Polish-Turkish Alliance in the late 17th Century

While one of the most famous triumphs of Polish arms, Sobieski's relief of Vienna and continued struggle against the Turks in many ways paved the way for the demise of the Commonwealth--Russia's power grew at Turkey's expense, and the saved Hapsburg Empire would join in the partition of Poland-Lithuania.

Did it have to be that way? Poland and the Turks had a passable relationship in the sixteenth century, and obviously shared at least one major enemy.

Is there a way to get a real Polish-Ottoman Alliance set up after the Swedish Deluge, directed primarily against Russia and the Cossacks? Could such an alliance save both powers from their eventual decline?
 
Post Great Turkish War is the best open time I think:

Post deluge the PLC & the Ottoman Empires have issues. The Cossacks (Zaporizhian) for example, were at War with the PLC and losing. For support they turned to the Ottomans leading to the War's of 1666-71 & 1672-76. Now stopping this Cossack-Ottoman Alliance can also help but I can of find it hard to see this happening. The Ottoman's are still relatively strong at this point and had no great enmity with the Russian's yet either. The only war they (Rus vs Tur) fought was fought back in 1568-1570 (and while the Ottoman's lost they had more important regions to focus on and kind of brushed it aside). Meanwhile they'd fought with the PLC about 5 times by then.

A PLC-Turkish dentente as it were, is possible albeit it would need very strong French backing. Best chance is ensuring the Sobieski's don't have internal fighting (John III's son was a rare candidate that both the Austrian's & French were ok with during the period of classic rivalry but it seems internal disagreements with his French mum put off the szlachta from voting from him) and prevent the House of Wettin from ending up on the PLC throne. You avoid the alliance with Peter the Great & Russia's interventionist tendencies having causus belli (not that there weren't members of the Szlachta that wouldn't side with Russia anyway). So long as the Ottoman's avoid direct conflict with other Christian (read Catholic) nations risking a Holy league, they'll avoid any conflict with the PLC. French influence can try and hold back Sweden or redirect its attention to Russia; same for the Ottomans. (Basically, a non-aggression pact btw Sweden, the PLC & the Ottomans and have them focus their energies on Russia)

But quite simply the problem is the PLC itself, the libertum veto means there is always someone to bribe. It concentrates far too much power in the hands of too many people. There were always members of the nobility willing to ally with any invader due to their immense dislike of central authority encroaching on their privileges, for example the House Radziwill during the Deluge, and other internal factors like the Cossack uprisings.

Austria is a non-factor in and of herself, Austria couldn't fight off both Prussia (2-0, pains me so :'( second one was close though) & Russia while a the PLC has a civil war between the it's various factions. (Maria Theresia was against the partition because it reminded her of how Silesia was stolen from her, Kaunitz & Joseph II were for it, she had the final word and agreed only after Russia & Prussia signed an alliance to defend each other's partition gains)
The only other continental ally, France wasn't interested. The Ottomans just got beat by the Russian army (what prompted the partition on the first place), Sweden was in no position to attack, her siding with the French in the Seven Yr's War & that of the War of Austrian Succession had cost her dearly in those 2 wars against Russia.

(Side note: Austria helped the PLC during the Deluge)
 
Poland need pro-French and anti-Habsburg king, king Michael was supported by pro-Austrian fraction and was married to the daughter of emperor, so he should be deposed early or never elected. Sobieski was pro-French, make him king earlier should help because Ottomans were traditional ally of France against Habsburgs.
 
Top