sorry for late quote
In my opinion the A-H annexation of Bosnia in 1908 was a solid move. It was during a time of Russian weakness, so matters were unlikely to escalate beyond A-H control. To ensure no bad blood, A-H sought and obtained prior Russian approval for the annexation. It entrenched the status quo and removed Bosnia from the table - essentially making it less assessable to the increasingly aspirational goals of Serbia and even the Ottomans. It protected the vast investment A-H had made into the infrastructure of the territory and the rights of the majority of the population, which had no desire for Serbian rule. What's not to like?
Oh there are definitely perceived benefits, but as I said for an empire already feeling some cracks appear over local nationalism it's basically inviting more of it in and exacerbating what was already there. Even if the Russians are using it to their political advantage Pan-slavism is a thing, nationalism is a thing, self determination even just emancipation is a thing. Serbia isn't going to end it's aspirations by AH taking Bosnia, but AH taking Bosnia will ring alarm bells for both Serbian and Slavs in the areas in general. Even if the general population of the area aren't looking to be ruled by Serbia, that doesn't mean they're joyous at the idea of being ruled by AH either. The 'your either AH or Ottoman' is no longer the only possible choice.
(don't get me wrong as I said in my first post I don't think the AH empire is about to blow apart, but it's creaking and the C20th is going to present it with some new challenges)
The Treaty of Berlin 1878 explicitly divided the Balkans into spheres of influence between A-H and Russia - Serbia was attached politically and economically to A-H. It is my understanding the Russians in 1904 sponsored secret military convections between Serbia and Bulgaria - a breach of its undertakings in the aforementioned Treaty. What you are saying is the Russians were openly flouting those breaches.
Well Bulgaria declared its full independence from the Ottoman empire after the treaty of Berlin, It not too surprising they had worked out who they thought their friends were going to be prior to that.
But OK, by the same token AH had flouted it when they annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina. Perhaps relevantly for this debate they did that quickly enough to offer and fait acompli to the world who were not happy but well facts on the ground and all that. However with that in mind you can see why Russia wasn't keen on letting AH offer a fait acompli with Serbia in 1914!
Also there was history with Serbia & B-H, in that the Herzegovina uprising 1878 against the Ottomans had basically been Serbian led.
Yep, but part of the problem was AH was pushing it luck here as well
The mischief being, without that one demand, the balance of the undertakings could not be enforced.
well hang on the ultimatum terms where:
- Suppress all publications which "incite hatred and contempt of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy" and are "directed against its territorial integrity".
- Dissolve the Serbian nationalist organisation Narodna Odbrana ("The People's Defense") and all other such societies in Serbia.
- Eliminate without delay from schoolbooks and public documents all "propaganda against Austria-Hungary".
- Remove from the Serbian military and civil administration all officers and functionaries whose names the Austro-Hungarian Government will provide.
- Accept in Serbia "representatives of the Austro-Hungarian Government" for the "suppression of subversive movements".
- Bring to trial all accessories to the Archduke's assassination and allow "Austro-Hungarian delegates" (law enforcement officers) to take part in the investigations.
- Arrest Major Vojislav Tankosić and civil servant Milan Ciganović who were named as participants in the assassination plot.
- Cease the cooperation of the Serbian authorities in the "traffic in arms and explosives across the frontier"; dismiss and punish the officials of Šabac and Loznica frontier service, "guilty of having assisted the perpetrators of the Sarajevo crime".
- Provide "explanations" to the Austro-Hungarian Government regarding "Serbian officials" who have expressed themselves in interviews "in terms of hostility to the Austro-Hungarian Government".
- Notify the Austro-Hungarian Government "without delay" of the execution of the measures comprised in the ultimatum.
and they agreed to all but the one in bold, the problem with the one in bold is the fear was 2nd half would when being pushed with threat of invasion basically gives up judicial sovereignty on their own soil, and no one is going to willingly agree to that given any recourse
Plus there's the wider context that as mentioned earlier AH had already tried to fabricate evidence a decade earlier
The point being the other 9 were enough to meet reasonable expectation. Perhaps more importantly they would be a good basis for an internationally led process (see below)
Both Serbia and Russia had form in saying one thing and doing another. Even Wilhelm who is cited as approving the Serbian response, suggested territory would need to be taken because Serbia could not be trusted.
OK but neither is AH a 100% reliable actor either. Also Wilhelm did't say that, rather he said:
On 26 July, after reading Serbia's reply, Wilhelm commented, "But that eliminates any reason for war"[132] or "every cause for war falls to the ground".[133] Wilhelm noted that Serbia had made "a capitulation of the most humiliating kind",[133] that "the few reservations [that] Serbia has made with respect to certain points can in my opinion surely be cleared up by negotiation", and acting independently of Grey, made a similar "Stop in Belgrade" offer.[134] Wilhelm stated that because "the Serbs are Orientals, therefore liars, tricksters, and masters of evasion", a temporary Austrian occupation of Belgrade was required until Serbia kept its word
(also if even Wilhelm is describing the Serbian response as being enough to eliminate any reason for war, I think it's reasonable to say it did for pretty much everyone except AH and those others who were really only going to be happy with war)
of course Bethmann Hollweg then does what he does.
The Russians and French made it perfectly clear Serbia would not be held accountable in any circumstances and went so far as to mock the A-H representative in Moscow.
Well as above AH had form here, plus of course Russia was going to back Serbia (and France was going to back Russia) but Russia and France are not the entirety of the international community here. Plus IIRC their response was more against the AH narrative that the assassination was official state policy of Serbia and the ultimatum, not a response that nothing should be done. And that's basically the point here AH didn't what an international investigation or debate (or even the things on that list), because they felt they weren't going to get everything they wanted, and not because the world was actually against them. And well no they weren't likely to get whatever they wanted, but that's the reality of international politics. Especially when you've kind of been stirring the pot a bit in a volatile area. Of course they felt that a better response was:
Count Szögyény reported to Vienna that "here, it is generally taken for granted that if Serbia rejects our demands, we shall at once reply by declaring war, and opening military operations. We are advised ... to confront the world with a fait accompli (emphasis in the original)
Hell I'll quote the whole paragraph because it contains good indications of the well placed German attitudes here, as well:
Also on 24 July, after Berchtold met with the Russian chargé d'affaires, f
urious complaints were prompted from Berlin, warning that Austria should not engage in talks with any other powers in case a compromise might be worked out.[103]* That same day,
Wilhelm wrote on the margin of a dispatch from Tschirschky, calling Austria-Hungary "weak" for not being aggressive enough in the Balkans, and writing that alteration in the power in the Balkans "has got to come. Austria must become predominant in the Balkans as compared to the little ones, and at Russia’s expense."[109] Count
Szögyény reported to Vienna that "here, it is generally taken for granted that if Serbia rejects our demands,
we shall at once reply by declaring war, and opening military operations. We are advised ... to confront the world with a
fait accompli (emphasis in the original)."
[109] When the German ambassador in Belgrade reported how sad the Serbian people were with being faced with the choice of either war or national humiliation,
Wilhelm wrote on the margins of the report: "Bravo! One would not have believed it of the Viennese! ... How hollow the whole Serbian power is proving itself to be; thus, it is seen to be with all the Slav nations! Just tread hard on the heels of that rabble!"[110]
* I mean Christ we wouldn't want a compromise would we?!
**Interesting that he wrote what he wrote on the 26th July (mentioned in the earlier point) two days after writing this, presumably he considers what he wrote on the 26th as compatible with what he wrote here.
My understanding is the French draft was increased to 3 years around 1912. Joffre was appointed around the same time by the French Political leaders, explicitly on the basis of his offensive doctrines, which were swiftly implemented. Joffre was given broader powers and influences than his predecessors, aside from the discretion to breech Belgium neutrality. The Franco-Russian defence agreement evolved into co-ordinated offensives against Germany within +15 days.
You are right, but it took time to put in place and feel the benefit of, and they were still having the to deal with issue of the shorter drafts. However my point was more aimed at this idea of a France militarily led and champing at the bit (when in fact the opposite had been true for decently long time)
On the change in plans from defensive to offensive doctrines it not really the case of first one and then the other being complete replacement
the French still had concentration plans in place up until 1914. Plan XVI was still getting tweaked in Sep 1911 was still basically a concentration plan it just changed where they would be concentrated. It took 18 month from then for Plan XVII (mentioned earlier) to be created. It didn't actually reach commanders until Feb 1914. Mover while yes it involved going ion the offensive in it wasn't a preemptive attack but rather going out to meet an already advancing German army (possibly Belgium, Luxembourg or AL). Similarly the restrictions that were placed on the French army operating in Belgium back that up, they could only enter Belgium if Germany had done so first.
(plus there's the point that it doesn't matter what you military plan calls on you to do, if your army can't practically do it it's not going to happen)
so yes the Franco-Russian plan was to make the Germans fight on two fronts at once but it was to do so in response to German initiation (not that Russia had much practical choice in the matter, they're faster than they had been but their still not going to beat German mobilisation). +15 days is after all a very long time in this context!
I believe the Russian 'premobilisation' started before A-H - don't ask me the difference.
They did, but it was partial and not announced (not that it really mattesr if AH hears about it, it's reasonable to respond to it). Thing is their doing it in response to AH saying to Serbia if you don't agree all terms we're invading tomorrow, and as above the message from both AH and Germany was yes, yes let's do this. And well what can I say people will respond to things you say out especially if they know it takes them longer to do so than others and fast mobilisation is perceived to be a key part of success.
My understanding is the Treaty of London was non-prescriptive on either the timing or how the signatories were expected to protect Belgium territory, but don't expect me to defend the German invasion of Belgium.
Oh I wasn't excepting you to do so, and yes there's always going to be room to debate the finer deal of a treaty in theory, but in reality Belgium's response to Germany pretty much set the tone for how the treaty would work. On top of this you had already had Germany testing the waters of British neutrality on the 29th and it having the opposite effect so Britain's interpretation of the ToL really shouldn't have come as a surprise
One of the reasons A-H felt compelled to act was German support in recent times had become somewhat fickle. Russian blank cheques had been raining on the Balkans for some time, but a German blank cheque was something rare and had to be spent. As an aside, the Germans expected the cheque to be used for groceries, not a farm.
I think you are right (although there are several well placed German actors who did their very best to accelerate stuff). But really that's all still on AH and Germany. Not really the rest of the world's fault AH feel it's coupon is about to expire so must use it.
NB, yes OK I've been quoting Wiki, but I'm fine with that because I've been posting quotes that are themselves supported by separate citations, and it good place for collected relevent quotes