No 'Second Balkan War'

The defeat of Bulgaria ruined Austria-Hungary's strategic plans for the containment of Serbia and the Slavic menace. It had been building up Bulgaria as a potential counter-weight and now she was defeated, had lost lands, but more importantly had given yet another shot in the arm to Serbia.

The Second Balkan War was entirely of Bulgaria's instigation. That she was hammered, and even had Rumania jump on her from the North and the Ottoman Empire tear back some of the lands lost the previous year, was the result of this great strategic blunder.

So, what if Bulgaria had not attacked Serbia in 1913 ?

Grey Wolf

Different frontiers. Bulgaria keeps more of Macedonia. Turkey only keeps Istanbul city up to to the lines at Chatalja / Catalca. I read that OTL what stopped the Bulgarian army at Chatalja was the cholera disease more than enemy resistance.

Another Balkan Wars POD: No cholera at Chatalja. Bulgaria takes Istanbul (which OTL (and presumably also ATL) they call Tsarigrad).

All this won't stop Princip in Sarajevo in 1914 from firing "the shot that was heard round the world".

Anthony Appleyard said:

Different frontiers. Bulgaria keeps more of Macedonia. Turkey only keeps Istanbul city up to to the lines at Chatalja / Catalca. I read that OTL what stopped the Bulgarian army at Chatalja was the cholera disease more than enemy resistance.

Another Balkan Wars POD: No cholera at Chatalja. Bulgaria takes Istanbul (which OTL (and presumably also ATL) they call Tsarigrad).

All this won't stop Princip in Sarajevo in 1914 from firing "the shot that was heard round the world".

Click to expand...

That is absolutely FALSE. The Ottomans had learned from their defeats earlier on and had remedied them, whereas the Bulgarians were overextended and facing a rallied and motivated enemy. The Bulgarians were not checked at Chatalja by cholera, which also hit the Ottomans, they were outfought and out-generalled. Also, the armistice line was not Chatalja, it was a line that gave the Ottomans much of Western Thrace, but not Edirne (Adrianople). Bulgaria acquiring Istanbul would be a total catastrophe, probably resulting in the massacre or expulsion of millions, and the destruction of millenia of history.

Anyway, back to Wolf's point, without the Second Balkan War, there is really no chance of the Ottomans coming into the war on the same side as Bulgaria if it still happens, and the Ottomans, instead of having no territorial ambitions in Europe, with be like France for A-L with regard to Edirne. Also, I think Bulgaria is likely to be terribly overextended with all the territory gained in the 1st Balkan War. Not having even digested East Rumelia, the Bulgars would be a minority in their own country, and given the spirit of the times, there will be ethnic cleansing, which even though nobody will care about the millions of Muslims that will be massacred or expelled, there will certainly be an uproar about massacres of Christians. I don't think Greater Bulgaria will survive long.

"Bulgaria acquiring Istanbul would be a total catastrophe, probably resulting in the massacre or expulsion of millions, and the destruction of millenia of history."

I can understand the argument you made about the Bulgarians mistreating the city's people (everybody in the Balkan wars loved to indulge in ethnic cleansing), but "destruction of millenia of history"? Are you saying they'd destroy the city or something?

Matt Quinn said:

"Bulgaria acquiring Istanbul would be a total catastrophe, probably resulting in the massacre or expulsion of millions, and the destruction of millenia of history."

I can understand the argument you made about the Bulgarians mistreating the city's people (everybody in the Balkan wars loved to indulge in ethnic cleansing), but "destruction of millenia of history"? Are you saying they'd destroy the city or something?

Click to expand...

When an army enters a conquered city, great destruction tends to occur. In the case of Istanbul, which especially in the old city there were densely packed wooden buildings, disaster would have been but a spark away.

Also, since the Bulgarian population of the city was about zero, they Bulgarians would have had to make some serious changes in order to have a chance of holding onto the city, the population of which was equal to about 25% of Bulgaria's entire population at the time.

"In the case of Istanbul, which especially in the old city there were densely packed wooden buildings, disaster would have been but a spark away."

Point conceded. Must remember that historical cities have MORE than ancient stone buildings next time!