggesting they could have expanded further south from there - down to Thessaloniki, giving them access to the Med.
Well that would mean war with the Ottomans, at a great distance from Austrian centres and probably also with Serbia while Greece and given the proximity to the straits Russia is also likely to be distinctly concerned. It also means that the empire gains even more populations who are neither German or Hungarian, with a lot of Muslim Turks and Orthodox Christians. Its not impossible in such a scenario that if a WWI type conflict comes around you could have the Russians and Turks on the same side!  |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on May 18, 2023 1:45:33 GMT
An Egon Friedell wrote during the 1920s that A-H made a mistake giving up Novipazar, suggesting they could have expanded further south from there - down to Thessaloniki, giving them access to the Med.
Well that would mean war with the Ottomans, at a great distance from Austrian centres and probably also with Serbia while Greece and given the proximity to the straits Russia is also likely to be distinctly concerned. It also means that the empire gains even more populations who are neither German or Hungarian, with a lot of Muslim Turks and Orthodox Christians. Its not impossible in such a scenario that if a WWI type conflict comes around you could have the Russians and Turks on the same side! Russia's more interested about the Straits though, so they might tolerate it.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on May 18, 2023 2:37:08 GMT
... don't you think your prerogative is maybe a wee bit ... faulty?
Bosnia-herzegovina was under full austro-hungarian determined adminsitration and only titulary under ottoman souvereignity. For the Sanjak Austo-Hungaria had only the right - if wished - to garrison troops there (and if wished to build-up some infrastructure aka a railline). It executedthis right only on a rather small level in the north-eastern parts of the Sanjak while the complete administration - and souvereignity - stayed with the ottomans. The latter even changed administrative organisation during this timeand not only once wihtout any interference of questioning by or in Vienna.
... now ... how would you like to have this changed without any further 'amendments' necessary to the Treaty of Berlin of 1878 (which way the full Souvereignity of AS-H over Bosnia-Herzegovina was juridically reassured) ? ... wihtou too much of an upheaveal leading to another war scare already then ?
I find it hard to distinguish "northeast" Sanjak since the land is more oriented on a northwest to southeast axis. If the statuses of Bosnia and Novi-Pazar were that different that would make "annexation" of Novi-Pazar a big deal, but, Austria-Hungary did maintain a garrison in the region continuously since the Treaty of Berlin 1878 and had it simply continued to do so from after 1908 without them withdrawing, that wouldn't have been some bold new provocation beyond the annexation of Bosnia itself. Instead what Austria in OTL did was withdraw its garrisons and yield back full sovereignty to the Ottomans in 1909, which allowed the Serbs and Montenegrins to occupy and divide Novi Pazar during the 1st Balkan War with Austria simply standing aside. An Egon Friedell wrote during the 1920s that A-H made a mistake giving up Novipazar, suggesting they could have expanded further south from there - down to Thessaloniki, giving them access to the Med.
Well that would mean war with the Ottomans, at a great distance from Austrian centres and probably also with Serbia while Greece and given the proximity to the straits Russia is also likely to be distinctly concerned. It also means that the empire gains even more populations who are neither German or Hungarian, with a lot of Muslim Turks and Orthodox Christians. It's ntnot impossible in such a scenario that if a WWI type conflict comes around you could have the Russians and Turks on the same side! Russia's more interested about the Straits though, so they might tolerate it.
Interesting observations - Austria-Hungary taking the plunge and invading Ottoman Macedonia from Novi Pazar and reaching out for Salonica would be a truly bold and uncharacteristic play. It would inspire the jealousy of others, and perhaps competitive expansionist efforts, but since the Ottomans were Europe's punching bag who everybody (like Italy and the Balkan States) were allowed to attack, some power appointing itself as champion and ally of the Turks seems unlikely. I suppose Italy would have the best 'excuse' or 'cover' to try an advance toward Salonica while its Triple Alliance partner Italy was engaged in the conquest of Tripolitania and the Dodecanese and Vienna had warned them away from Albania. From Novi Pazar, the Austrians could reach Kosovo first while their fleet and fleet-borne Army units could land in Albania, attack Turkish garrisons and attempt to cut deals with Albanian rebels. At this point, the Turkish defenses will be alerted, and Balkan states' jealousy will be instigated. So the Serbs will probably begin opportunistic attacks on the Ottomans to grab territory for themselves and block off avenues of Austrian advance while doing so. Bulgaria and Greece probably get similarly involved in a 'scramble for Rumelia'. If the Austrians really want to be sure to get Salonica, they would be wise to sortie strong fleet units into the Aegean, which the Ottoman Navy isn't even contesting, and land troops in Salonica, otherwise odds are they won't be first to get there by an overland march. |
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on May 18, 2023 4:43:37 GMT
Wouldn't the Austro-Hungarian expansion into Ottoman Macedonia actually alienate a potential ally in Bulgaria? Given Bulgarian irredentist claims over that area, plus both the Bulgarians and Austro-Hungarians have a common enemy in Serbia, annexing Ottoman Macedonia may possibly be a bit foolhardy.
However, if Austria-Hungary also tries to woo Montenegro into its sphere of influence in addition to its annexation of Sandzak, that could result in their potential expansion into Albania.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 23,418
Likes: 12,034
|
Post by stevep on May 18, 2023 12:48:42 GMT
Wouldn't the Austro-Hungarian expansion into Ottoman Macedonia actually alienate a potential ally in Bulgaria? Given Bulgarian irredentist claims over that area, plus both the Bulgarians and Austro-Hungarians have a common enemy in Serbia, annexing Ottoman Macedonia may possibly be a bit foolhardy. However, if Austria-Hungary also tries to woo Montenegro into its sphere of influence in addition to its annexation of Sandzak, that could result in their potential expansion into Albania.
Its going to alienate just about everybody in the region. As raharris1973, said it's likely to upset the Italians unless Vienna was willing to offer them a free hand in what's now Albania. Greece, Turkey and Bulgaria all wanted Salonika for themselves and Russia would look to support its allies in the theatre, which by this time would include Bulgaria as well as Serbia and quite possibly Greece as well. [Different king in charge at the time].
You could end up triggering WWI a few years early, which is likely to make it a lot shorter and less bloody for all concerned. [Turkey would be on the EP side rather than the CPs along with a cluster of Balkan powers and Germany has no access to the Haber process being the key points] The CPs would be the clear aggressor in this case and while they might have Italy on side they might not. Not sure how things would go on the western front and while Russia is relatively weaker at this stage, being only 3 years after the end of the disaster fighting Japan and the following revolution all they really need to be able to do is fight for a few months until the CP's nitrate supplies run out.
|
|
