Cockier Russia challenges Britain in Persia?

Let's say for the sake of argument that Russia wins the Russo-Japanese War decisively, at sea and then forcing Japan to a stalemate and surrender on land.

Coming off of this victory the Russians suppress the 1905 Revolutions.

The Anglo-Russian Entente of 1907 was signed shortly after, and Russia began to concentrate its efforts in Pan-Slavism.

So if Russia was cockier due to victory would they challenge Britain in Persia and Central Asia instead of messing around in the Balkans? Would they start something with the Ottoman's again?
 
They might try, but that might push Britain, the Ottomans and Germany together, which would be far too powerful a coalition for the Russians to beat. If Russia tried anything in the Balkans, the Austro-Hungarians, Ottomans and Germans would be all over it. Central Asia, and Britain will have allies to back it up. Russia wouldn't be able to handle pressure from more than one source, leading to either imperial overstretch or a more balanced attitude than in this ATL. i If they were belligerent, it might start a major war early, but would more likely lead to a relatively isolated Russia settling its Far East more.
 
If Russia can get an alliance with Germany, although unlikely, they could take on the Ottomans and from their the Austrians. Or they could indulge in some Byzantine diplomacy, getting AH on their side and taking Bulgaria, Wallachia and Moldavia from the Ottomans, with AH getting Bosnia-Herzegovina. It's unlikely that Russia could get hegemony in the Balkans, but they could definitely increase their power there.
 

Warsie

Banned
Pan slavism is a strong force it might be hard to resist. Honestly a greater pod for this would be during the 'great game' and let Belarus have a stringer national identity due to being annexed later
 

abc123

Banned
If Russia can get an alliance with Germany, although unlikely, they could take on the Ottomans and from their the Austrians. Or they could indulge in some Byzantine diplomacy, getting AH on their side and taking Bulgaria, Wallachia and Moldavia from the Ottomans, with AH getting Bosnia-Herzegovina. It's unlikely that Russia could get hegemony in the Balkans, but they could definitely increase their power there.

And in my TL "Triple Alliance" ( link: https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=196992 ) just that happend. And Persia could be a very intresting place in that TL...
;)
 
They might try, but that might push Britain, the Ottomans and Germany together, which would be far too powerful a coalition for the Russians to beat. If Russia tried anything in the Balkans, the Austro-Hungarians, Ottomans and Germans would be all over it. Central Asia, and Britain will have allies to back it up. Russia wouldn't be able to handle pressure from more than one source, leading to either imperial overstretch or a more balanced attitude than in this ATL. i If they were belligerent, it might start a major war early, but would more likely lead to a relatively isolated Russia settling its Far East more.

So, I see two scenarios here, and only one of them really involves allies getting involved.

1) Russia only goes after Persia, gets beaten by the British, and probably don't get involved in WW1, however it starts, due to the Entente being in shambles.

2) Russia goes after Persia and the Ottoman's, which might, as you say result in Germany and Austria-Hungary getting in on that. Dunno what happens after that but Russia is fucked, that's revolution material (possibly even the Czar leaving).
 
Good opportunity for getting stronger dominance over Persia could be in this scenario as well. Russia has prepared for Crimean war accordingly, managed to pull off at least a status quo that goes more into their favor if not a victory. With their new confidence they decide to take a more direct approach to the British presence in India, and after Sepoy rebellion of 1857 starts they do everything they can to mess London's plans up in the region; that would include armaments shipments, "military advisors", whatever is needed. And on the other hand they strongly encourage and/or directly help Persia in attack of Afghanistan to retake Herat and whatever else they want. In the end of the things you have a stronger Persia that is very grateful to Moscow, utterly in their sphere of influence, no matter if indian rebellion succeeded or not, main point would be that she should serve as a viable distraction to all other Russia/Persia cooperation plans.
 
Good opportunity for getting stronger dominance over Persia could be in this scenario as well. Russia has prepared for Crimean war accordingly, managed to pull off at least a status quo that goes more into their favor if not a victory. With their new confidence they decide to take a more direct approach to the British presence in India, and after Sepoy rebellion of 1857 starts they do everything they can to mess London's plans up in the region; that would include armaments shipments, "military advisors", whatever is needed. And on the other hand they strongly encourage and/or directly help Persia in attack of Afghanistan to retake Herat and whatever else they want. In the end of the things you have a stronger Persia that is very grateful to Moscow, utterly in their sphere of influence, no matter if indian rebellion succeeded or not, main point would be that she should serve as a viable distraction to all other Russia/Persia cooperation plans.

A bit early...
 
Top