What would an 1870-1871 partition of Austria-Hungary look like?

[FillyofDelphi]

As I said in another thread, the annexation of Austria and/or Bohemia is a serious risk for Bismarck and the assured rise of the Zentrum, Bismarck and his party have strong personal motivations against full annexation of Catholic regions. I think that "Britain will not like!" is a good cover to the real reason "My political enemies will get stronger!"...

It's also a good reason in and of itself because it puts at risk his "baby": unification of Germany under a strong, aristocratic, Prussian-Junker dominated Conservative system in a way that it will be accepted by the international community. Keeping Austria out fulfilled both goals.

 

[Jürgen]

As I said in another thread, the annexation of Austria and/or Bohemia is a serious risk for Bismarck and the assured rise of the Zentrum, Bismarck and his party have strong personal motivations against full annexation of Catholic regions. I think that "Britain will not like!" is a good cover to the real reason "My political enemies will get stronger!"...

It's better for Bismarck to deal with a larger Zentrum than risking a revolution. The Germans wanted a Grossdeutschland, because of Austria stayed out of the war, they had to live with a Kleindeutschland, but if there's the chance of the former and Bismarck doesn't take it, he won't stay in power. German nationalism was a tiger which Bismarck rode on, and if he release it, he will be eaten.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

It's better for Bismarck to deal with a larger Zentrum than risking a revolution. The Germans wanted a Grossdeutschland, because of Austria stayed out of the war, they had to live with a Kleindeutschland, but if there's the chance of the former and Bismarck doesn't take it, he won't stay in power. German nationalism was a tiger which Bismarck rode on, and if he release it, he will be eaten.

Sure there were Pan-Germanists, but are they really going to try to overthrow the government just because Bismarck diden't push for wiping a Great Power (Second string, sure; but still recognized as such) off the map in one fell swoop? Only the most ideological purists woulden't seen the practical repercussions of such a measure and, while they may not like it, would be far more likely to blame Prefidious Albion's, and to a lesser extent other "hostile" nation's, manipulation and dog-piling on to stop Germany from fulfilling her destiny. Bismarck could easily channel their hatred in a direction productive to his continued political success (Against the Catholic Church and forgein governments, helping justify the type of government he saw fit. Nothing like getting the population to believe the democratic opposition are catspaws for the enemies of the state to justify limiting civil and political rights)

 

[Jürgen]

Sure there were Pan-Germanists, but are they really going to try to overthrow the government just because Bismarck diden't push for wiping a Great Power (Second string, sure; but still recognized as such) off the map in one fell swoop? Only the most ideological purists woulden't seen the practical repercussions of such a measure and, while they may not like it, would be far more likely to blame Prefidious Albion's, and to a lesser extent other "hostile" nation's, manipulation and dog-piling on to stop Germany from fulfilling her destiny. Bismarck could easily channel their hatred in a direction productive to his continued political success (Against the Catholic Church and forgein governments, helping justify the type of government he saw fit. Nothing like getting the population to believe the democratic opposition are catspaws for the enemies of the state to justify limiting civil and political rights)

Yes they're going to try overthrow the government and they had broad support. Bismarck didn't want a united Germany, neither Klein oder Gross, he wanted a Grosspreußen, and he got that in 1866, if it hadn't been for a French idiot, the unification would have ended there, but Bismarck had to continue ride the tiger.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

Yes they're going to try overthrow the government and they had broad support. Bismarck didn't want a united Germany, neither Klein oder Gross, he wanted a Grosspreußen, and he got that in 1866, if it hadn't been for a French idiot, the unification would have ended there, but Bismarck had to continue ride the tiger.

Me thinks you are either overestimating the power, fervor, unity, or multiple selections from the above of the Pan-German movement. Bismarck and Prussia had enough "street cred" after establishing the custom's union, the Schewing-Holstein War, the integrated rail system, etc. that the majority of Pan-Germanists woulden't lynch them over not being able to pull the international politics equivilent of a miracle. Even if some diden't, the Prussian army IS a loyal weapon in their hands, and a mighy finely honed one at that, added to the fact that there's nobody in the international community who actually WANTS the Pan-German radicals to succeed in their plot to overthrow the government. If they try to do so democratically, franchise laws in Prussia put them at a distinct disadvantage compared to the conservative landowners and industrialists that Bismark had made great strides to engender himself with, meaning in addition to not having the bullets they won't be able to get their hands on enough ballots: particularly if Bismark does what he did historically and pulls the Socialist's main issues out from under them.

Now, would Grossdeuchland be preferable to Kleindeuchland to more people than those radicals? Sure. But to the extent that they're willing to put that issue above all others, to the point of risking their lives, liberties, and other political concerns in a vain effort to enforce it against thec combined forces the Prussian and Hapsburg states and the norms of the international community? Not in sufficent numbers to overcome said combined forces.

 

[Falecius]

Sure there were Pan-Germanists, but are they really going to try to overthrow the government just because Bismarck diden't push for wiping a Great Power (Second string, sure; but still recognized as such) off the map in one fell swoop? Only the most ideological purists woulden't seen the practical repercussions of such a measure and, while they may not like it, would be far more likely to blame Prefidious Albion's, and to a lesser extent other "hostile" nation's, manipulation and dog-piling on to stop Germany from fulfilling her destiny. Bismarck could easily channel their hatred in a direction productive to his continued political success (Against the Catholic Church and forgein governments, helping justify the type of government he saw fit. Nothing like getting the population to believe the democratic opposition are catspaws for the enemies of the state to justify limiting civil and political rights)

If Austria enters the war, it would be politically very problematic for Bismarck (or anybody else ruling in Berlin) not to go for Grossdeutschland. Also, in this context, no Power is going to be both willing and able to stop it. Russia is an ally, Austria and France are defeated, Italy is either an ally to bargain with or does not matter alone, Britain has no continental power projection of note and can't do much except maybe in coordination with (at the very least) Italy, and likely uninterested in committing much.
However, what the combined Power CAN and WOULD do is to limit the new Germany's gains.

 

[Old1812]

While I don't mean to derail the discussion of Pan-Germanism, who would be picked to rule the new Kingdom of Hungary? Would one of the Hohenzollern-Sigmaringens be a good choice? As it seems likely that Hungary will be close to Germany ITTL, it would seem to make sense. Of the younger sons of Prince Karl Anton, Karl has already gone to Romania, and Anton was killed at Königgrätz, leaving only Friedrich (which could be a problem as he left no heirs).

 

[Falecius]

While I don't mean to derail the discussion of Pan-Germanism, who would be picked to rule the new Kingdom of Hungary? Would one of the Hohenzollern-Sigmaringens be a good choice? As it seems likely that Hungary will be close to Germany ITTL, it would seem to make sense. Of the younger sons of Prince Karl Anton, Karl has already gone to Romania, and Anton was killed at Königgrätz, leaving only Friedrich (which could be a problem as he left no heirs).

Depends. A bitter, defeated Hungary bordering Hohenzollern Romania on the Tisza and Hohenzollern German Empire downstream Pressburg would not pick Hohenzollerns if not forced, and everyone who is not Hohenzollern would also object. They either pick some cadet Habsburg or a native Hungarian magnate (Esterhazys are the most likely I think) with off chances for other houses (the dethroned Hanoverians? Amedeo of Savoy, who was called to Spain IOTL? In both cases, the logic is building goodwill with another power who is not in the German or Russian camp as a guarantee of independence).
A largely integral Hungary on good terms with Germany may be happy to foster good neighboring relationships with both Berlin and Bucharest by picking a H-S prince, though, again, this may be received badly in St. Petersburg or London (but what can they do?).

 

[Monter]

Depends. A bitter, defeated Hungary bordering Hohenzollern Romania on the Tisza and Hohenzollern German Empire downstream Pressburg would not pick Hohenzollerns if not forced, and everyone who is not Hohenzollern would also object. They either pick some cadet Habsburg or a native Hungarian magnate (Esterhazys are the most likely I think) with off chances for other houses (the dethroned Hanoverians? Amedeo of Savoy, who was called to Spain IOTL? In both cases, the logic is building goodwill with another power who is not in the German or Russian camp as a guarantee of independence).
A largely integral Hungary on good terms with Germany may be happy to foster good neighboring relationships with both Berlin and Bucharest by picking a H-S prince, though, again, this may be received badly in St. Petersburg or London (but what can they do?).

Which Hohenzollern Romania? It didn't exist until 1881.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

If Austria enters the war, it would be politically very problematic for Bismarck (or anybody else ruling in Berlin) not to go for Grossdeutschland. Also, in this context, no Power is going to be both willing and able to stop it. Russia is an ally, Austria and France are defeated, Italy is either an ally to bargain with or does not matter alone, Britain has no continental power projection of note and can't do much except maybe in coordination with (at the very least) Italy, and likely uninterested in committing much.
However, what the combined Power CAN and WOULD do is to limit the new Germany's gains.

... an alliance that will sour very, VERY quickly once the Czar learns Germany is trying to take a kaiser-sized bite out of Eastern Europe, to the point that Germany becomes the only viable threat/check on Russian interests in the region (And vice versa; Germany can now only be held back on land if Russia gets involved). That's the problem with alliances of convenience /partition: mutual greed only runs so long until you realize the other guy is now your main rival for power. Would Russia even back Grossdeutschland at the inevitable international conference that would be called in the event Germany pushes to eliminate a Great Power from the map? Or would they, seeing the shift in the balance of power, try to hold Germany back (perhaps for French and British approval of her annexations on the Carpathians?)

I fully expect the Russo-German alliance to go the way of Tilst. Add that to the fact that the new Germany would have diplomatically isolated itself if it went after the level of gains suggested (Austria, A-L, and Bohemia-Moravia as they would have called it), and the Pan-Germanists may find that the biggest unifying they've done related to the German world is unite the rest of the world against it.

 

[Falecius]

... an alliance that will sour very, VERY quickly once the Czar learns Germany is trying to take a kaiser-sized bite out of Eastern Europe, to the point that Germany becomes the only viable threat/check on Russian interests in the region (And vice versa; Germany can now only be held back on land if Russia gets involved). That's the problem with alliances of convenience /partition: mutual greed only runs so long until you realize the other guy is now your main rival for power. Would Russia even back Grossdeutschland at the inevitable international conference that would be called in the event Germany pushes to eliminate a Great Power from the map? Or would they, seeing the shift in the balance of power, try to hold Germany back (perhaps for French and British approval of her annexations on the Carpathians?)

I fully expect the Russo-German alliance to go the way of Tilst. Add that to the fact that the new Germany would have diplomatically isolated itself if it went after the level of gains suggested (Austria, A-L, and Bohemia-Moravia as they would have called it), and the Pan-Germanists may find that the biggest unifying they've done related to the German world is unite the rest of the world against it.

Of course the alliance is hardly going to last. But what is Russia going to do? Propping up a rump Austria immediately after having contributed to its destruction?

 

[Falecius]

Which Hohenzollern Romania? It didn't exist until 1881.

It appears that Carol I of House Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen became Ruling Prince of Romania in 1866. I only checked Wikipedia, but it's usually reliable for such things.

 

[Monter]

It appears that Carol I of House Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen became Ruling Prince of Romania in 1866. I only checked Wikipedia, but it's usually reliable for such things.

Oh, that's right, my bad.

 

[FillyofDelphi]

Of course the alliance is hardly going to last. But what is Russia going to do? Propping up a rump Austria immediately after having contributed to its destruction?

Propping up? Not nessicerily; they're going to insist on their pound of flesh. Agreeing to abide by the norms of international warfare and the politics surrounding it that have been the norms since the Napoleonic Wars, where the exchange of territory is mediated, somewhat limited, and done in such a way that its at least mutually acceptable to the other Great Powers to prevent Europe from cascading into another series of continental total wars? Sure thing.

To give an almost perfectly parallel example, there's a reason Russia diden't insist on the Treaty of San Stefano when the international community convened the Congress of Berlin. And that was with a nation that arguably had fallen out of the Great Power club and was not quite "European" to boot.

 

[Byzantion]

Had Austria-Hungary foolishly entered the Franco-Prussian War on France's side (due to a desire for revenge on Prussia; for the events of 1866), and had Russia entered this war on Germany's side afterwards, what would the resulting partition of Austria-Hungary have looked like?

King William the first wanted to end the Habsburg Empire, after it was clear that they were going to lose. Bismarck disagreed. Maybe William fires Bismarck this time.

 

[Falecius]

Propping up? Not nessicerily; they're going to insist on their pound of flesh. Agreeing to abide by the norms of international warfare and the politics surrounding it that have been the norms since the Napoleonic Wars, where the exchange of territory is mediated, somewhat limited, and done in such a way that its at least mutually acceptable to the other Great Powers to prevent Europe from cascading into another series of continental total wars? Sure thing.

To give an almost perfectly parallel example, there's a reason Russia diden't insist on the Treaty of San Stefano when the international community convened the Congress of Berlin. And that was with a nation that arguably had fallen out of the Great Power club and was not quite "European" to boot.

That's part of why I insist that maximal Grossdeutschland is unlikely. It is likely, however, that Russia would grudgingly accept at least that (roughly) the German-speaking parts of Cisleithania are incorporated into Germany in some way. Probably Bohemia-Moravia too. The rest depends on how the war exactly had gone, and individual decisions. Hard to define.

 

[CaliGuy]

Yes they're going to try overthrow the government and they had broad support. Bismarck didn't want a united Germany, neither Klein oder Gross, he wanted a Grosspreußen, and he got that in 1866, if it hadn't been for a French idiot, the unification would have ended there, but Bismarck had to continue ride the tiger.

Didn't Bismarck himself provoke the war with France, though?

That's part of why I insist that maximal Grossdeutschland is unlikely. It is likely, however, that Russia would grudgingly accept at least that (roughly) the German-speaking parts of Cisleithania are incorporated into Germany in some way. Probably Bohemia-Moravia too. The rest depends on how the war exactly had gone, and individual decisions. Hard to define.

Your proposal isn't very different from Grossdeutschland, though.

Anyway, how does this partition look like: Germany gets Czechia and German Austria (including Burgenland), Italy gets the Italian-majority areas of A-H and perhaps Dalmatia as well, Hungary becomes independent but loses Transylvania (which is annexed to Ottoman-vassal Romania), and Russia annexes both Galicia and Subcarpathian Ruthenia?

Indeed, is that spot-on?

 

[CaliGuy]

They would if they figure the Russians are coming after them once Austria is beat. The other option is to give the Russians the Balkans for something else in return. In 1914, there would be the North African coast. In 1870, not much

Why would Russia have been interested in the North African coast even in 1914, though?

People you know what in case of UK it doesn't make a difference how much Germany takes, Bismarck can't get away with not annexing Austria and Bohemia, so he just as well ignore UK and focus in getting a strong strategic position for Germany. Also without Austria Germany and Russia have no reason to end up on opposite side. Italy is not trustworthy, so their interests doesn't matter, give them Nice, Savoy and Corsica to place them in conflict with the French, not for any other reason, if you can get the Belgiums aboard give them some border changes too. Hungary aren't relevant as a power without Austria, so Germany can just as well remove any delusion of grandeur they have. Romania are a relative large ethnicity, and lack any potential conflict with Germany, why not strengthen them by giving them the river Tisza as their western border (maybe minus Banat, you can potential make some population exchanges) and Bukovina) While slightly smaller than OTL Hungary in population, Romanians are in massive majority. Giving the Croats a free hand to expand in the Balkans, then you have them aboard. The question are whether Slovakia should be set up as independent state.

Who would get Slovenia in this TL?

 

[Mikestone8]

King William the first wanted to end the Habsburg Empire, after it was clear that they were going to lose. Bismarck disagreed. Maybe William fires Bismarck this time.

No he didn't. He would have liked to annex all or part of Saxony, and either Bohemia or just the German-speaking parts of it and Moravia/Silesia. In return he would have been willing to leave Hanover et al independent (within the NGC) provided that their current rulers abdicated. Neither Wilhelm nor anyone else proposed to destroy the Austrian Empire.

 

[Mikestone8]

Didn't Bismarck himself provoke the war with France, though?

Not really. Being rude to an Ambassador doesn't lead to war unless you are already seeking an excuse for one. The French were seeking one, and Bismarck very sensibly obliged, since France had no allies, and if she were dopey enough to go to war, right now would be the best time for Germany to fight it.