IOTL Treaty of Berlin to settle the aftermath of Russo-Ottoman War of 1877-78, it ushered a new era of radicalism. Treaty of Berlin, which accepted the creation of a Bulgarian state, gave a stamp of approval for smaller ethnic groups to strive for what was previously regarded a privilege for "great" nations only, like Germans and Russians. It also contributed to the wave of radicalism, alongside Marxism and Anarchism, that plagued Europe throughout the late 19th century and early 20th century up to WW1, or arguably perhaps even the snowball that cause WW1.
The question being, was it also behind the rise of "one state of one people" concept throughout the European colonies, especially India and Indonesia, adopted as an ideology in opposition to colonial yoke ? Both India and Indonesia have witnessed the emergence of national language to bind respective countries' grossly multi-ethnic demographic together into one encompassing civic national identity, which has been kinda stalled in the former and quite successful in the later. Indonesia has the "Youth Pledge" that declare all ethnic groups of Indonesia as "Under One state, One Language and One Nation". And in case of Indonesia, the general concept of "One East Indies, One People" was started by the Eurasian Eugene Douwess Dekker and his Indische Party as opposition to racial policy of Dutch colonial regime, based on shared history under a common oppressor, which makes the back bone of Indonesian nationalist ideology.
Had the OE, a "non-national" universalist empire, won against Russia and prevented the creation of Bulgaria out of a chunk its former territory, would it have altered national awakening in European colonies in Asia and Africa ? Will we see Asian ex colonies to emphasize themselves more as country where many nations live side by side rather then concentrate to build a common culture ? More federalism instead of unitarianism ? And what will become of ethnic nationalism itself ? Will the small nations movement be prevented entirely, or will it be just significantly setback ?
The question being, was it also behind the rise of "one state of one people" concept throughout the European colonies, especially India and Indonesia, adopted as an ideology in opposition to colonial yoke ? Both India and Indonesia have witnessed the emergence of national language to bind respective countries' grossly multi-ethnic demographic together into one encompassing civic national identity, which has been kinda stalled in the former and quite successful in the later. Indonesia has the "Youth Pledge" that declare all ethnic groups of Indonesia as "Under One state, One Language and One Nation". And in case of Indonesia, the general concept of "One East Indies, One People" was started by the Eurasian Eugene Douwess Dekker and his Indische Party as opposition to racial policy of Dutch colonial regime, based on shared history under a common oppressor, which makes the back bone of Indonesian nationalist ideology.
Had the OE, a "non-national" universalist empire, won against Russia and prevented the creation of Bulgaria out of a chunk its former territory, would it have altered national awakening in European colonies in Asia and Africa ? Will we see Asian ex colonies to emphasize themselves more as country where many nations live side by side rather then concentrate to build a common culture ? More federalism instead of unitarianism ? And what will become of ethnic nationalism itself ? Will the small nations movement be prevented entirely, or will it be just significantly setback ?