Question on the Bosnian Crisis

Reading the Events In History That Make No Economic Sense thread reminded me of a question regarding the Bosnian Crisis I've wondered about but never got round to finding out, namely why on earth did the Austro-Hungarians want the bloody place? They have to of known that even with prior discussions with the Russian Empire, which still somehow got buggered up, that it was going to annoy pretty much all of the surrounding countries for what appears little if any real benefit. Short of expansion for expansions sake or denying it to someone else by grabbing it first I'm failing to see the attraction of it.

Edit: And this would be in the wrong forum. Will get a Mod to move it.
 

abc123

Banned
Reading the Events In History That Make No Economic Sense thread reminded me of a question regarding the Bosnian Crisis I've wondered about but never got round to finding out, namely why on earth did the Austro-Hungarians want the bloody place? They have to of known that even with prior discussions with the Russian Empire, which still somehow got buggered up, that it was going to annoy pretty much all of the surrounding countries for what appears little if any real benefit. Short of expansion for expansions sake or denying it to someone else by grabbing it first I'm failing to see the attraction of it.

Edit: And this would be in the wrong forum. Will get a Mod to move it.

Well, because they considered that they have:

a) historical right on Bosnia-Herzegovina as part of Croatian/Hungarian Crown

b) the obligation to make order there, because the place was about the biggest trougle spot in Balkans because they have about 1000 km of common border with Bosnia-Hercegovina

c) and because if they dont move ther someone other ( Serbia, read as Russia ) most surely will, and they know that Serbia will not stop there ( they will want other parts of A-H too ) so why helping future enemy?
 
It was the hinterland to Austrian Dalmatia. Now it would be called "strategic depth" I guess.
I doubt anybody really gave a damn about any historical right Hungary may have had on the place at that point. The last thing Hungarians wanted was more Slavs around, and Bosnia was not united to Hungarian crown anyway.
And yes, there was expansions for expansion's sake to some extent, it was commonplace for Europeans at the time after all.
 

abc123

Banned
Why? I don't see why it would have any substantial effect on future events.

Because if they did hold that Sanjak they would divide Serbia and Montenegro, and that would mean that Serbs and Montengrins have to be very careful what they are doeing. Also, A-H would kept common border with Ottoman Empire in Kosovo area.
 

abc123

Banned
I doubt anybody really gave a damn about any historical right Hungary may have had on the place at that point. The last thing Hungarians wanted was more Slavs around, and Bosnia was not united to Hungarian crown anyway.

True, but when you have to justify your action to others any explanation is good.
;)
 
Because if they did hold that Sanjak they would divide Serbia and Montenegro, and that would mean that Serbs and Montengrins have to be very careful what they are doeing. Also, A-H would kept common border with Ottoman Empire in Kosovo area.
That wouldn't help the Ottoman Empire in the Balkan war and Serbia and Montenegro would have a connection through Kosovo.
 
Excellant. So if it was mostly expansion for expansions sake and to deny it to Serbia, and via them Russian influence, then a timeline where the Ottoman Empire still controls what would become Serbia and has at least half decent relations with Austria from their mostly concentrating on internal reforms should nicely obviate the whole affair. Thanks. :)
 
Top