Ok, assuming for whatever reason there is no flare up with Serbia in 1914 and Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and takes over for Franz Joseph I some time in late 1910s. Franz Ferdinand knew the Hungarians were dragging the Austro Hungarian empire down the shitter. And he wanted to keep his empire together and he will try to remove the Hungarian issues to keep his empire together. But I'm assuming the Hungarian fight back how would an Austro-Hungarian Civil War go?
No July Crisis, Austro-Hungarian Civil War
- Thread starter Jim Smitty
- Start date
On their own, I would say the Hungarians are screwed-- Transleithania would be surrounded by hostile territory, there are ethnic minorities within Transleithania who are less than supportive of the repressive Hungarian nobles, and the Hungarian people themselves would have a hard time supporting an assortment of recalcitrant aristocrats.
On top of this, you'd probably have Imperial German formations stepping into the conflict in order to end it as quickly as possible.
However, the Hungarian revolt might see the Entente declare war on the Central Powers in order to "secure Hungarian liberty/freedom and free it from the Hunnic yoke", especially if it takes more than a few months to put down the revolt or the Austrian military suffers some defeats that bring into serious question its potential effectiveness vis a vis Entente forces.
Britain might have a hard time selling such an intervention to their populace, so they sit it out.
On top of this, you'd probably have Imperial German formations stepping into the conflict in order to end it as quickly as possible.
However, the Hungarian revolt might see the Entente declare war on the Central Powers in order to "secure Hungarian liberty/freedom and free it from the Hunnic yoke", especially if it takes more than a few months to put down the revolt or the Austrian military suffers some defeats that bring into serious question its potential effectiveness vis a vis Entente forces.
Britain might have a hard time selling such an intervention to their populace, so they sit it out.
Fearless Leader
Donor
I'd say it really depends on what the international situation was at the time. When exactly does this happen?
Christopher Clark in Sleepwalkers lays out a pretty convincing case that the Entente wasn't going to last much longer. Tensions in particular between Britain and Russia over Asia were likely going to drive a massive wedge in the Alliance.
Has Ireland blown up yet? That would mean that Britain is effectively out of the war.
What about the French government? It's investment in military spending was not sustainable pre-1914. What are it's attitudes towards Russia?
Serbia and Russia will certainly want to intervene, but they won't without France and France won't without Britain...
Christopher Clark in Sleepwalkers lays out a pretty convincing case that the Entente wasn't going to last much longer. Tensions in particular between Britain and Russia over Asia were likely going to drive a massive wedge in the Alliance.
Has Ireland blown up yet? That would mean that Britain is effectively out of the war.
What about the French government? It's investment in military spending was not sustainable pre-1914. What are it's attitudes towards Russia?
Serbia and Russia will certainly want to intervene, but they won't without France and France won't without Britain...
The POD in this world is in 1908. This I'm looking at happening in the late teens. I figure without the stress of the war Franz Joseph gets a few more years to live before kicking the bucket. Ireland is in a period like the Troubles at the moment ITL.
As to the French they see the Russians as the only thing that will save them from the German huns. The British on the other hand have become very worried about Russia's growing power and Germany isn't under Willy II anymore. The Anglo-German naval race is over.
Personally I don't want this to spread to being a wider war as I want that to happen later. But this is such a mess I decided to ask for help.
LordKalvert
Banned
if there is full scale civil war, the Russians, Romanians, Italians and Serbs are likely to jump in and take what they want. The French and Germans be damned.
The Germans won't like it but what can they do? Without Austrian help, they really have nothing and with Austria in a civil war, the Germans have nothing
If Germany mobilizes, France mobilizes and the Germans would have to face the Franco-Rusian coalition by herself. Not going to happen
Germany would probably be given Germanic lands but their days of being a great power are effectively over
That said, civil war is unlikely. The Magyar nobles simply had no real support in the country no one would rally o the cause
The Germans won't like it but what can they do? Without Austrian help, they really have nothing and with Austria in a civil war, the Germans have nothing
If Germany mobilizes, France mobilizes and the Germans would have to face the Franco-Rusian coalition by herself. Not going to happen
Germany would probably be given Germanic lands but their days of being a great power are effectively over
That said, civil war is unlikely. The Magyar nobles simply had no real support in the country no one would rally o the cause
Both Hungarian nationalists and Austro-Hungarian unionists/imperial-nationalists will end up losing that war.
While Franz Ferdinand did dislike the Hungarians (very strongly...he won't be alienating just the nobles but plenty of ordinary Hungarians as well), his plans for how to fix the Empire were confused and reactionary even on a good day and he was pretty bad at making friends and allies.
By this point neither Budapest nor Vienna have that many fans among the Empire's minorities, especially those minorities that have an existing national state of their own to look up to. The war would quickly be joined by new sides seeking separation from Austria and Hungary, then Italy, Serbia and Romania (and probably Russia) would intervene and when the dust settles neither the Austro-Hungarian Empire nor St. Istvan's Hungary will be a thing.
While Franz Ferdinand did dislike the Hungarians (very strongly...he won't be alienating just the nobles but plenty of ordinary Hungarians as well), his plans for how to fix the Empire were confused and reactionary even on a good day and he was pretty bad at making friends and allies.
By this point neither Budapest nor Vienna have that many fans among the Empire's minorities, especially those minorities that have an existing national state of their own to look up to. The war would quickly be joined by new sides seeking separation from Austria and Hungary, then Italy, Serbia and Romania (and probably Russia) would intervene and when the dust settles neither the Austro-Hungarian Empire nor St. Istvan's Hungary will be a thing.
What would the Hungarians fight back with? Iirc their Honved wasn't allowed to have artillery units, so things would be rather one-sided.
Incidentally, during an earlier crisis in 1906, when Franz Josef dismissed a Hungarian government, nobody fired a shot, and even the civil servants stayed obediently at their desks. Would it be any different under Franz Ferdinand?
LordKalvert
Banned
It's hard to see anyone really backing the Magyar nobles. The Hungarian parliament was elected with such a ridiculous franchise that no one took it seriously.
Franz Ferdinand should have provoked a crises with the Hungarians by proposing some radical reform that the Hungarian populace would support and the nobility oppose. That would give him an excuse to not only shut down the Parliament but to seize the noble's land and rule by decree
That was what Vienna had been using for some time to slap Budapest with (it popped up as a threat in the 1907 Ausgleich negotiations). Universal (male) suffrage via Imperial decree.
It was even a fundamental component of Vienna's War Plan U (aimed at suppressing a Hungarian rebellion and/or breaking Budapest).
The problem with any such conflict is, ultimately, not in Budapest (they aren't that likely to be able to resist Austria, with a chronically under-funded and under-equipped Honved). The problem is Austria's neighbors. While Germany is likely to back Vienna (the ruling Prussian establishment was terrified of the prospect of the Catholic Habsburgs and their Catholic subjects upsetting the careful balance in Germany), the others are likely to cause problems and/or intervene. Russia, Italy, Romania, Serbia ... all have reasons (strategic or nationalistic) to try to intervene, whether to break up the monarchy or grab as much territory as possible.
That's what brings the Monarchy's survival into question in such a scenario more than anything. Any such attempt would require all external powers (save a Vienna-friendly Germany) to be otherwise occupied or out of the game.
The last three don't really count - and Russia won't act without France, which is unlikely to want to get involved.
There is a major variable not taken in consideration in the discussion: the parliament of Cisleithania had been (partially) reformed over the years in a more democratic direction, but the changes had the major effect of paralyzing it. There had been a proliferation of political parties (both ideological and ethnic ones) and an effective increase of ethnic strife (in particular in Bohemia and in Slovenia: in the latter case, the government had been forced to use Muslim troops recruited in Bosnia to put down the fights between Slovenes and ethnic Germans). The 1907 renegotiation of the Ausgleich lasted 14 months, with a Cisleithanian delegation of 50 members since every party wanted a visible presence,and in the end the Cisleithanian parliament was unable to ratify the agreement: the Hungarians had a parliament elected by a 6% franchise which was more or less functional, while the other half of the empire had a more democratic franchise which ended up in paralysis.
There is no reason why the situation in Cisleithania should improve and result in a more functional legislative body: in a way this gave the government the opportunity to rule by decree with freer hands, but it would certainly become a nightmare in the event of a serious constitutional crisis, much less a full-blown civil war. Another major issue was the coldness (if not dislike) shown by the emperor for the heir: there were two centers of imperial authority (Franz Joseph at the Hofburg and Franz Ferdinand at the Belvedere) which often worked at cross-purposes and required delicate negotiations.
Finally there is the Slavic issue: at the census of 1910, the total of the various Slavic speakers was slightly over 50% of the total population. It is true that the Slavs were not united, but there were two major organized blocks (Bohemians and Croats) and some practical way should be found to deal with them. Incidentally, Franz Ferdinand did not like or trust either the Magyars or the Slavs (who both reciprocated the sentiment).
Given the above, it's quite likely that a civil war might end up in a major free for all (Yugoslavia 1990 anyone?) rather than the easy march into Hungary postulated by many posters.
There is no reason why the situation in Cisleithania should improve and result in a more functional legislative body: in a way this gave the government the opportunity to rule by decree with freer hands, but it would certainly become a nightmare in the event of a serious constitutional crisis, much less a full-blown civil war. Another major issue was the coldness (if not dislike) shown by the emperor for the heir: there were two centers of imperial authority (Franz Joseph at the Hofburg and Franz Ferdinand at the Belvedere) which often worked at cross-purposes and required delicate negotiations.
Finally there is the Slavic issue: at the census of 1910, the total of the various Slavic speakers was slightly over 50% of the total population. It is true that the Slavs were not united, but there were two major organized blocks (Bohemians and Croats) and some practical way should be found to deal with them. Incidentally, Franz Ferdinand did not like or trust either the Magyars or the Slavs (who both reciprocated the sentiment).
Given the above, it's quite likely that a civil war might end up in a major free for all (Yugoslavia 1990 anyone?) rather than the easy march into Hungary postulated by many posters.
Yet the Habsburg army stayed reasonably loyal, if not enthusiastic, right through the Great War. Would this be otherwise in case of a Hungarian revolt (if that ever happened - see my earlier remarks about 1906)?
Yes.
Thanks to his long rule, Franz Josef had a special place in the late Habsburg empire (the modern equivalent would be Queen Elizabeth II.).
For most people, he was the only Habsburg monarch in their lives which inspired additional loyalty among his subjects.
Civil wars are different from wars against foreigners.
Morale plays a larger role in them.
LordKalvert
Banned
Oh quite understood if the neighborhood decides that they're hungry, Austria is a tasty snack and will have no challenge getting to the table
I wrote a scenario around this on another board at one time.
When it comes to foreign relations, Russia is the big question. Russia sent troops to subjugate the Hungarian revolt 1848 - an ethnic rising against an old multi-ethnic Empire would spell bad news for them. Finland and Poland want to be free, and there's nationalistic tendencies in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. While the relations between Austria and Russia soured over the Balkans, Russia attacking Austria in support of an ethnic revolt is inplausible.
Serbia would certainly attack if she thought she could get away with it. The 1903 murders of the royual family and the coup that went with it showed that the Serbians had little concern for the diplomatic system (they suffered tremendously diplomatically for it). But without Russia, they will probably not dare attack on their own - after all, the Bulgarians want Macedonia back, and the Greeks are eying the same territory, and they are busy rebuilding after two ruinous Balkan Wars and absorb their substantial conquests in those wars.
Without Russia, Serbia will probably not act. A provocation could cause war, but if Austria remains on the defensive, Russia will probably not intervene.
While Romania would like to get their hands on Transylvania, their monarch and his government are German- and Austrian-friendly - OTL it took the Brusilov offensive and Austria-Hungary looking ready to collapse, and the Austro-Hungarian forces engaged both against Italy and Russia for the Romanians to enter the war.
Italy might want a piece of Austria, but they are formally allied, and attacking an ally is a big no-no at the time.
Austria-Hungary is Germany's closest, oldest and best ally, and a useful tool for keeping catholics and the Balkans in order. They will NOT attempt to disassemble Austria-Hungary. Rather, they will offer troops, supplies and diplomatic support. The Germans will let the Romanians and Italians know that any aggression against Austria in her time of peril will be considered aggression against Germany. The Austrians will probably reject direct support out of pride, but German troops might take up positions along the Austro-Italian and Austro-Russian border, and volunteers and supplies as well as observers and staff officers will be sent.
France will probably support the Hungarians, at least diplomatically - they had a soft spot for subjected people in eastern Europe/potential allies against Russia/Germany/Austria, which is why they supported Poland 1863 - but they will not move without either Britain or Russia. They know they cannot take on the Germans on their own.
The Hungarian people were voting with their feet at the time - 1880-1914, more than 7% of the Hungarian population emigrated, so I doubt the nobility that control the Hungarian parliament will find much support among the populace, especially if Franz Ferdinand offers male suffrage. The Croatians and Transylvanian Romanians would not support Budapest - they did not 1848. And I doubt the Slovaks will either. All of them have more to gain by supporting Vienna.
I suspect a 3-month campaign before the parliament surrenders, 2 of those months being a siege of Budapest.
When it comes to foreign relations, Russia is the big question. Russia sent troops to subjugate the Hungarian revolt 1848 - an ethnic rising against an old multi-ethnic Empire would spell bad news for them. Finland and Poland want to be free, and there's nationalistic tendencies in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. While the relations between Austria and Russia soured over the Balkans, Russia attacking Austria in support of an ethnic revolt is inplausible.
Serbia would certainly attack if she thought she could get away with it. The 1903 murders of the royual family and the coup that went with it showed that the Serbians had little concern for the diplomatic system (they suffered tremendously diplomatically for it). But without Russia, they will probably not dare attack on their own - after all, the Bulgarians want Macedonia back, and the Greeks are eying the same territory, and they are busy rebuilding after two ruinous Balkan Wars and absorb their substantial conquests in those wars.
Without Russia, Serbia will probably not act. A provocation could cause war, but if Austria remains on the defensive, Russia will probably not intervene.
While Romania would like to get their hands on Transylvania, their monarch and his government are German- and Austrian-friendly - OTL it took the Brusilov offensive and Austria-Hungary looking ready to collapse, and the Austro-Hungarian forces engaged both against Italy and Russia for the Romanians to enter the war.
Italy might want a piece of Austria, but they are formally allied, and attacking an ally is a big no-no at the time.
Austria-Hungary is Germany's closest, oldest and best ally, and a useful tool for keeping catholics and the Balkans in order. They will NOT attempt to disassemble Austria-Hungary. Rather, they will offer troops, supplies and diplomatic support. The Germans will let the Romanians and Italians know that any aggression against Austria in her time of peril will be considered aggression against Germany. The Austrians will probably reject direct support out of pride, but German troops might take up positions along the Austro-Italian and Austro-Russian border, and volunteers and supplies as well as observers and staff officers will be sent.
France will probably support the Hungarians, at least diplomatically - they had a soft spot for subjected people in eastern Europe/potential allies against Russia/Germany/Austria, which is why they supported Poland 1863 - but they will not move without either Britain or Russia. They know they cannot take on the Germans on their own.
The Hungarian people were voting with their feet at the time - 1880-1914, more than 7% of the Hungarian population emigrated, so I doubt the nobility that control the Hungarian parliament will find much support among the populace, especially if Franz Ferdinand offers male suffrage. The Croatians and Transylvanian Romanians would not support Budapest - they did not 1848. And I doubt the Slovaks will either. All of them have more to gain by supporting Vienna.
I suspect a 3-month campaign before the parliament surrenders, 2 of those months being a siege of Budapest.
Yet even the unimpressive Karl lasted two years, at a time when the Monarchy was in fart worse straits than in 1914.
And would morale be all that bad? I can't see Germans, Croats, Slovaks or Rumanians having any qualms about fighting Magyars (whom they hate), while the Czechs are almost hemmed in by Germans, so don't really count. The Poles in Galicia support the Monarchy because they have nowhere else to go. So about the only people who might conceivably take the Magyar side would seem to be the Bosnian Serbs, who aren't a very strong ally. Add to that the fact already noted, that the Honved has no artillery, and there's no reason why FF can't squash Hungary in a matter of days, even without German intervention, if the Magyars are crackbrained enough to rebel.
The early 20C state was pretty powerful. Even A/H and Russia didn't experience revolution until after disastrous defeats - which in 1914 were still in the future.
An Austro-Hungarian civil war is a worse scenario than what the Hapsburg empire had to deal with in 1916-1918.
War against other states, against foreigners does not test loyalty to your own government as much as civil war does.
The problem is not that they would not fight Magyars, but that many would not fight for the sake of the Habsburg empire.
Rumanians have the option to secede and join Rumania.
Croats and Slovaks had to endure Budapest's dominance and would desire an autonomy similar to what Magyars got in 1867 or more.
Vienna's biggest challenge was to strengthen the central government non-German nationalities.
Serbs would be supported by Russia.
You did also forget the Italians and their claims.
It's not as simple as that. For example, the winner of most elections in Habsburg Croatia before WWI was a coalition founded with the idea of allying with the Magyars - up to and including the Hungarian independence movement - in order to fight against dualism and (perceived) German economic and cultural hegemony.
Poles will not at all be happy to bleed in such a war, due to Polish-Hungarian historical friendship and lack of any conflict points.
As for Romanians, Croats, Serbs etc...they may have few qualms about fighting against Budapest, but they have plenty of qualms about letting themselves be used by Vienna again like in 1848. Croats, being the least separatist of the group, will likely declare union of Croatia with Dalmatia and complete autonomy, then bargain with both Austria and Hungary while refusing to fully commit to either side. Serbs and Romanians will likely see it as an opportunity to declare complete independence and union with Serbia/Romania. And even if at first they only go as far as the Croats, the situation is bound to radicalize soon.
How much bleeding would be required?
There is no likelihood of set-piece battles, given Hungary's military weakness compared to Austria. It would be largely a matter of shooting down rioters and blasting away barricades in Budapest and a few other towns. Just the traditional "whiff of grapeshot".
The other nationalities have even less force at their disposal than the Magyars.
Rumania was still allied with A/H at this point. Even after the outbreak of WW1 it waited two years before risking intervention. Why would it risk butting in when there is no general war to join, and they have no guarantee of finding any allies?
As for Serbia, it wasn't looking for a fight in 1914. Look at the way it accepted 90% of the Austrian ultimatum, despite having far more hope of Russian support than it would have in this situation, where it is launching an unprovoked attack for no reason except that it doesn't happen to like the Emperor.
Last edited:
I mean, as Mike Stone and others have pointed out, there wouldn't be an Austro-Hungarian civil war. There would be unrest and discontent at whatever reforms Franz Ferdinand is seeking in the Magyar parts of Hungary, but they'd have to swallow it. I don't understand the idea that the Romanians and Serbs would get involved, given that it is the Hungarians who are oppressing Romanians and Serbs within the Monarchy, not the Austrians. An unhappy Hungary can make life very difficult for the Habsburgs. It can make an active foreign policy impossible, it can put governance in general in crisis, and so forth. But, on its own, it's not going to bring about a civil war, because the Hungarians have nothing to fight with.
Yes, but, again, you have to get to the civil war first. And you wouldn't here. I mean, kindly propose a course of events which takes us from Franz Ferdinand's accession to a full scale civil war. It's not the military that's the issue. It's that the Magyars are *politically* in a weak position. Franz Ferdinand's reforms would be dangerous because they would gravely weaken Magyar support for the government in the event of a war, and potentially force the Austrians to once again rule Hungary by decree, not because the Magyar elites would be able to actually overthrow Habsburg rule in Hungary during peacetime.