Russia VS Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans

[Tongera]

Would it be possible for a war between Russia against an alliance of Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans only, without military interference from other Great Powers? How would such a war go and how would any peace treaty go? How would the other Great Powers and Secondary Powers react to such a war?

POD is 1900.

 

[RGB]

It would be very unusual for the other powers to allow Russia to fight its dream war. It's very likely that Russia defeats both and gets even more concessions.

Someone will intervene to prop up the Ottomans and Austria, for sure.

That's my take on it.

 

[Snowstalker]

I assume a Russia/Romania/Greece/Serbia/Montenegro coalition vs. Austria/Turkey, with Bulgaria going either way?

Yeah, Russia would win fairly easily even without its Balkan allies, but it's doubtful that the other great powers would just let Russia get away with that (see the Crimean War).

 

[Romanos]

Yeah, I think 1900 is way too late for the other powers to leave Russia do what it wants, and it is also too early for Russia to find an excuse to do that, the Balkans had been quiet only for the last 15 years at this point and there isn't an Anglo-Russian Convention/Entente yet to neutralise the threat of British intervention.

If, however, Russia does somehow manage to pull this, I believe it would treat AH and the Ottomans very differently. I can see them aspiring to force a San Stafano II of sorts to the Ottomans. The odd thing here is that the only remaining Russo-Turkish border is now in the East, in Caucasus. It would be a very bloody and very messy affair. As a result, Russians couldn't have made large gains and they would have no viable way to reach Constantinople (I'm guessing a Russian fleet in the Dardanelles is a no go for fear of the English). Thus, the only possible gain for them is the westwards expansion of the caucasian-anatolian border. The biq question here is what happens with/to the Armenians. Under the right circumstances, they could even get an autonomous state under either Russian protection or Ottoman suzerainty.

As for AH, it depends on what is Russia's long term thinking. If they want to not make them hatred enemies of theirs, they would only get Ruthenian strongly-majority areas of Galicia while giving something (territory, monetary compensation, free had in Serbia/Balkans) back. Otherwise, they take most or all of Galicia and Austria becomes Germany's puppet earlier.

 

[Simon]

I'm not so sure that Russia would have it all their own way if we moved things back 15 years like Romanos suggested. The Russo-Turkish War wasn't a complete pushover as shown by incidents like the Siege of Plevna where the Turks were able to fighting rather effectively, it seems as much if not more to do with the Turkish generals bickering as Russian military prowess winning it. If they've then got to deal with Austria-Hungary as well and spread themselves even thinner I could easily see them making some small initial gains but then running into a wall and things bogging down at least in the Balkans.

 

[Flubber]

I assume a Russia/Romania/Greece/Serbia/Montenegro coalition vs. Austria/Turkey, with Bulgaria going either way?

You can throw Italy in on Russia's side. It has territorial claims against Austria and has an eye on Ottoman North Africa.

As many others as pointed out, the main problem with the OP is why Germany, France, the UK, etc., are not involved too.

 

[RGB]

I'm not so sure that Russia would have it all their own way if we moved things back 15 years like Romanos suggested. The Russo-Turkish War wasn't a complete pushover as shown by incidents like the Siege of Plevna where the Turks were able to fighting rather effectively, it seems as much if not more to do with the Turkish generals bickering as Russian military prowess winning it. If they've then got to deal with Austria-Hungary as well and spread themselves even thinner I could easily see them making some small initial gains but then running into a wall and things bogging down at least in the Balkans.

There won't be a repeat of the fight for the passes because Bulgaria now controls them. Unless Bulgaria is on Austria's side, which is possible because of claims on Nis. Keep in mind that Bulgaria never actively fought against Russia OTL even if it ended up on the opposing side several times.

 

[Captain Jack]

Would it be possible for a war between Russia against an alliance of Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans only, without military interference from other Great Powers? How would such a war go and how would any peace treaty go? How would the other Great Powers and Secondary Powers react to such a war?

With a POD of 1900 this isn't really possible. Fighting the Ottomans and Austria-Hungary without interference from Germany is basically Russia's wet dream. It gives them the opportunity to beat two of their weaker enemies simultaneously without interference from their most powerful opponent, Germany. Moreover, why would Germany risk Austria being beaten in a war. If Russia wins it just means that they can direct more of their total forces against Germany in the next war. Basically it's strongly in Germany's interest to jump in if Russia goes to war with Austria and in Frances interest to jump in if Germany goes to war with Russia.

EDIT: Thinking about it, not possible is too strong. Lets go for implausible instead.

 

[Flubber]

Basically it's strongly in Germany's interest to jump in if Russia goes to war with Austria and in Frances interest to jump in if Germany goes to war with Russia.

Not only is it in their interest, it's an explicit part of the pre-1900 treaties they've signed.

 

[Captain Jack]

Not only is it in their interest, it's an explicit part of the pre-1900 treaties they've signed.

Did the treaty obligate France to join if Russia went to war with Germany at all? I thought the treaty only kicked in if Russia or France were attacked by Germany not if one of them were the aggressor.

 

[Flubber]

Did the treaty obligate France to join if Russia went to war with Germany at all? I thought the treaty only kicked in if Russia or France were attacked by Germany not if one of them were the aggressor.

Here's the full text of the Franco-Russian Military Alliance.

The word "attacked" is used, not some weasel word like "aggressor".

France and Russia are also obligated to mobilize if any member of the Triple Alliance mobilizes for any reason.

 

[Captain Jack]

Here's the full text of the Franco-Russian Military Alliance.

The word "attacked" is used, not some weasel word like "aggressor".

France and Russia are also obligated to mobilize if any member of the Triple Alliance mobilizes for any reason.

That is very helpful, thanks! Also, that treaty is amazingly short!

 

[Flubber]

That is very helpful, thanks! Also, that treaty is amazingly short!

Short, but it got the job done.

The application of the treaty is where and when all the details came into the picture.

 

[Simon]

Not only is it in their interest, it's an explicit part of the pre-1900 treaties they've signed.

Hhmm, has anyone done a timeline on something like this? Russia attacks the Ottoman Empire as their main target and also the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Germany seeing it as a direct threat and under their treaty obligations intervenes which also brings in the French, with the east being the main theatre they concentrate on that and dig in taking a defensive position in the west. Cue Russia probably not doing very well. If it's pre-1900 does this do enough to secure Germany and Austria-Hungary's eastern flank to avoid the Great War or does it simply set it up for later as an even larger grudge match?

 

[Dementor]

There won't be a repeat of the fight for the passes because Bulgaria now controls them. Unless Bulgaria is on Austria's side, which is possible because of claims on Nis. Keep in mind that Bulgaria never actively fought against Russia OTL even if it ended up on the opposing side several times.

Bulgaria fought against the Russians in WWI when they send forces to help the Romanians. And by all accounts, the Bulgarian troops didn't hold back at all.
So if Russia attacks Bulgaria, the Bulgarians are going to fight. But this will probably not happen in this scenario, since Bulgaria would be far more interested in fighting the Ottomans.

 

[Deleted member 14881]

Bulgaria fought against the Russians in WWI when they send forces to help the Romanians. And by all accounts, the Bulgarian troops didn't hold back at all.
So if Russia attacks Bulgaria, the Bulgarians are going to fight. But this will probably not happen in this scenario, since Bulgaria would be far more interested in fighting the Ottomans.

So, Bulgarian Thrace and Istanbul. Dementor, what about Greek Macedonia

 

[Dementor]

So, Bulgarian Thrace and Istanbul. Dementor, what about Greek Macedonia

Bulgaria at the time certainly considered Greek Macedonia (at least the northern part) Bulgarian, so they would try to get it. It depends on who gets there first. Bulgarian (or Northern) Thrace, by the way, was the part of Thrace (with some minor exceptions) that was controlled by Bulgaria at the time, so no reason to be included here. Bulgaria wanted most of Southern Thrace.
Istanbul, incidentally was an obsession really only of the Bulgarian king. Most Bulgarians just wanted to unify with the Bulgarian populated lands in the Ottoman Empire. But this is a post-1900 POD, the king is the same, so probably the same attempts to capture Istanbul. Unless Russia makes it very clear that Bulgaria will not receive any support if they attempt to capture the city.

 

[Deleted member 14881]

I meant the Turkish part of Thrace, which has Adrianople in it.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

With a POD of 1900 this isn't really possible. Fighting the Ottomans and Austria-Hungary without interference from Germany is basically Russia's wet dream. It gives them the opportunity to beat two of their weaker enemies simultaneously without interference from their most powerful opponent, Germany. Moreover, why would Germany risk Austria being beaten in a war. If Russia wins it just means that they can direct more of their total forces against Germany in the next war. Basically it's strongly in Germany's interest to jump in if Russia goes to war with Austria and in Frances interest to jump in if Germany goes to war with Russia.

EDIT: Thinking about it, not possible is too strong. Lets go for implausible instead.

Did the treaty obligate France to join if Russia went to war with Germany at all? I thought the treaty only kicked in if Russia or France were attacked by Germany not if one of them were the aggressor.

So... why wouldn't Germany attack Russia? Answer: because then theyd have a two front war with both Russia and France.

Far better for the Germans to
1) pour money and troops into AH for her defence.
2) conduct a major diplomatic blitz, pointing out to France that Russia is the aggressor here, and German troops are for defensive purposes only. And pointing out to Britain that its not in her best interest that the war expand, and that she should convince France of the rightness of the German position.

 

[Flubber]

So... why wouldn't Germany attack Russia? Answer: because then theyd have a two front war with both Russia and France.

And such concerns certainly stopped Germany in the OTL.

Thanks to the terms of 1895's Franco-Russian alliance - terms which Germany knew all about and terms which too many people on this forum apparently know nothing about - once Russia goes to war with Austria-Hungary France will be at war with Germany.

Germany needn't go on the offensive in the West but the will be a war in the West.

Far better for the Germans to 1) pour money and troops into AH for her defence.

This isn't Risk. The A-H's transport network could barely handle her own mobilization. Adding the additional stress of a German army or armies would simply make things worse.

The best way for Germany to help her ally Austria-Hungary against Russia is to attack Russia from her own territory using her own logistic and transport network.

2) conduct a major diplomatic blitz, pointing out to France that Russia is the aggressor here, and German troops are for defensive purposes only.

Once France fails to meet her treaty obligations to Russia it will be over a generation before any power seriously treats with France again. Becoming an international pariah is not in France's best interests.

Besides, this quibbling over who's the aggressor is nothing more than mush minded modern day squeamishness. The politicians and leaders of that era not only knew full well that any situation could be spun by one power to force another into the role of the "aggressor" but they'd seen it occur in their lifetimes.

And pointing out to Britain that its not in her best interest that the war expand, and that she should convince France of the rightness of the German position.

Again just as in the OTL, Britain's decision on whether to join the war or not is going to based more on the threat posed by a potential continental hegemon and less by quibbles over who attacked who first.