A Russo-Ottoman War in the Mid-1890s

CaliGuy

Banned
What if, in response to the Hamidian massacres (of Armenians), Russia would have went to war against the Ottoman Empire sometime between 1894 and 1896?

How would this war turn out and would any other countries get involved in this war?

Also, for the record, I am presuming that Russia's war aims in this war would be to halt the killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and probably also to annex all of the areas of the Ottoman Empire with large Armenian populations.

Anyway, any thoughts on this?
 
What if, in response to the Hamidian massacres (of Armenians), Russia would have went to war against the Ottoman Empire sometime between 1894 and 1896?

How would this war turn out and would any other countries get involved in this war?

Also, for the record, I am presuming that Russia's war aims in this war would be to halt the killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and probably also to annex all of the areas of the Ottoman Empire with large Armenian populations.

Anyway, any thoughts on this?

There had been large portions of Pontic Greeks, too and other Orthodox Christians. Also the Armenians lived in many areas ot the Ottoman Empire despite Anatolia like Iraq and Syria. Maybe there are Pan-Slavic Orthodox plans to annex Constantinople. (The Bulgarian troops moved in sight of Istanbul´s gates in 1913) Maybe there would be a paralell war on the Balkan, too for a weekened Empire could lead to an independence war . ( an earlier version of the 1912 Balkan war? . On the other hand,there could be bad blood with the British Empire and the rivalty of the 19th Century continues. Interesting would be Austria-Hungary´s reaction, because a Otton-Russian war would influence the Balkan policy. Would they annex Bosnia earlier ? A Russian-Ottoman war could lead to a power struggle between all European powers, like in 1876, when it was averted on the Berlin Congress. Bismarck is still in charge in 1898, who knows, what his diplomatic stand would be in a renewed Russian-Ottoman war.
 
Last edited:

CaliGuy

Banned
There had been large portions of Pontic Greeks, too and other Orthodox Christians. Also the Armenians lived in many areas ot the Ottoman Empire despite Anatolia like Iraq and Syria. Maybe there are Pan-Slavic Orthodox plans to annex Constantinople. Maybe there would be a paralell war on the Balkan ( an earlier version of the 1912 Balkan war? That would be compli( The Bulgarian troops moved in sight of Istanbul´s gates in 1913). On the other hand,there could be bad blood with the British Empire and the rivalty of the 19th Century continues.
Would Britain actually be willing to go to war to protect and defend a genocidal regime, though?
 
Would Britain actually be willing to go to war to protect and defend a genocidal regime, though?

For a long time, they seem to have turned a blind eye on that matter. I don´t know, what the public opinion in Britain was. But for a long time, the British Empire wanted to avert a dissolution of the "Ill man" ( which lead to the Crimean war). I´m not sure, of what nature the Anglo-Ottoman relations were in the 90es ( Germany began to tighten it´s ties with the Ottomans already ?) but I think that they wouldn´t allow Russia, to gain too much influence in the Middle East ( let alone conquer and gain tihe Dardanelles).
 
Last edited:

CaliGuy

Banned
For a long time, they seem to have turned a blind eye on that matter. I don´t know, what the public opinion in Britain was. But for a long time, the British Empire wanted to avert a dissolution of the "Ill man" ( which lead to the Crimean war). I´m not sure, how of what nature the Anglo-Ottoman relations were in the 90es ( Germany began to tighten it´s ties with the Ottomans already ?) but I think that they wouldn´t allow Russia, to gain to much influence in the Middle East ( let alone conquer and gain tihe Dardanelles).
What about if Russia will limit itself to the six "Armenian Vilayets" in the Ottoman Empire in this 1890s war, though?
 
What about if Russia will limit itself to the six "Armenian Vilayets" in the Ottoman Empire in this 1890s war, though?

That is a difficult question. I cannot awnser that accurately, Russia might do that without extreme consequences but I could imagine, that Britain would keep a nervous eye on Russia´s ambitions in the region. Austria might annex Bosnia at once as a reaction.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
That is a difficult question. I cannot awnser that accurately, Russia might do that without extreme consequences but I could imagine, that Britain would keep a nervous eye on Russia´s ambitions in the region.
Agreed; however, to be fair to Russia, it could legitimately argue that its conquest of these six vilayets was necessitated by the Ottomans' ethnic cleansing of the region's Armenian population!
 
Agreed; however, to be fair to Russia, it could legitimately argue that its conquest of these six vilayets was necessitated by the Ottomans' ethnic cleansing of the region's Armenian population!

Before the Crimean War, the Tsar wanted to establish himself as a patron of the Christians within the Ottoman Empire- this was not accepted by the other Great Powers.
But it is true, the Christian Armenians and other Christian ethnics like Caucasus Greeks and Christian Laz would be secured from ethnic and religious persecution up until the 20th Century. I am not sure what would happen to the non Christian population ( also, there had been also Muslim Armenians).There might be a migration flow of Muslims into the Ottoman Empire.
 
A Balkan War in the 1890's is quite unlikely to happen. The balance of power of the Balkan nations vis a vis the Ottoman Empire was vastly different in 1890, or even 1898, than it was in 1912. For evidence of that, look at the Greco-Turkish War of 1897. Greece tried to capitalize on the Cretan Rebellion and discovered that its military was substantially inferior to that of the Ottomans. Moreover, Russo-Bulgarian relations were extremely cold until 1895, due to the election of Ferdinand as Bulgarian Prince. So, without Bulgarian cooperation, Russia's only front against the Ottomans is the Caucasus. You actually have a perfect excuse for a Russian intervention in the period as the Ottoman Empire was massacring tens to hundreds of thousands of Armenians between 1894 and 1897. I haven't seen any good explanation as to why Russia didn't intervene IOTL, but I'd guess it was due to a lack of agreement among the Great Powers regarding joint action. Or they were busy worrying over Crete. Anyway, the point is that the Russian dominance and influence over the Balkans that allowed the campaigns of 1877-78 and the allignment of Balkan interests that allowed the Balkan League of 1912 were not present in the 1890's. So, a Russo-Turkish war would be occuring only in the Caucasus and it does't seem like there's all that much to be had in the way of gains from such a conflict.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
A Balkan War in the 1890's is quite unlikely to happen. The balance of power of the Balkan nations vis a vis the Ottoman Empire was vastly different in 1890, or even 1898, than it was in 1912. For evidence of that, look at the Greco-Turkish War of 1897. Greece tried to capitalize on the Cretan Rebellion and discovered that its military was substantially inferior to that of the Ottomans. Moreover, Russo-Bulgarian relations were extremely cold until 1895, due to the election of Ferdinand as Bulgarian Prince. So, without Bulgarian cooperation, Russia's only front against the Ottomans is the Caucasus. You actually have a perfect excuse for a Russian intervention in the period as the Ottoman Empire was massacring tens to hundreds of thousands of Armenians between 1894 and 1897. I haven't seen any good explanation as to why Russia didn't intervene IOTL, but I'd guess it was due to a lack of agreement among the Great Powers regarding joint action. Or they were busy worrying over Crete. Anyway, the point is that the Russian dominance and influence over the Balkans that allowed the campaigns of 1877-78 and the allignment of Balkan interests that allowed the Balkan League of 1912 were not present in the 1890's.

Excellent summary! :)

So, a Russo-Turkish war would be occuring only in the Caucasus and it does't seem like there's all that much to be had in the way of gains from such a conflict.

What about additional territory for Russia, though?
 
Excellent summary! :)

Thank you!

What about additional territory for Russia, though?
Certainly they could get some, but what would it be, exactly? I suppose they could take Erzurum. Russia captured it in 1878, but relinquished it in the peace treaty, so that's a potential goal. Probably along with swallowing up more of Armenia into the Russian Empire. You'd have to compare the relative military capabilities of Russia and Turkey at the time though, I'm not sure how the respective armies had developed since 1878 and who would have the advantage. So, our hypothetical Russo-Turkish War would be fairly limited in comarison to the previous one. Which honestly could be a factor both for and against it.
 
Russia didn't care much about the Hamidian massacres one way or another - Britain was the one who spearheaded the call for humanitarian intervention, Russia couldn't be bothered (even though Britain was willing to discuss a possible partition of the Ottoman state).

Generally, Russia was pro-Armenian up to the 1880s and again in the 1910s, but not at this particular point in time. In fact, it had fairly good relations with Abdulhamid's Ottoman Empire. So something would need to change in the background to make this war plausible.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Russia didn't care much about the Hamidian massacres one way or another - Britain was the one who spearheaded the call for humanitarian intervention, Russia couldn't be bothered (even though Britain was willing to discuss a possible partition of the Ottoman state).

Generally, Russia was pro-Armenian up to the 1880s and again in the 1910s, but not at this particular point in time. In fact, it had fairly good relations with Abdulhamid's Ottoman Empire. So something would need to change in the background to make this war plausible.
Why exactly did Russia stop and then once again start being pro-Armenian, though?
 
Russia didn't care much about the Hamidian massacres one way or another - Britain was the one who spearheaded the call for humanitarian intervention, Russia couldn't be bothered (even though Britain was willing to discuss a possible partition of the Ottoman state).

Generally, Russia was pro-Armenian up to the 1880s and again in the 1910s, but not at this particular point in time. In fact, it had fairly good relations with Abdulhamid's Ottoman Empire. So something would need to change in the background to make this war plausible.
Very interesting. I haven't read much at all about the Hamidian massacres from a non-Ottoman perspective. It really is a shame that Ottoman history tends to skip from the 1877-78 war to the Bosnian Crisis. I've studied Ottoman history at a relatively advanced level and even then we got maybe a day or two of lecture on the period and it was only about the massacres and Abdulhamid's reforms. I hadn't heard that Britain was willing to discuss a partition of the Ottoman Empire, nor that Russia had a hiatus in supporting Armenia. Any way you could elaborate?
 
Why exactly did Russia stop and then once again start being pro-Armenian, though?

Very interesting. I haven't read much at all about the Hamidian massacres from a non-Ottoman perspective. It really is a shame that Ottoman history tends to skip from the 1877-78 war to the Bosnian Crisis. I've studied Ottoman history at a relatively advanced level and even then we got maybe a day or two of lecture on the period and it was only about the massacres and Abdulhamid's reforms. I hadn't heard that Britain was willing to discuss a partition of the Ottoman Empire, nor that Russia had a hiatus in supporting Armenia. Any way you could elaborate?

When the sort of progressive Alexander II was replaced by Alexander III's staunchly conservative regime, the Russian government started viewing Armenians as a subversive and revolutionary element. In addition to that, Russia was less pro-Armenian because it was more pro-Ottoman; there was a general understanding with Abdulhamid - he lets Russian trade pass by uninterrupted, but keeps the Straits closed to foreign (basically: British) warships which would like to threaten Russia through the Black Sea. Between the warmer relations with the Abdulhamid and Alexander III's suspicion of Armenians, Russia had no interest in splitting up the Ottoman Empire. Especially since they wanted to focus on Asia.

Meanwhile, Britain was secure enough in its position that it no longer felt obligated to support the Ottomans; so it indulged its humanitarian streak. Tons of proposals were put forth - to depose Abdulhamid, to intimidate him into radical reforms with a military action, and last but not the least: to simply partition the Ottoman Empire. But all these plans required the cooperation of at least some of the other Great Powers, and they - Russia and Austria and Germany and even France - all rejected it for their own reasons.

As for why Russia gradually became a friend of the Armenians again - that was also a complex issue. First, the reactionary Alexander III was replaced by the more moderate Nicholas II. A new imperial governor in the Caucasus, Vorontsov-Dashkov, managed to win over many of the local Armenians with new, tolerant policies; so St. Petersburg itself became more confident of its Armenian subjects and thus more inclined to champion the cause of Armenians across the border. The semi-reliable Abdulhamid was replaced by a series of Young Turk governments, which continued much of Abdulhamid's friendship with Germany but little of his friendship with Russia...and so on.

Interestingly, Russia never completely settled on the Armenians even as they reconciled; allying with Kurdish nationalism instead was an option and a parallel course all the way up to WWI.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
When the sort of progressive Alexander II was replaced by Alexander III's staunchly conservative regime, the Russian government started viewing Armenians as a subversive and revolutionary element. In addition to that, Russia was less pro-Armenian because it was more pro-Ottoman; there was a general understanding with Abdulhamid - he lets Russian trade pass by uninterrupted, but keeps the Straits closed to foreign (basically: British) warships which would like to threaten Russia through the Black Sea. Between the warmer relations with the Abdulhamid and Alexander III's suspicion of Armenians, Russia had no interest in splitting up the Ottoman Empire. Especially since they wanted to focus on Asia.

Meanwhile, Britain was secure enough in its position that it no longer felt obligated to support the Ottomans; so it indulged its humanitarian streak. Tons of proposals were put forth - to depose Abdulhamid, to intimidate him into radical reforms with a military action, and last but not the least: to simply partition the Ottoman Empire. But all these plans required the cooperation of at least some of the other Great Powers, and they - Russia and Austria and Germany and even France - all rejected it for their own reasons.

As for why Russia gradually became a friend of the Armenians again - that was also a complex issue. First, the reactionary Alexander III was replaced by the more moderate Nicholas II. A new imperial governor in the Caucasus, Vorontsov-Dashkov, managed to win over many of the local Armenians with new, tolerant policies; so St. Petersburg itself became more confident of its Armenian subjects and thus more inclined to champion the cause of Armenians across the border. The semi-reliable Abdulhamid was replaced by a series of Young Turk governments, which continued much of Abdulhamid's friendship with Germany but little of his friendship with Russia...and so on.

Interestingly, Russia never completely settled on the Armenians even as they reconciled; allying with Kurdish nationalism instead was an option and a parallel course all the way up to WWI.
Thanks for all of this information! :)

However, two questions:

1. How many Armenian revolutionaries in the 1880s and beyond actually wanted to kill and/or overthrow the Tsar?

2. What exactly was Russia's planned end game with the Kurdish nationalists had it decided to support them instead?
 
1. How many Armenian revolutionaries in the 1880s and beyond actually wanted to kill and/or overthrow the Tsar?

No idea. The threat was greatly exaggerated in the eyes of the Tsarist government, but there were some Armenians, in revolutionary organizations of both the all-Russian and the Armenian-specific kind.
2. What exactly was Russia's planned end game with the Kurdish nationalists had it decided to support them instead?

Some of the Kurdish separatists desired an independent Kurdistan under Russian influence; but while that's not a completely impossible outcome, the Russians themselves did not have a clear end game in mind. They were helping the Kurds under the general assumption that it could prove useful later - if eastern Anatolia becomes a battleground for influence between various Great Powers, or as a possible counterweight to Armenian nationalism.
 
Top