This is ignoring the Albanians.
Well I didn't ignore them on purpose, it's just that the Albanians were pretty much pawns in the power politics at the time and Austria-Hungary and Italy paid attention when it was in their interests.
That is true. I would expect a definite insurgency throughout all of the Albanian inhabited areas against Italy, Serbia, Montenegro and Greece.
They fought successfully in 1878 to retain lands given in the Treat of Berlin to neighboring countries, forcing the Ottomans to cede other territory instead. None of the Balkan powers have enough power to subdue Albania,
But the maps I posted basically showed the areas occupied by the various Balkan power's armies after the 1912 Balkan war. So they did subdue Albania....unless I'm misinterpreting your use of the word "subdue". If you mean break any insurgency/unrest then I agree, they wouldn't be able to do it, but it you mean conquer the area I think they did that already.
and this situation is more likely to start a new Balkan War, not less, and maybe directly spark WWI directly. Greece only gets a little sliver of territory it considers integral, while a Slavic country get's the lion's share?
Why is it more likely to start a second Balkan war? How dissatisfied was Greece in 1912 with it's 1912 gains? Why would Greece sign an agreement with one of Bulgaria's pacifist PMs recognizing the 1912 boundaries if it wanted to readjust them badly and already had Serbia's backing in case of war and had Bulgaria basically turning Russia away? And would Greece really start a second Balkan war with Bulgaria if Bulgaria hasn't so disgusted Russia here that Russia hasn't renounced their 1902 alliance?
Not only that, but Serbia has been given the most Catholic portion of Albania.
As I said earlier, this is based on maps purporting to show the OTL areas occupied by the armies of Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria in 1912 which is what formed the basis of the borders (except for Albania) in the 1913 Treaty of London that ended the first balkan war.
And Italy and Austria-Hungary would never, ever allow this. That's why Albania survived in the first place.
I tend to agree, which is why any TL involving this would be extremely difficult (though not impossible I think as there is probably some POD that occurred which involved Italy's main movers and shakers). A-H in particular would be opposed and I doubt Italy would trade an independent Albania which could later fall under it's influence for a couple of ports on the Albanian coast. It seems more likely, however that Italy would accept that kind of bribe than A-H.
WWI largely started because the Hapsburgs were distressed at the growth of Serbia. There might be slightly greater tolerance for Greece gaining territory, but this plan would bring in the Powers so fast it would make your heads spin.
Well,
any plan would bring in the powers very fast. They always got themselves involved. They all presented themselves for the Treaty of London in 1913 and then the Treaty of Bucharest in 1913 so no difference there.
) as within a year Bulgaria had managed to piss off just about everybody: Romania, the Ottoman Empire, the Russian Empire, Serbia, Greece and Montenegro. How much of this might be due to frustration over not getting the share of Macedonia that had been agreed to between themselves and Serbia and how much might be due to delusions of grandeur...well I don't we will ever know. Again from a heavily salted wikipedia serving it seems that during the 1912 Balkan War Bulgaria was even warned by Russia that should it take Constantinople then the Russian Army would attack the Bulgarian Army, but Bulgaria still went for it (now if all of that is true it would make an awesome ATL: Russia attacks Bulgaria during the first Balkan War over Constantinople).