The future of Austria-Hungary without WWI

I'm under the impression that the Czechs at this point in time figured they would have to work within empire and barely entertained the idea of independence, the poles if I recall also had it fairly well (comparatively) in the empire making them unlikely to support the Hungarians, the rest had no fondness for the Hungarians at all.
A Hungarian revolt doesn't have much of a chance for success without outside help and the Germans will be looming over anyone who entertains the idea of helping them.
 
I have an important point to make about an enduring myth about Austria-Hungary (and since it's already been pointed out that Franz Ferdinand was an awful person, and I'm too sleepy to defend FJ and Karl) and it's about the Ausgleich 'renegociations' and I 100% blame Kaiserreich for propagating this myth.

They never happened. At least, not in the way people think. It's not mentioned in any of the books I have on A-H and I would seriously think something that would threaten the Empire evey decade would be important enough to mention.

What WAS to be renegotiated every ten years, however, were the economic terms of the customs union, not the political Ausgleich. That is, IIRC, the balance of the budget for the Common Ministries (Foreign, Finances, War) and the customs union itself. Basically, even by 1867, the Hungarians weren't aure if they wanted to go full-Free Market with Austria or towards protectionism, a debate that had been going on since the 1830s. Of course, the success of the Union and the massive economic growth meant that the Hungarians would never repudiate it. After all, as previously mentioned, Hungary needed Austria as much as the latter needed the former. Politically and ecnomically.

Secondly, people tend to forget how broken the politics of Hungary were pre-1918. It was a shitty system were the noble magnates had way too much power and the suffrage was ridiculously limited. Remember, iOTL, Hungary fell to a communist revolution. While without the war, discontent wouldn't be so radical, Hungary is hardly a united, anti-Vienna and pro-independence bloc. It was the complete opposite. During the war, the government had to compromise and promise to expand suffrage. I don't see why the call for reform wouldn't happen iATL even without the war. Vienna wouldn't want Budapest to ruin the Kingdom of Hungary by continuing their Magyarisation policies and angering both ethnic minorities and the commoners. The Hungarian system would, in my opinion, collapse much more quickly and easily than the Empire itself.

Basically, Hungary needs reform as much as the Empire as a whole. Whether the Nationalists want to or not, the Hungarian magnates are going to be forced on the negociating table and it's either going to be with Vienna or an increasing amount of political radicals. A clever one in Vienna couls very-well take advantage of the increasingly-unstable situation un Hungary to push for reforms.

In the end, Hungary was far from disloyal as people keep trying to push for the past 99 years. Especially not in 1914. I don't think it could've stood up from a more reform-minded Vienna by the late 1910s. Not without its own growing problems becoming more and more glaring. I'm certain the Hungarian magnates wouldn't risk everything in order to maintain a degrading status quo. They had less to lose from reformsn after all.
 
Sorry, but it's just that whenever I see someone calling Kaiser Wilhelm II "smart" or a "statesman" I tend to call bullshit. This was man who delivered the "Hun Speech", the "Krueger Telegram", gave Austria-Hungary their "blank cheque" and countless other gaffes.
Franz-Joseph was a dinosaur but his overriding concern was to keep the Empire together. His main ruling style - IIRC - was to wait, doing and saying nothing, allowing the parties involved to shout themselves hoarse and resolve the issue amongst themselves before pronouncing judgment on the side that everyone had already agreed was right. He was a reactionary, but only as being reactionary was what was keeping the Empire from falling apart. He kept moderates out of power, but extremists as well.

"Ich habe alles geprüft und erwogen."

Sure, he was not that proactive, except after 48, he pretty much set the pieces as he liked (Bach-governement), and after that, he pretty much tended to not act until the very last moment, when he - and his system - was cornered. For example, the road to the Ausgleich had three lost major ways, large territorial losses, large economic losses, large "face" losses and the prospect of defaulting.
 
Assuming he lived, the reforms which he would theoretically have carried out.

The reforms he would have carrried out theoretically would have been similar to the pos-48 system. Nobody liked it.
(What the hungarians got as punishment, the others got s reward.)

Because loyalty to the Hapsburg Crown and also because it wasn't Slavs vs. Magyars vs. Germans. There were many people who were loyal to the Empire from all ethnicities. Many Nations in Austria did not have their own states like Romania or Serbia, and Austria had been or was being good to them. For example the Ukrainians who were known as the Tyroleans of the East for their loyalty to the Empire. While Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, and Ukrainians all performed poorly on the Italian and balkan fronts, when defending their lands from the Russians they fought with excellent morale, vise versa for Slovenians, and Croats when on the Eastern Front. People also tend to forget the "Nationalization" of the Hapsburg family itself. By 1914, there were definitively Polish Hapsburgs and a Ukrainian Hapsburg Archduke. The Hapsburgs were evolving with the times, with different National branches. This would and IOTL did to some extent resulted in the strengthening of the loyalty of the people's in question as they felt the Empire and the Royal Family began to reflect its subjects much more than before. Combine that with FF's reforms and the Slavs(except maybe the Serbs) will be firmly loyal to the Empire. The Italians, Serbs, and Romanians will always have been a pain, however one that could be mitigated to a large extent domestically at least.

As i remember, the Czech regiments had maybe the lowest morale - and maybe im not too far, if i connect this to the unsolved czech question.
 
The reforms he would have carrried out theoretically would have been similar to the pos-48 system. Nobody liked it.
(What the hungarians got as punishment, the others got s reward.)



As i remember, the Czech regiments had maybe the lowest morale - and maybe im not too far, if i connect this to the unsolved czech question.
Well, once you solve the Czech question and give them a prominent place in the Empire they'll be loyal. Most A-H units during the war had poor morale, but fighting against the Russians they performed fairly well as they were defending land closer to home.
 

Perkeo

Banned
Maybe A-H is saved by the mere fact that both German-Austria and Hungary are likely to loose territory to the small nationalities and thus are better off when the empire is not split.
 
I rather like the idea of a continuing Hapsburg empire and think it might present an opportunity to avoid a whole lot of pointless bloodshed, precisely because its ethnic map is such a mishmash. With the rise of SD the party would emphasize class interest over ethnic and the rights of small people would come to be seen as protected by the masses of other small people of all ethnicities throughout the Empire rather than the chimera of nationalism. So I would like to hope.

However I take issue with the premise of "if only we can avoid the Great War!" Avoiding the Great War would itself be a tremendous boon for humanity, and I also agree that the Empire had a chance of surviving going forward from OTL 1914 but avoiding the war.

But can we avoid the war? I fear not. I think the currents that led to it were deep and inexorable and that while we can shift the start date back and forth half a decade or so, the explosion was coming.

Therefore I would conclude that if we want to save the Empire from extinction, alternate decisions would have to be taken much much earlier than 1914, way back in the 1870s or so, to lay the groundwork for an Empire that is stronger than OTL's version on the eve of war, so that it can get caught up in the maelstrom but still survive. Go back a generation, 30, 40, 50 years, or even alter the outcomes of the 1848 crisis, and look for more visionary and wise and long-viewed solutions. Then we can hope for survival of the Empire maybe. It could be that some of the better work is not all done by the time the war breaks out but with enough ground work the war itself allows more vital cementing to occur, leaving the Empire stronger not weaker. Of course during a war all nations on the other side will be doing everything they can to try to split the fault lines and break it up, just to weaken the alliance of their enemies. So the work of the previous generations had to be sound.
 

What do you like Austria-Hungary's future would have looked like without WWI?



They’d have muddled on through.


But can we avoid the war? I fear not.



Have Sir Edward Grey keel over dead in 1909 and who knows? Depends on the replacement.


As i remember, the Czech regiments had maybe the lowest morale - and maybe im not too far, if i connect this to the unsolved czech question.


But if it were that bad then why were there Czech regiments in the first place?
 
The reforms he would have carrried out theoretically would have been similar to the pos-48 system. Nobody liked it.
(What the hungarians got as punishment, the others got s reward.)



As i remember, the Czech regiments had maybe the lowest morale - and maybe im not too far, if i connect this to the unsolved czech question.
Actually it is more complicated. There were some cases of desertions but there were cases when Czech regiments fought well.
But sure if Czech question was solved mirale could be better.
Look at Slovak regiments. Morale was not so good there either.
 
They’d have muddled on thr
But if it were that bad then why were there Czech regiments in the first place
Because A-H regiments were drafting their soldiers locally. Regiment based in Prague was calling on men from Prague and around. Regiment based in Pilsner did so in Pilsner. That's why there were Czech regiments, Austrian or German or mixed. Same goes for other nationalities in empire. Almost every nationality had at least one regiment in which they were majority.
 
Because A-H regiments were drafting their soldiers locally. Regiment based in Prague was calling on men from Prague and around. Regiment based in Pilsner did so in Pilsner. That's why there were Czech regiments, Austrian or German or mixed. Same goes for other nationalities in empire. Almost every nationality had at least one regiment in which they were majority.

The fact that Czech units existed at all suggests that their loyalty was not seriously questioned prior to the war though.
 
The fact that Czech units existed at all suggests that their loyalty was not seriously questioned prior to the war though.
The fact that their existed is not question of nationality but location where they existed and from where they drafted their men. After all they were official not called "Czech" or "Slovak" regiment but by number. And onoficially by town where they were located. For example 71st KuK infantry regiment was located in Trencsen. Slovak Trencin. majority of it soldiers were Slovaks so is sometimes referred as Slovak regiment.

So so called Czech regiments were regiments of KuK Army with majority of Czech soldiers.
 
Last edited:
A few thoughts, I think a Czech third kingdom would be pretty much a disaster. It would alienate the Austro-Germans and weaken the empire rather than strengthen it, weakening the Austrian economy by removing the industry from it, while placing the Bohemian kingdom in permanent conflict between the local Germans and Czechs. If they go after a third kingdom Greater Croatia make sense, not Bohemia.

A few other thoughts, when I made my calculation I wasn't thinking about Krakow, I could see Krakow and Austrian Silesia growing into one major industrial region closely connected with German Silesia. In this region we will likely see a influx of all ethnicities of the empire plus Polis and Jewish immigrants from Russia. The result would be a mixed population with German as lingua franca a kind of kleinwien on the border of Russia and Prussia.

Also I think we will see the rise of the Socialist/Social Democrat "ethnicity", this was something we saw in Germany, working class movement where people was more loyal to party/movement than to their ethnicity. So ironic it's the rise of the working class, which may serve as the clue keeping the empire together. In area where the population are mixed this mewan that they will be open to intermarriage, which ironic create a kind of Austrian ethnicity who likely speak German, but who have little connection with Germany outside their connection to SPD.
 

Perkeo

Banned
The First World War was by no means unavoidable. It's a common and oft repeated myth that it was "only a matter of time" until a major War broke out.
It's a simplificationm but not a myth. The various military rivalries and the doctrine to favor offense over defense makes a major war very likely. So i someone writes a no-WWI-timeline I don't say that's per se ASB, but I do ask for a reason why not.

For A-H its similar: Zeitgeist worked against athoritarian multi-ethnic states. However, one century later there are still some athoritarian multi-ethnic states around, so it's not impossible. IMO it all depends on the cohesion between German-Austrians and Hungarians.
 
It's a simplificationm but not a myth. The various military rivalries and the doctrine to favor offense over defense makes a major war very likely. So i someone writes a no-WWI-timeline I don't say that's per se ASB, but I do ask for a reason why not.

For A-H its similar: Zeitgeist worked against athoritarian multi-ethnic states. However, one century later there are still some athoritarian multi-ethnic states around, so it's not impossible. IMO it all depends on the cohesion between German-Austrians and Hungarians.
There were several proposals for Austria-Hungary reforming into a federal state. As others have mentioned the greatest resistance would be from the Hungarian nobility.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_of_Greater_Austria
 
In the short term, if the central government unifies the army then this common army will be around 1/4 Hungarian and not under the control of the nobility. Any attempt to secede made by the Hungarian nobility without outside support will result in a prompt curb stomping by the Austrians plus all other ethnic and religious minorities that make up a large majority in the armed forces.

Short term without ww1 I can see them surviving with some sort of larger suffrage and democratisation and allowing civil rights.

The biggest problem I see long term is Galicia, when Ukraine and Poland gain independance from Russia and Germany where they will demand part of/all of Galicia as they consider it a core part of their nation, this revanchism is unlikely to go away. This is similar with Transylvania/Vojvodina.

If given sufficient rights I can see all the other self contained nationalities choosing to remain under triple/quadruple/quituple monarchy or United States scenario.
 
I think people are overestimating the power of a select group of Hungarian magnates over a minority of the conservative patriotic army without the support of the monarch and with no other goal except maintaining their economic and political power.
 
As i remember, the Czech regiments had maybe the lowest morale - and maybe im not too far, if i connect this to the unsolved czech question.

The initial morale of the entire army, just like all other armies, was very good when the war began in 1914, regardless of ethnicities of the regiments. One of the massive problem affecting the Czech regiments has little to do with the morale/élan/loyalty of the Czech soldiers. It was the General Staff's idiocy that ruined it. Looking for a scapegoat for the massive failures on the Serbian front and, of course, unwilling to accept their part in the failures, blamed the Czechs. German-speaking officers often had pan-germanist tendencies or had supremacist beliefs typical of the day. Being scapegoated despite their show of loyalty and competence made many Czechs legitimately upset and angry at the High Command, which they associated with the overall Empire and they became disillusioned. Of course, that doesn't mean the Czechs all became disloyal; the Empire only collapsed in 1918, after all. Many still believed that in the end of the war, their loyalty would be rewarded with autonomy. When the war was lost, they everybody gave up on the Empire since it was guaranteed to be dissolved.

tl;dr Low Czech Morale applies after the initial battles because the KuK High Command was absolutely stupid.
 
Or... the Magyars might cede Transylvania to Romania and Slavonia and Bosnia to Serbia in return for support against Austrian reconquest.

The Hungarians didn`t actually have the authority to cede Slavonia or Bosnia to anyone. Bonsia was an Austro-Hungarian co-dominium, and Croatia while being a part of the Lands of the Crown of Saint Stephen, wasn`t really part of Hungary proper.

2000px-Austria-Hungary_map_new.svg.png
 
Top