Bosnian Kingdom in 1878?

[moro]

During the Berlin congress of 1878 austria-hungary obtained the occupation of bosnia-herzegovina with only weak ottoman opposition.
What if, instead of occupying the territory, it was decided to create an independent state?
After all, there were not a few objections to the Vienna court about an expansion.
An economically subjugated kingdom with strong ties would perhaps have been more useful and less dangerous than direct domination.
Would it have been possible?

 

[GeographyDude]

. . . An economically subjugated kingdom with strong ties . . .

‘Course, doesn’t sound ideal, nor all that independent, obviously! But things sometimes loosen up over time.

And there might be highly interesting ripples!

For example, when Austria-Hungary gives Serbia an ultimatum and a list of demands following the assassination of Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie Marie, and really demands that no sovereign state could agree on . . . maybe Bosnia acts as a go-between and does so before it reaches this end state.

 

[Aghasverov]

‘Course, doesn’t sound ideal, nor all that independent, obviously! But things sometimes loosen up over time.

And there might be highly interesting ripples!

For example, when Austria-Hungary gives Serbia an ultimatum and a list of demands following the assassination of Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie Marie, and really demands that no sovereign state could agree on . . . maybe Bosnia acts as a go-between and does so before it reaches this end state.

I think in this scenario at least one of those ripples may have butterflied away the assassination of FF completely

Who would be King of such a state? I'm guessing some German Prince or Duke with nothing better to do at the time, as was usually the case

If the Serbian leadership has the same goals afterwards as IOTL, I'd imagine infiltrating and destabilizing the Bosnian Kingdom might take a higher priority than assassinating Austrian notables...

 

[thezerech]

If it is decided that 1. Turkey should not have Bosnia (easy) and 2. Austria also should not have Bosnia then this is possible. If someone says, we don't want Austria to have Bosnia, and the Austrians decide it isn't worth a war, then establishing an independent buffer state is a precedented response in European politics.

The question is, why/who would object? Italy and Russia seem like reasonable options, although something would have to throw a wrench into Austro-Russian relations earlier than IOTL.

Italy objecting might not elicit the other Great Powers to back, and they probably would not fight (and win) a war over Bosnia.

If Turkey is stronger than Bosnia isn't going to Austria without a fight, a general Turkish Balkan collapse slightly earlier might cause the Powers to call a conference to prevent Russia and Austria from eating the Balkans and starting a war over it. If the Ottoman Empire is falling apart that might galvanize the powers.

 

[Grey Wolf]

I think in this scenario at least one of those ripples may have butterflied away the assassination of FF completely

Who would be King of such a state? I'm guessing some German Prince or Duke with nothing better to do at the time, as was usually the case

If the Serbian leadership has the same goals afterwards as IOTL, I'd imagine infiltrating and destabilizing the Bosnian Kingdom might take a higher priority than assassinating Austrian notables...

This would definitely be an interesting alternate history!

It won't be Ferdinand of Coburg, he's only 17 at this point. His father, though, was only sixty with a good family

 

[Aghasverov]

This would definitely be an interesting alternate history!

It won't be Ferdinand of Coburg, he's only 17 at this point. His father, though, was only sixty with a good family

Prince August? Good choice, even though he wouldn't live much longer... LOTS of family connections there....

 

[GeographyDude]

. . . If the Serbian leadership has the same goals afterwards as IOTL, I'd imagine infiltrating and destabilizing the Bosnian Kingdom . . .

Might certainly play out this way!

Or perhaps cooler heads prevail . . .

 

[Aghasverov]

Might certainly play out this way!

Or perhaps cooler heads prevail . . .

Well... I'd like to think this would be possible, but.....
The "Pan-Slavic" sentiment seemed to take root in Serbia more deeply than anywhere else in the Balkans... unification of the South Slavic peoples under the "natural" leadership of the Serbs (without incidentally consultation with other South Slavs who might not consider themselves Serbs ) seems to have been a recurring theme...
Cooler heads would certainly not have conceived of the idea of offing the heir apparent of their big and powerful neighbor to the North...whether an independent Bosnian Kingdom (which would've been seen, especially by the supporters of the Karadordevics, as an essentially artificial creation) could've changed this dynamic, I don't know... but I have my doubts....

 

[moro]

If it is decided that 1. Turkey should not have Bosnia (easy) and 2. Austria also should not have Bosnia then this is possible. If someone says, we don't want Austria to have Bosnia, and the Austrians decide it isn't worth a war, then establishing an independent buffer state is a precedented response in European politics.

The question is, why/who would object? Italy and Russia seem like reasonable options, although something would have to throw a wrench into Austro-Russian relations earlier than IOTL.

Italy objecting might not elicit the other Great Powers to back, and they probably would not fight (and win) a war over Bosnia.

If Turkey is stronger than Bosnia isn't going to Austria without a fight, a general Turkish Balkan collapse slightly earlier might cause the Powers to call a conference to prevent Russia and Austria from eating the Balkans and starting a war over it. If the Ottoman Empire is falling apart that might galvanize the powers.

it could be a mix, increased internal resistance on the Hungarian side and an Italian objection could do the trick.

This would definitely be an interesting alternate history!

It won't be Ferdinand of Coburg, he's only 17 at this point. His father, though, was only sixty with a good family

Prince August? Good choice, even though he wouldn't live much longer... LOTS of family connections there....

other hypotheses for a candidate? I guess he will be Catholic or Protestant, perhaps an Austro-Hungarian nobleman?

 

[Grey Wolf]

it could be a mix, increased internal resistance on the Hungarian side and an Italian objection could do the trick.


other hypotheses for a candidate? I guess he will be Catholic or Protestant, perhaps an Austro-Hungarian nobleman?

It certainly wouldn't be anyone who didn't hold the rank of prince. Here's a list

List of princes of Austria-Hungary - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Falecius]

Italy surely will not be going to be anywhere close to the position in which whatever ideas her government may fancy about Bosnia are mattering anything at all.

 

[Jürgen]

Most princes chosen as king of Balkan nations was chosen from minor royal houses based on their family connections to the major houses. A obvious choice would be Prince Valdemar of Denmark who was chosen as Prince of Bulgaria but decided against to avoid potential future conflicts with his brother the king of Greece. There's little risk of future conflicts with Greece as monarch of Bosnia , he would keep the Russian happy as he was brother in law to the future Alexander III of Russia and the fact he was a Protestant would mean he didn't belong to any of the three dominating groups of the kingdom. He would likely serve as little more than a de facto Austrian vassal.

Another aspect I suspect than Bosnian would be made a principality as that would keep it de jura a Ottoman vassal. The political effects would be that Russia would save face both in 1878 and 1908. With a local rule we would likely also see a greater focus on developing the country.

 

[moro]

Italy surely will not be going to be anywhere close to the position in which whatever ideas her government may fancy about Bosnia are mattering anything at all.

Andràssi's whole game in Berlin was to make the occupation of Bosnian appear a matter that Austria reluctantly accepted, this to allay Hungarian fears.
if Italy opposes it, it risks compromising the internal position of the minister.
Italy and the Ottomans alone did not have the strength to oppose but they had the soft power to make occupation difficult for Austria.
knowing this, for Austria it would be better to arrive at an indirect dominion over the region, in this way they would have the advantages of controlling the territory without the problem of subversive peoples and diplomatic objections.

Most princes chosen as king of Balkan nations was chosen from minor royal houses based on their family connections to the major houses. A obvious choice would be Prince Valdemar of Denmark who was chosen as Prince of Bulgaria but decided against to avoid potential future conflicts with his brother the king of Greece. There's little risk of future conflicts with Greece as monarch of Bosnia , he would keep the Russian happy as he was brother in law to the future Alexander III of Russia and the fact he was a Protestant would mean he didn't belong to any of the three dominating groups of the kingdom. He would likely serve as little more than a de facto Austrian vassal.

definitely a good candidate.

Another aspect I suspect than Bosnian would be made a principality as that would keep it de jura a Ottoman vassal. The political effects would be that Russia would save face both in 1878 and 1908. With a local rule we would likely also see a greater focus on developing the country.

good point.
I guess it might make the balkans a little less agitated.