Inverse Second Balkan War

I have yet to see why the Greeks and Serbs will attack Bulgaria if it does not jump them. Both where content with the results of the war and their gains, the Greeks were even willing to offer minor territorial concessions as long as their control of Thessaloniki was not threatened. A conference in St Petrograd had been scheduled between the Balkan league members under Russian auspices to reach a compromise between the league members. Instead Bulgaria believed their own propaganda, that their army would be able to capture Thessaloniki within a day and Belgrade in 5 days and attacked.

I can see why the Bulgarians were frustrated at the results of the 1st war, but it still was the strategic blunder of the century at a time when they might not had gotten anything they wanted but had still made massive gains of roughly 45,000 square km.
 
It's been suggested that Bulgaria would be in a stronger position being on the defensive. And if so, and Bulgaria doesn't collapse, Romania and Turkey don't pile on. In that case - Enver Pasha doesn't lead Ottoman forces to the recapture of Thrace. That victory (coming after the disastrous defeat of the previous year) elevated Enver to the level of co-leader of the country. He was raised to the rank of pasha, and married a princess of the sultan's family.

No Thrace campaign, and Enver remains a second-tier player.
Even IOTL, Enver and Ottoman public were so determinent that even if government wouldn't have taken action, he was going to take action. IOTL Government was hesitant because of British and Russian threaten of war. Eventually Talat Pasha persuaded government and Enver marched on Edirne readily.
IITL maybe Talat Pasha couldn't have persuaded government for taking action but Enver still would take the army and attack. When Ottomans in, Romania wouldn't have missed the oppurtinity.
Becoming "Conquerer of Edirne" wasn't much huge step on Enver's carrier. He was aldready "Hürriyet Kahramanı(Freedom Hero)" and has power on the military. As for marriying with Naciye Sultan, they were in love actually. With or without Edirne marriage would still happen.
By the way, less known fact is M.Kemal(Atatürk) was seeking marriying with Sabiha Sultan(Sultan Mehmed VI Vahideddin's daughter). But she rejeceted and married with Şehzade Ömer Faruk Efendi (son of last Ottoman caliph).
 
Even IOTL, Enver and Ottoman public were so determinent that even if government wouldn't have taken action, he was going to take action. IOTL Government was hesitant because of British and Russian threaten of war. Eventually Talat Pasha persuaded government and Enver marched on Edirne readily.
IITL maybe Talat Pasha couldn't have persuaded government for taking action but Enver still would take the army and attack.
OTL, Turkey moved only when Bulgaria, severely defeated in Macedonia, transferred all troops in Thrace to the Greco-Serbian front. The Turkish advance was unopposed (zero combat casualties).

The first question is: If Bulgaria stands on the defensive in Macedonia, does Bulgaria avoid the defeats that compelled that transfer?

If yes, then...

The second question is: If Bulgaria does retain substantial forces in Thrace, would Turkey still attack?

This breaks into two questions:
2A, as it were: Would Talat Pasha still get the government to approve the attack?

2B: If not, would Enver still "take the army and attack ", without orders?

And if the answer to either 2A or 2B is yes, then...

The fourth question: Would the Turkish attack succeed? 2A affects this, I think, because an unauthorized attack would be weaker, and if it was initially repulsed, the government would probably order the troops to retreat and disclaim the operation.

Knowing very little about the Second Balkan War, I cannot answer any of these questions.
 
I have yet to see why the Greeks and Serbs will attack Bulgaria if it does not jump them. Both where content with the results of the war and their gains, the Greeks were even willing to offer minor territorial concessions as long as their control of Thessaloniki was not threatened. A conference in St Petrograd had been scheduled between the Balkan league members under Russian auspices to reach a compromise between the league members. Instead Bulgaria believed their own propaganda, that their army would be able to capture Thessaloniki within a day and Belgrade in 5 days and attacked.

I can see why the Bulgarians were frustrated at the results of the 1st war, but it still was the strategic blunder of the century at a time when they might not had gotten anything they wanted but had still made massive gains of roughly 45,000 square km.
I do think it’s worth mentioning that I do remember that Serbia and Bulgaria had signed a treaty that a certain occupied area by Serbia would be given to Bulgaria after the war; Serbia didn’t comply with the treaty and it remained occupied.
 
I do think it’s worth mentioning that I do remember that Serbia and Bulgaria had signed a treaty that a certain occupied area by Serbia would be given to Bulgaria after the war; Serbia didn’t comply with the treaty and it remained occupied.

Sure. Same treaty said the Serbs were supposed to get all of Albania. This too did not happen. Meanwhile the Greek-Bulgarian treaty said nothing of territory, effectively either side was to keep what it captured but this did not stop the Bulgarians from wanting Thessaloniki for themselves. Granted when signing that treaty the Bulgarian expectation was the Greeks would fail to breach the Olympus passes and instead the Greeks advanced all the way to Thessaloniki in three weeks... but it was their error to underestimate the Greeks.

The end result remains the same. Bulgaria chose to attack her own allies which combined were numerically superior to her and their armies had shown their efficiency in the recent war. There's a worse indictment about this than being wrong, unjustified, whatever you want to call it. Namely that it was a mistake, one caused by severely underestimating their enemies.
 
Sure. Same treaty said the Serbs were supposed to get all of Albania. This too did not happen. Meanwhile the Greek-Bulgarian treaty said nothing of territory, effectively either side was to keep what it captured but this did not stop the Bulgarians from wanting Thessaloniki for themselves. Granted when signing that treaty the Bulgarian expectation was the Greeks would fail to breach the Olympus passes and instead the Greeks advanced all the way to Thessaloniki in three weeks... but it was their error to underestimate the Greeks.

The end result remains the same. Bulgaria chose to attack her own allies which combined were numerically superior to her and their armies had shown their efficiency in the recent war. There's a worse indictment about this than being wrong, unjustified, whatever you want to call it. Namely that it was a mistake, one caused by severely underestimating their enemies.
Did Serbia have any intentions of attacking Albania post-First Balkan War?
 
What exactly was the status of Albania at the time ?
A rebellious former Ottoman province. Austria was determined to keep Serbia and Montenegro out from the area, while Italy wanted her share of the Balkan pie and viewed Albania as a part of Italian SoI. It was such a flashpoint that the Powers did one of the last historical multi-national naval demonstrations outside Scutari (Shkodër) to force the Montenegrins out from the city.
 
Top