Austria defeat the Ottomans in the Russo-Austrian-Turkish War (1735–1739).

I was thinking how could Austria win this rather disasterous war?

For gain I think what would later become Danube(Tuna) Vilayet would be likely plus the Danube principalities.



(thanks to Abdul)

Why this area, because it's easier to control than Bosnia with the transportion at the time.

A interesting aspect are also what would the effect of the ethnic cleansing of eastern Tun be*.
Could we see a Black Sea "Swabia"? or would Romanians settle it.

What would the consequences for the Romanians be if their entire population was part of the Austrian Empire,
would we see the Eastern Catholic Church end up dominant among Romanians?

What would the early influx of a large number of Danubian Muslims mean for the Ottoman Empire (Muslim majority in Edirne)?
*More or less unavoidable at the time.

 

I think you are a bit too optimistic about the possible gains (but of course, I do not know what scenario you have in mind for the Austrians Winning the war). I think just the anexation of th Romanian prinicpalities is a more realistic goal. O fcourse, the war of 1735-39 was a coalition war, and we must think about what the Russians will get in the event of a decisive victory. They might want to have at least Moldova, bt they will probably still be too far away to take it.
In any case, any Austrian expansion in the lower Danube valley will cut right across the main direction of Russian strategic expansion, which will create a lot of problems in the long run. I can seethe tow empires going to war very soon, instead of continuing their alliance against Turkey.
The Romanians will be a big challenge fo Austria. They will not like having their authonomy taken away, especially not by a western european power. I can see the Russians, and probably even the Ottomans, sponsoring uprisings among the Romanians, whit all the "fun" this entails.
On the other hand, If the Austrians play their cards right and successfully assimilate the Romanians, possibly with the help of the eastern catholic church, then the Romanians might replace the Hungarians as the Austrian's main enforcers within the empire.

 

I personal think that cutting the Russians off from the Balkans this early will improve the stability of the Balkans, and force the Russian goal of conquering Constatinoble at least through the Balkans. maybe we will see a Russia more focused on taking the Caucasus and eastern modern Turkey, but this will enable the Ottoman and Persian ally against such a clear and common threat. At the same time if the Austrians gain Tuna, I could see the Muslim refugees bring Muslims in clear majority in Edirne, which we could see as a integrated part of a future post Ottoman state. While any potential independent "Bulgaria" will just be greater (Slavic Macedonia), another benefits for both Ottomans and Habsburgs are that the Serbs end up a integrated part of the Habsburg Empire giving both one less problem to focus on.

 

But why would the Russians give up on the balkans and try the longer and very difficult route through the Caucasus. I don't think the Austrians can really scare them off. And Austria is due to be gangbanged anyway in 1740, so I can see Russia (and possibly Turkey too) jumping in against the Austrians in this scenario.
The presence of large slavic or slavophone and orthodox populations in the Balkans will act like a magnet for the Russians. And exterminating the muslims will not make the balkans much more stable, as it will not solve the conflict between orthodox and catholics, whihc hated eacother since before the muslims got there.

 

If Austria win against the Turks, they are going to be in a stronger position in 1740, and more important at this point the Russians was still trying their best to deal the the Crimean Bulgars, and I didn't suggest that the Muslims would be exterminating, I suggested that they would be driven out of Tuna and more or less end up in majority in south eastern Bulgaria, which would end part of alt-"Turkish"* state. While Serbia in this timeline are unable to expand south as it's a Habsburg territorium (the Habsburg lost in OTL war in 1735-1739)

*I use "" because I doubt such a state would be Turkish, if some of it richest territories was populated by Bulgarian Muslims.

 

Hrm. So the Danube would become a Habsburg artery, eh?

I wonder if you'd see an increase in commercial agriculture. But I have no clue how the Habsburgs would govern the principalities at this point.

 

That would look cool to me an austria with more orthodox lands.

 

More or less and while the Danube was shitty to sail on at this point so was the Rhine in the past, decades of draining, digging and damming will transform it into a eastern Rhine

I think they would rule them much like they did the military frontier, as areas traditional outside Hungary they can ignore the Hungarians. So we will likely see a focus on making the Romanians Eastern Catholics, beside that we will see large scale settlements of Germans, it's unlikely to have much effect in Wallachia and Moldavia proper, but Tuna and lower Bessarabia, with the local Muslims driven out, can very well end up with a German plurality or majority. I think in Moldavia and Wallachia they will try integrate the nobility in the empire, so we will likely see large estates and few rights to the peasants, while Tuna and Lower Bessarabia will end up much like the military frontier, dominated by small freeholders.

 

Actually, most of the lower Danube was ok to sail on, with the exception of the "Iron Gates" gorge through the Carpathians, which can not be improved with 18th century Tech anyway.

As for the governance of the Romanian lands, I can see the Austrians going for direct anexation, which is going to piss of the locals a lot. I can see the region being to Austria what Scotland was to Britain IOTL: an area prone to constant rebellions until all traces of the old order can be erased (and for much of the same reasons in both cases).