WI if the Hapsburgs never annexation Bosnia-Herzogovina?

WI if the Hapsburgs never annexed Bosnia-Herzogovina?

Could Austria-Hungry last a longer time? Would WWI be avoided or merely delayed? Who would be strengthend and who weakened compared to OTL?

Brilliantlight said:

Could Austria-Hungry last a longer time? Would WWI be avoided or merely delayed? Who would be strengthend and who weakened compared to OTL?

Click to expand...

I think the annexation did the following negative things:

1. Upset the careful ethnic balances of the Hapsburg state
2. Poisoned the relationship with Hungary, suspicious of the Hapsburg's motives
3. Poisoned the relationship between A-H and Russia
4. Radicalized Serbia & Montenegro & made conflict with them inevitable
5. Made South Slav nationalism incompatible with the existance of the Hapsburg State.
6. Made the Balkan Wars nearly inevitable and thus WWI.

If B-H had been left alone, the Balkans might have remained a bit more stable. Austria would be between Serbia & Montenegro (when B-H was annexed, Novi Pazar was returned to Ottoman administration), and the Balkans would have been less encouraged to make land grabs - the CUP government in Istanbul probably would not have lasted and thus their foolish foreign policy would have destabilized the Balkans further.

The best compromise acceptable would have leaving that region to Serbia proper and making the whole Serb nation a vassal and ally of the Empire while keeping it out of the Empire proper.

Valamyr said:

The best compromise acceptable would have leaving that region to Serbia proper and making the whole Serb nation a vassal and ally of the Empire while keeping it out of the Empire proper.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Given the ethnic mix of Bosnia, and the crusading attitude ingrained in the Serbs, you would get ethnic cleansings in 1880's. The best theoretical solution might have been a Lebanon ante-litteram, recognising and preserving the rights of ethnic and religious components. It might have been unfeasible in those years, so much the pity.

LordKalvan said:

I disagree. Given the ethnic mix of Bosnia, and the crusading attitude ingrained in the Serbs, you would get ethnic cleansings in 1880's. The best theoretical solution might have been a Lebanon ante-litteram, recognising and preserving the rights of ethnic and religious components. It might have been unfeasible in those years, so much the pity.

Click to expand...

I was taking that strong possibility into account. Its still the best practical solution I think, though Austria feared legitimately that Russia would gain too much influence over such a state.

LordKalvan said:

I disagree. Given the ethnic mix of Bosnia, and the crusading attitude ingrained in the Serbs, you would get ethnic cleansings in 1880's. The best theoretical solution might have been a Lebanon ante-litteram, recognising and preserving the rights of ethnic and religious components. It might have been unfeasible in those years, so much the pity.

Click to expand...

Well, the Ottomans DID manage it in Lebanon, AND in Bosnia. With the guarantee of the Powers it could have been possible, but I doubt Austria would ever have consented to this. In any case, an independent Bosnia would always have been a target for Serbian and Montenegrin ambitions.

Abdul Hadi Pasha said:

Well, the Ottomans DID manage it in Lebanon, AND in Bosnia. With the guarantee of the Powers it could have been possible, but I doubt Austria would ever have consented to this. In any case, an independent Bosnia would always have been a target for Serbian and Montenegrin ambitions.

Click to expand...

B-H was the bone tossed to the AH empire at the Berlin Conference, and it is quite difficult to assume it might have gone in a different way. Maybe the alternative was a solution a la Crete, with a joint powers guarantee and restructuring of a semi-independent B-H. OTOH, it would probably end up like Crete did, with Serbia annexing B-H in the early 1890's