AHC: Turkish Trianon, Hungarian Sévres

So here's the challenge: make Turkey and Hungary "switch places" when it comes to the peace treaties following WW1. The idea is for Turkey to lose as much territory as possible, possibly those proposed in the Treaty of Sévres, while Hungary avoids most losses incurred under Trianon, either something along the lines of the 2nd Vienna Treaty or even more.

My idea would be to avoid the communists' brief rise to power in Hungary after the war, leading to a much more intact armed force that is not demoralized. Aurél Stromfeld still stays in position and leads a counterattack against Entente forces much the same as he did OTL, although with a much better and motivated force, leading to even more victories and with a Hungarian government staunchly supporting him (something the communists under Kun did not do, leading to the armies demoralization and eventual dissolution). The French decide after setbacks that major military maneuvers would be necessary to subdue Hungary, which is not worthy, and instead offer more lenient terms to avoid more losses and a very hostile and revanchist state in the future.

In Turkey, I guess the easiest POD would be to have Ataturk die and the Entente become more pro-Armenian and willing to enforce the treaty.

Ideas, thoughts? What sort of WW2 would this lead to? Could this have effects in Germany?
 
Turkey's enemies could be defeated by Turkey, whether because they were uncommitted to the fight (Britain, France, Italy) or because they were weaker than Turkey (Greece, Armenia, etc). Hungary's enemies were not only relatively stronger, but motivated to make their territorial claims on the old Kingdom of Hungary. Why would the Romanians abandon claims to Transylvania, for instance?
 
Well, what if Hungarian Assembly, seeing the way the Austrians have bungled the war effort, decide to cut ties with the Hapsburgs, declare themselves independent and join the Entente, say right before Italy joins the war in 1915. That MIGHT be doable, though slightly ASB. . .
 
Wondering if there a way to accomplish these things as a consequence of just one event (ie. without two separate PoDs)? An (early) White victory in the Russian civil war sounds like it would influence both Hungary and Turkey in the desired direction.

First off, there's Lenin's alliance with the Turkish nationalists. Without the USSR's gold and weapons, Ataturk's armies won't do nearly as well. A White Russia will not be backing the Turkish national movement - in fact, it's probably going to help and reinforce Armenia instead. With a weaker Turkey and considerably stronger Armenia, the end result will be something very much like the Treaty of Sevres.

Second, the end of the Karolyi government and rise of Communism in Hungary was caused the Vix Note - a memorandum from the Paris Peace Conference which demanded that Hungary completely withdraw from Transylvania and recognized Romania's claims there. But the Vix ultimatum was strongly tied with the Russian civil war; France decided to fully back Romania because it needed Romania's help for the Whites and for Entente's own troops in southern Ukraine. In a scenario where the Bolsheviks are collapsing by the spring of 1919 and Romania's assistance is not needed, France would probably keep its earlier attitude towards Romania - suspicious and not very supportive.

Thus, non-communist Hungary is stronger, more internationally respected, and possibly more stable (the Communists would still be fairly popular); and Romania has less international support. Of course, there are still problems - the most Hungary can hope for is to retain 30% or so of Transylvania and some lesser concessions on the Czechoslovak and Yugoslav side. Even this may be too much - neither Bucharest nor the Romanian population of Transylvania are going to take it lying down. And the principle of self-determination means the great powers are obliged to at least half-heartedly support them. So it might come down to some sort of a population exchange.
 
I do find it interesting that the Hungarians pursued maximalist aims, trying to preserve all of Greater Hungary when going up against the Treaty of Trianon and failed utterly, whereas the Turks focused primarily on Anatolia when contesting Sevres and were quite successful. Perhaps in order to switch outcomes one must switch mindsets as well and have the Hungarians focus on creating an ethnically homogeneous nation while the Turks perhaps pursue a Pan-Turkic Empire perhaps under Enver Pasha rather than Mustafa Kemal.

I also think that given the fact that the Hungarians aren't going to defect in during the war itself, preventing the Aster Revolution in October 1918 would lead to a more lenient peace. In OTL the writers of the Treaty of St. Germain and the Treaty of Trianon worked in isolation. Some have argued that had there been only one treaty to deal with the Austro-Hungarian Empire it would have been more lenient. Rather than being an independent state at the beginning of the negotiations, the Democratic Republic of Hungary would be created as a result of this treaty with ostensibly more concern given towards its viability.
 
Wondering if there a way to accomplish these things as a consequence of just one event (ie. without two separate PoDs)? An (early) White victory in the Russian civil war sounds like it would influence both Hungary and Turkey in the desired direction.

This is an angle I never thought of, it could actually work.

I do find it interesting that the Hungarians pursued maximalist aims, trying to preserve all of Greater Hungary when going up against the Treaty of Trianon and failed utterly, whereas the Turks focused primarily on Anatolia when contesting Sevres and were quite successful.

There could be more than one PoD if you ask me. I also mentioned in the OP that Hungary does not necessarily have to pursue maximalist claims, they could just stick with area that are roughly the same as the Vienna Awards OTL, that is, Northern Transylvania, parts of OTL Slovakia including a border with Poland and at least parts of Vojvodina.

So, given an early White victory in the RCW, the rise of Enver Pasha to power and no Aster Revolution, could this be doable?
 
So here's the challenge: make Turkey and Hungary "switch places" when it comes to the peace treaties following WW1. The idea is for Turkey to lose as much territory as possible, possibly those proposed in the Treaty of Sévres, while Hungary avoids most losses incurred under Trianon, either something along the lines of the 2nd Vienna Treaty or even more.

My idea would be to avoid the communists' brief rise to power in Hungary after the war, leading to a much more intact armed force that is not demoralized. Aurél Stromfeld still stays in position and leads a counterattack against Entente forces much the same as he did OTL, although with a much better and motivated force, leading to even more victories and with a Hungarian government staunchly supporting him (something the communists under Kun did not do, leading to the armies demoralization and eventual dissolution). The French decide after setbacks that major military maneuvers would be necessary to subdue Hungary, which is not worthy, and instead offer more lenient terms to avoid more losses and a very hostile and revanchist state in the future.

In Turkey, I guess the easiest POD would be to have Ataturk die and the Entente become more pro-Armenian and willing to enforce the treaty.

Ideas, thoughts? What sort of WW2 would this lead to? Could this have effects in Germany?
I guess Hungarian Red Force were motivated pretty good. Some opinion I read on topic actually said troops were fighting for Great Hungary then for reds.

But I would agree that if they were were not fighting under the flag of communism they may at least got plebiscit in some disputed areas.

After all didn't Romanians at the end captured Budapest?
 
One major problem is that I'm not sure how much binding plebiscites would have necessarily changed things from the Hungarian perspective.

1. There were some compact Magyar-majority territories that could have made it into independent Hungary had the ethnographic principle been followed more strictly. Much of southern Slovakia could have passed to Hungary, for instance, as could a substantial portion of Vojvodina. Would this have been enough? Hungarian nationalists seem to have had an all-or-nothing approach, wanting the entire kingdom within its old borders.

2. There were some compact Magyar-majority territories far from the border. The most significant example I can think of is Szeklerland, in eastern Transylvania, separated from Hungary proper by large belts of non-Magyar-majority territories. What is to be done with these? Exclaves would be less workable than corridors, but how would you draw them?
 
1. There were some compact Magyar-majority territories that could have made it into independent Hungary had the ethnographic principle been followed more strictly. Much of southern Slovakia could have passed to Hungary, for instance, as could a substantial portion of Vojvodina. Would this have been enough? Hungarian nationalists seem to have had an all-or-nothing approach, wanting the entire kingdom within its old borders.

Yes, I think something has to happen to make Hungarian leadership accept that there would be at least some losses.

2. There were some compact Magyar-majority territories far from the border. The most significant example I can think of is Szeklerland, in eastern Transylvania, separated from Hungary proper by large belts of non-Magyar-majority territories. What is to be done with these? Exclaves would be less workable than corridors, but how would you draw them?

I believe that if the Hungarian forces start having successes and losses start mounting the Entente leaders would be more keen on hammering out some kind of agreement, even if it means large population transfers (remember that they have happened IOTL anyway, but now they are more well organized). If the Aster Revolution never happens, Austria could still provide assistance, and I believe the Poles would also be sympathetic to the Hungarian cause, which is a big deal as they are the biggest players right now in the region and the Entente heavily relies on them. Then there is the case of a White Russia also supporting Hungary, as mentioned. With these in mind, I believe something along the lines of WW2 (post 2nd Vienna Award) Hungary could be achieved, including the small strip on the Austrian border that they lost at Trianon.
 
Population transfers will be inevitable. It's anyone's guess as to whether these will result in lasting peace. IIRC Greece and Turkey managed to get along well after 1922, but what of the Hungary-Romania pair?
 
Population transfers will be inevitable. It's anyone's guess as to whether these will result in lasting peace. IIRC Greece and Turkey managed to get along well after 1922, but what of the Hungary-Romania pair?

I guess that depends on how WW2 works out, if it happens at all. With White Russia and a somewhat better managed Central-Europe....
 
Top