Russian-Ottoman War of 1854 [No Britian or France in Crimea]

[DuQuense]

From this thread -- https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=177478

@Grey Wolf
The best way ...........................................

Or from Napoleon III's coup - a strong part of his backers within the armed forces expected his coronation to mean immediate war with Britain

Exactly one year after the coup, on 2 December 1852, after approval by another referendum, the Second Republic was officially ended and the Empire restored, ushering in the Second French Empire. President Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte became Emperor Napoleon III.

POD
Following the coronation Britain sends a nastygram expressing displeasure, and withdraws their Ambassador for a short period.

The Ambassador returns after a short period, but tensions lead to a Cold Peace.

Octobre 1853
Ottomans Declare war on Russia.
Both Britain & France declare their support for the Ottomans, However due to Tensions between the two, Neither can send material support or allow the other to do so.

?So how goes the Russian-Ottoman War of 1854?

 

[anarchjoe]

Why would Britain dislike the coronation of a king?

 

[DuQuense]

Why would Britain dislike the coronation of a king?

Not a King -- A Bonaparte as Emperor of France.

 

[imperialaquila]

Why would Britain dislike the coronation of a king?

Because Britain had, within living memory, fought a fifteen-year war against his uncle. To the British, Napoleon I was the Devil, so why should his nephew be any different?

To answer the question, I think Russia would win.

 

[St. Just]

Yeah- Russia should kick Turkish butt. Hell, have them prop up Greek claims on Istanbul and Edirne (but not Western Aegean- that is ridiculous!)

 

[Don Lardo]

I'll forestall Abdul's inevitable beat down of you all by reminding you all that while the Anglo-French expeditionary force was squatting in Varna slowly dying in a cholera epidemic of it's own making, the Turks had already "won" the war.

Russia had already failed to achieve her objectives in the Balkans and Caucuses, operations on both fronts had all but ceased, and suggestions for negotiations had been made.

It was the idiotic insistence of Anglo-French that they "do something" before returning home which led to the Crimean invasion and prolonged the war for another two years.

I also don't see a Cold Peace between France and Britain forestalling a Western intervention in the war. As absurd as it seems, a perpetual argument between Roman Catholic monks and Orthodox monks over who would get to hold the keys to a certain door in a certain church was one of Russia's excuses for going to war. France was interested in the monks' hissy fits too, if only as a way for Napoleon III to both curry favor with and placate both Catholics in France and his harridan of a wife.

With the monks' quarrel as an excuse, France is going to "assist" the Ottomans as part of the Second Empire's "busier" geopolitical posture. And Britain isn't going to be able to prevent any such "assistance" without using force.

In the OTL, that is why both France and Britain joined the war. France was going to do something no matter what, so Britain joined up too in order to keep an eye on France. They weren't allies in any real sense and it's worth noting that both nations found themselves engaged in a naval race with the usual "Invasion of England" fears and countermeasures less than two years after the Crimean War ended.

 

[DuQuense]

I also don't see a Cold Peace between France and Britain forestalling a Western intervention in the war. As absurd as it seems, a perpetual argument between Roman Catholic monks and Orthodox monks over who would get to hold the keys to a certain door in a certain church was one of Russia's excuses for going to war. France was interested in the monks' hissy fits too, if only as a way for Napoleon III to both curry favor with and placate both Catholics in France and his harridan of a wife.

With the monks' quarrel as an excuse, France is going to "assist" the Ottomans as part of the Second Empire's "busier" geopolitical posture. And Britain isn't going to be able to prevent any such "assistance" without using force.

In the OTL, that is why both France and Britain joined the war. France was going to do something no matter what, so Britain joined up too in order to keep an eye on France. They weren't allies in any real sense and it's worth noting that both nations found themselves engaged in a naval race with the usual "Invasion of England" fears and countermeasures less than two years after the Crimean War ended.

OK -- instead of a Cold Peace - Lets have a Hot War. https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=177565

Britian & France are busy with their own War, ? Do Either Russia or Ottomans get sweep up in the Wake?, Thereby Expanding the War.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Russia would end up doing better than per OTL, but the main thrust of the Crimean War once the Allies got involved was pointless.

The important factors are terrain and money. Russia doesn't have the financial resources to push the war to a conclusion, and it has no communications infrastructure to support a drive into Ottoman territory. In addition, an invasion has to go through the Principalities, and that route can be easily cut off by the Hapsburgs, who would almost certainly issue an ultimatum if it looked like the Russians were on the verge of any real success.

Also, remember the Ottomans did fairly well before Britain & France got involved. The Ottomans were generally ahead of the Russians in equipment and quality, and in this period it was very difficult for the Russians to bring their superior numbers to bear.

Despite being on the outskirts of Istanbul in 1878, the Russians had no choice but to submit to British pressure, because they were running on fumes and on the verge of financial collapse.