Austria collapsing after 1866

[cjc]

So what if for some resone bizmarks diplomacy fails and France joinds Austria agenst Prussia, Russia joinds Prussia and a more general eropian war is created.

Based on how domonit Prussia was in both wars agenst Austria and France and whith the help of Russia I still see them winning this war so what if Austria collapses do to this war.

Prussia gets bohimia and the rest of the German majority areas, Russia gets Galicia, Italy gets Venetia , treats and Tarantino, and hungary gets interdependence.

I don't know what France would lose maby what they lost historically maby less.

And I don't know on which side if any England would join in this case but probably France and Austria for balance of power resonse if nothing else.

 

[Tresckow]

The situation you described wouldn't happen.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

The situation you described wouldn't happen.

Or if Russia jumped in to help Prussia and France steps in to help preserve the European order/status quo, Italy won't be jumping on Austria and Britain will quickly support the French. Prussia gets hit by a too many front war and quickly blows through her available cash as the war drags on and the Imperial armies come in, likely with the Danes given a thumbs up and nudge to move back into Slesvig and Holstein, and the Prussians lose their initial quick mobalization and manuverability advantage and ends up getting into a grinding war they're bound to lose. Expect Russia to cut them lose to try to limit the damage to themselves and an international conference to reorganize Centeral Europe to contain them, and Bismark's carefully crafted methiods to circumvent the Landtag to collapse like the house of cards it was

 

[Vanity 6]

For the record I’m not a fan of the spontaneous implosion of Austria, Independent Lands of St Stephen or Russian Galaicia.

But now that I’ve got all that off my chest let’s just say this all happens.

It’s a dystopia for Prussia. I’m assuming Bohemia is annexed outright increasing the Catholic and Slavic populations. Bad news. Austria I guess is a constituent state of the new German Empire? And now this Hermany is wedged in between a vengeful France and an ambitious Russia.

It’s a dystopia for Hungary which has lost its big sister Austria and now has to choose between being a failed state or a satellite of Germany. With Germany in the role of Imperator in Central Europe propping up Hungary it will have to either have to allow Russia a sphere of influence in the Balkans or fight.

Doesn’t look good. Bismarck was a smart guy.

 

[Ariosto]

I've thought of this scenario before for a Sandbox game I was in years back, @Magus1108 and "Merely A Cold, Nothing More".

Spoiler: Larger Images from Before I Learned To Size Them Down

First off, the map above shows the result of an Alternate Italian Revolution and Franco-Prussian War, keep that in mind.

This was before it became more clear to me that Wilhelm I's goals were more limited to the annexation of the Sudetenland by and large rather than the whole of Austria proper, but I'd argue it is workable all the same. Prussia would not directly annex Austria, but the two nations would be ruled in Personal Union under Wilhelm I and his heirs, with the Bohemian Crownlands being made an independent Kingdom under the rule of Prince Albert. Hungary was granted independence with full territorial integrity, though I could never decide on who the nobility might have chosen as ruler; I leaned towards a native Hungarian given residual nationalism from the Revolutions period, but could not find a clear contender. Russia annexed Galicia so as to prevent the formation of independent Polish or Ukrainian States. Italy would have been rewarded with a breadth of various claims so as to keep it on side, especially as the Austrians can for the time being not intercede on such discussions.

This I decided was the best compromise when it came to a collapse of the Austrian regime in the Austro-Prussian War, or at least the most acceptable one to those powers with an interest in such a collapse and the power to interfere on a significant scale.

​

 

[kreepysam]

I've thought of this scenario before for a Sandbox game I was in years back, @Magus1108 and "Merely A Cold, Nothing More".

Spoiler: Larger Images from Before I Learned To Size Them Down

First off, the map above shows the result of an Alternate Italian Revolution and Franco-Prussian War, keep that in mind.

This was before it became more clear to me that Wilhelm I's goals were more limited to the annexation of the Sudetenland by and large rather than the whole of Austria proper, but I'd argue it is workable all the same. Prussia would not directly annex Austria, but the two nations would be ruled in Personal Union under Wilhelm I and his heirs, with the Bohemian Crownlands being made an independent Kingdom under the rule of Prince Albert. Hungary was granted independence with full territorial integrity, though I could never decide on who the nobility might have chosen as ruler; I leaned towards a native Hungarian given residual nationalism from the Revolutions period, but could not find a clear contender. Russia annexed Galicia so as to prevent the formation of independent Polish or Ukrainian States. Italy would have been rewarded with a breadth of various claims so as to keep it on side, especially as the Austrians can for the time being not intercede on such discussions.

This I decided was the best compromise when it came to a collapse of the Austrian regime in the Austro-Prussian War, or at least the most acceptable one to those powers with an interest in such a collapse and the power to interfere on a significant scale.

​

This is a really interesting map. It seems apparent that the Russians were bought off with the kingdom of Galicia, but would they need anything else as compensation for such a geopolitical revolution (e.g. secret handshake with Prussia/Germany for carving up Balkans?) Also, how were France and Britain induced to not intervene?

 

[Ariosto]

This is a really interesting map. It seems apparent that the Russians were bought off with the kingdom of Galicia, but would they need anything else as compensation for such a geopolitical revolution (e.g. secret handshake with Prussia/Germany for carving up Balkans?) Also, how were France and Britain induced to not intervene?

Russia would no longer have a competitor in the form of the Austrian Empire for influence in the Balkans, and could potentially have strong influence in the Hungarian Kingdom as well; I don't see them being particularly successful in that endeavor given Russia's past actions regarding the Hungarian Revolution of '48, which would leave an opening for Prussia or later Germany to become its benefactor should it so choose. Regardless, Hungary is a far weaker opponent when it comes to establishing spheres of influence. Historically though, Prussia indeed promised to adopt a "hands off" approach to the Balkans in favor of Russia, and I don't see the immediate case being different here.

The French were only just finalizing their withdrawal from Mexico, and were for the most part isolated on the continent. Disputing the terms of the final Peace Treaty would have alienated the Russians and Italians who they hoped to bring into an alliance against Prussia, and their final option the British were largely uninterested in European affairs so long as their own sphere was protected; Napoleon's past discussions regarding the future of Belgium made him more of a threat then Prussia at the time.

The British, in turn, would have and did view Prussia-Austria as an effective counterweight to Napoleonic France on the continent.

Edit: That said, I am not an expert on European Great Power politics during the period, so there could something that I'm missing that would change the equation in one or two places, enough to upset the balance.​

 

[Zeller]

It’s a dystopia for Hungary which has lost its big sister Austria and now has to choose between being a failed state or a satellite of Germany. With Germany in the role of Imperator in Central Europe propping up Hungary it will have to either have to allow Russia a sphere of influence in the Balkans or fight.

But why is it a dystopia? Isn’t that exactly what Hungary wanted in 1849? Austria wasn’t a big sister to Hungary before 1867. Why would independence make it a failed state?

 

[Vanity 6]

Even a haughty big sister is still a sister. And without Austria Hungary is vulnerable to internal and external pressure. Why would the Croats or Romanians accede to Hungary when they could side with Germany or Russia to gain their own advantage? And which boot is worse for Hungary? The Tsar’s or the Kaiser’s? I’m guessing the Kaiser is who they choose. That at least gives them the semblance of independence. But at what price?

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

Even a haughty big sister is still a sister. And without Austria Hungary is vulnerable to internal and external pressure. Why would the Croats or Romanians accede to Hungary when they could side with Germany or Russia to gain their own advantage? And which boot is worse for Hungary? The Tsar’s or the Kaiser’s? I’m guessing the Kaiser is who they choose. That at least gives them the semblance of independence. But at what price?

Croatia would likely be independent. Romanians are a different matter. Neither Hungary will allow a loss of Transylvania, nor the Romanians willing to give it up.

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

Or if Russia jumped in to help Prussia and France steps in to help preserve the European order/status quo, Italy won't be jumping on Austria and Britain will quickly support the French. Prussia gets hit by a too many front war and quickly blows through her available cash as the war drags on and the Imperial armies come in, likely with the Danes given a thumbs up and nudge to move back into Slesvig and Holstein, and the Prussians lose their initial quick mobalization and manuverability advantage and ends up getting into a grinding war they're bound to lose. Expect Russia to cut them lose to try to limit the damage to themselves and an international conference to reorganize Centeral Europe to contain them, and Bismark's carefully crafted methiods to circumvent the Landtag to collapse like the house of cards it was

A pan-European War in 1866 will be a godsent gift for the Ottomans. Russia busy fighting Austria and France.

I have my scepticism if it will turn into this but it is up to Napoleon. If he sees through Bismark and intervenes after declaring war on Austria, Prussia is caught between two fires. It is up to Alexander II whether helping Prussia is worth it. I am also not sure if Britain is willing to enter the European War so quickly. My two cents are for them to observe and mediate afterwards or intervene to prevent one power overcomes the other.

 

[Mikestone8]

A pan-European War in 1866 will be a godsent gift for the Ottomans. Russia busy fighting Austria and France.

I have my scepticism if it will turn into this but it is up to Napoleon. If he sees through Bismark and intervenes after declaring war on Austria, Prussia is caught between two fires. It is up to Alexander II whether helping Prussia is worth it. I am also not sure if Britain is willing to enter the European War so quickly. My two cents are for them to observe and mediate afterwards or intervene to prevent one power overcomes the other.

Britain was still looking over her shoulder at the US. British relations with the Union had been prickly at best, and Fenians were raiding into Cabnada. I don't see HMG doing anythig

 

[FillyofDelphi]

I have my scepticism if it will turn into this but it is up to Napoleon. If he sees through Bismark and intervenes after declaring war on Austria, Prussia is caught between two fires. It is up to Alexander II whether helping Prussia is worth it. I am also not sure if Britain is willing to enter the European War so quickly. My two cents are for them to observe and mediate afterwards or intervene to prevent one power overcomes the other.

With the terms Russia and Prussia are putting on the table? Unless they agree to scrap the treaty like San Stefano and have the Austrain pruning be decided by international Congress, this is basically taking a sledgehammer to any semblence of Balance of Power in Centeral and Eastern Europe which allowing to stick would critically undermine French and British policy towards the Baltic and Balkans.

 

[alexmilman]

So what if for some resone bizmarks diplomacy fails and France joinds Austria agenst Prussia, Russia joinds Prussia and a more general eropian war is created.

Based on how domonit Prussia was in both wars agenst Austria and France and whith the help of Russia I still see them winning this war so what if Austria collapses do to this war.

Prussia gets bohimia and the rest of the German majority areas, Russia gets Galicia, Italy gets Venetia , treats and Tarantino, and hungary gets interdependence.

I don't know what France would lose maby what they lost historically maby less.

And I don't know on which side if any England would join in this case but probably France and Austria for balance of power resonse if nothing else.

Probably it would make sense to introduce a less vague timing because between 1860 and 1870 both France and Russia had been seriously reforming their military systems.

So, if you are talking about 1866, then in OTL:

Prussia fielded 437K (total size of the Prussian army was 557K)
and Austria - 407K (total size - 558K)
(total sizes are from http://loveread.me/read_book.php?id=72783&p=1)

Russia in 1864 - 67 lowered size of a standing army to 742K (stationed mostly close to the Western borders) with a possibility to raise it up to between 1 and 1.5M in the case of war. The numbers were growing (and equipment improving) through the 1860s - 70s (Milutin's Reforms). In 1860's weaponry was still obsolete (introduction of the Berdan rifle - 1868, the same for modern artillery).
https://megabook.ru/article/Военные+реформы+1860-1870-х+годов
Russia, by the obvious reason (called "Crimean War"), did not like France and Austria and was quite friendly with Prussia (among other things, mother of Alexander II was daughter of Frederick William III of Prussia).

France in 1869 was supposedly able to field in Europe 288K (against anticipated 1M Prussian/German). Niel's reform is applicable only to 1870 time table.

In 1854, the British Army had a total strength of 140,043 men. Of that number 39,750 were stationed in the colonies, 29,208 in India, and the remaining 71,085 in the British Isles. (https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-...ative-to-its-contemporaneous-rivals-and-peers)
Or in 1883 124K (https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-14218909)
In other words, not a major factor in a land-based war. It remained uncommitted both during the Austro-Prussian and Franco-Prussian wars.

So if in the late 1860s there is a confrontation between Franco-Austrian and Prussian-Russian alliances (plus smaller continental players on both sides), then the Franco-Austrian chances for victory are not very good and an idea that the war could be stopped by the British saying "don't do this!" is rather unconvincing: at that time neither Prussia nor Russia had extensive overseas trade or put too much stress on the naval programs.

Now, as I understand there is a question of the Hungarians choosing or rejecting their independence. If the time frame is 1860s (and there is no earlier Austro - Prussian war), then there is no dual empire yet and I'm not sure that an overwhelming number of the Hungarians would prefer status quo to the independence. While the memories about Russian intervention in 1848 - 49 were not the happy ones, it was Austrians who did all the hangings. Of course, there would be immediate issue of Croatia.

 

[Mikestone8]

A pan-European War in 1866 will be a godsent gift for the Ottomans. Russia busy fighting Austria and France.

I have my scepticism if it will turn into this but it is up to Napoleon. If he sees through Bismark and intervenes after declaring war on Austria, Prussia is caught between two fires. It is up to Alexander II whether helping Prussia is worth it.

He won’t be eager, still having the Crimean War and Polish Revolt to pay for. OTOH he can’t let Prussia be crushed as that gives him a Franco-Austrian alliance on his doorstep, creating a threat at his most sensitive point – Poland. OTO, he certainly doesn’t want a Greater German superstate nest door, even one ruled by his uncle. He will be anxious to keep the war limited. Expect notes to all the foreign embassies, expressing opposition to any widening of the war, but “reserving Russia’s freedom of action” should it occur. Given Nappy III’s reluctance to fight, that is probably enough to keep him neutral.

Should he be drawn in, Alexander will want to keep the war as short and limited as possible. Say S/H and the “Sudetenland” [1] for Prussia and part of Galicia [2] for Russia, plus status quo ante for France if she’s come in. Still a North German Confederation but Hanover et al just losing some territory rather than annexed outright. He will be seconded in his moderation by Prussian conservatives, who will not wish to see Prussia swallowed up in a majority/Catholic Greater Germany – even one ruled by a Hohenzollern. In this situation I just can’t see the OP happening.



[1] I use that word as a convenient shorthand. I have no idea whether it was current in 1866 or (as I suspect) just coined “for the occasion” in the 1930s.

[2] Probably not all of it. Alexander won’t want to saddle himself with even more rebellious Poles, and probably won’t especially want more Jews either. A few Ukrainians from the eastern end will probably suffice.

 

[alexmilman]

The situation you described wouldn't happen.

Why? At that time Russian-French relations were weaker than Russian-Prussian (France was openly sympathetic to the January Uprising) and Russian-Austrian were plain bad after the CW. In OTL Russian military observers had been present on the Prussian side in 1866 and 1870 and the French defeat had been used to declare that Russia is not bound anymore by the conditions of Paris Treaty of 1856.

The only problem on the Russian side in that situation was that it was passing through period of the major reforms. Still it had an army of over 1M.

 

[alexmilman]

He won’t be eager, still having the Crimean War and Polish Revolt to pay for. OTOH he can’t let Prussia be crushed as that gives him a Franco-Austrian alliance on his doorstep, creating a threat at his most sensitive point – Poland. OTO, he certainly doesn’t want a Greater German superstate nest door, even one ruled by his uncle. He will be anxious to keep the war limited. Expect notes to all the foreign embassies, expressing opposition to any widening of the war, but “reserving Russia’s freedom of action” should it occur. Given Nappy III’s reluctance to fight, that is probably enough to keep him neutral.

Should he be drawn in, Alexander will want to keep the war as short and limited as possible. Say S/H and the “Sudetenland” [1] for Prussia and part of Galicia [2] for Russia, plus status quo ante for France if she’s come in. Still a North German Confederation but Hanover et al just losing some territory rather than annexed outright. He will be seconded in his moderation by Prussian conservatives, who will not wish to see Prussia swallowed up in a majority/Catholic Greater Germany – even one ruled by a Hohenzollern. In this situation I just can’t see the OP happening.



[1] I use that word as a convenient shorthand. I have no idea whether it was current in 1866 or (as I suspect) just coined “for the occasion” in the 1930s.

[2] Probably not all of it. Alexander won’t want to saddle himself with even more rebellious Poles, and probably won’t especially want more Jews either. A few Ukrainians from the eastern end will probably suffice.

The debt would not be an unsurmountable problem for Alexander II: he kept accumulating the debt during all of his reign both by mishandling economy (only after the whole railroad system was reformed by Witte during the reign of Alexander III the railroads ceased to cause the losses to the state treasury) and by starting a “war for honor” in 1877 and meddling into its conduct ( which turned the planned “blitz” into a messy and costly affair). But your [2] seems to be very reasonable: Alexander had more Poles than he could handle. The war could be presented as an act of revenge for the CW (which would guarantee national enthusiasm, especially if it is short).

As a reward, Alexander may ask for the Prussian diplomatic support in pressuring the Ottomans to return a small piece of territory on the Danube which Russia lost to Moldavia by the Paris Treaty (and which it got back in 1878). And, of course, with France being defeated, Russia may denounce the Paris Treaty few years earlier than in OTL (especially, ban on the Black Sea fleet).

 

[Mikestone8]

As a reward, Alexander may ask for the Prussian diplomatic support in pressuring the Ottomans to return a small piece of territory on the Danube which Russia lost to Moldavia by the Paris Treaty (and which it got back in 1878). And, of course, with France being defeated, Russia may denounce the Paris Treaty few years earlier than in OTL (especially, ban on the Black Sea fleet).

Likely enough, though William would also want compensation (presumably the Dobruja) for his fellow Hohenzollern who was now Rumania's Prince.

Alexander will certainly denounce the Black Sea clauses the moment he thinks he can get away with it. The joke here is that, having done so in 1870, he then found that he couldn't afford to build a Black See Fleet. Iirc it was about 1890 before Russia actually got one. But of course it was a point of honour. so practical considerations didn't count.

That's why Bismarck was able to get away with so much. He was the one-eyed man in the country of the blind.

 

[alexmilman]

Alexander will certainly denounce the Black Sea clauses the moment he thinks he can get away with it. The joke here is that, having done so in 1870, he then found that he couldn't afford to build a Black See Fleet. Iirc it was about 1890 before Russia actually got one. But of course it was a point of honour. so practical considerations didn't count.

That's why Bismarck was able to get away with so much. He was the one-eyed man in the country of the blind.

AFAIK, the issue was not as much financial impossibility as Gorchakov’s unwillingness to irritate Britain (he was obsessed with a notion of the European Concert practically at all costs). During the same period Russian Baltic fleet got 18 battleships, 12 frigates and hundred cannon boats while Pacific fleet got 12 new armored ships, 9 transport ships and 4 frigates. Even the Black Sea fleet got 19 new ships, mostly armed steamers used as the light cruisers, including construction of very expensive (2.8M rubles without armament and 3.85M) famous round ships “Novgorod” and “Vice admiral Popov” built in 1871 - 75. What it was lacking, were the armored battleships (which proved to be a problem in 1877 - 78). Program of their construction had been adopted in 1881 after extremely costly war and the first 3 had been built in 1889 - 94. As I already mentioned, the delay was a matter of the foreign politics rather then finances.

Budget deficit was pretty much modus operandi: between 1855 and 1880 only 5 years at least on paper did not have a deficit and cost of the war of 1877-78 was over 1 Billion (CW - 796M). The same goes for the constantly growing negative balance of the foreign trade, etc. The best short definition of the Russian financial situation of this reign had been given in the poem “Popov’s dream”: a person who is seen in public without the pants is being asked if he wants to impersonate Russian budget.

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

AFAIK, the issue was not as much financial impossibility as Gorchakov’s unwillingness to irritate Britain (he was obsessed with a notion of the European Concert practically at all costs). During the same period Russian Baltic fleet got 18 battleships, 12 frigates and hundred cannon boats while Pacific fleet got 12 new armored ships, 9 transport ships and 4 frigates. Even the Black Sea fleet got 19 new ships, mostly armed steamers used as the light cruisers, including construction of very expensive (2.8M rubles without armament and 3.85M) famous round ships “Novgorod” and “Vice admiral Popov” built in 1871 - 75. What it was lacking, were the armored battleships (which proved to be a problem in 1877 - 78). Program of their construction had been adopted in 1881 after extremely costly war and the first 3 had been built in 1889 - 94. As I already mentioned, the delay was a matter of the foreign politics rather then finances.

Budget deficit was pretty much modus operandi: between 1855 and 1880 only 5 years at least on paper did not have a deficit and cost of the war of 1877-78 was over 1 Billion (CW - 796M). The same goes for the constantly growing negative balance of the foreign trade, etc. The best short definition of the Russian financial situation of this reign had been given in the poem “Popov’s dream”: a person who is seen in public without the pants is being asked if he wants to impersonate Russian budget.

Yeah I don't see Prussia pressuring for Dobruja for Romania. Romania will and it needs Alexander II goodwill and his desire to fight the Ottomans. Although Romanian claims on Dobruja are pretty... debatable. They got as a compensation in 1878. Not sure what Czar Alex would want? Get what he asks or try for more?