Which sea are Habsburgs more likely to expand to?

which Sea are the Habsburgs more likely to expand to?

  • The black sea

    Votes: 56 57.1%
  • The Aegean Sea

    Votes: 42 42.9%

  • Total voters
    98
Not exactly: IIRC, the bulk of the Russian army had been staying on the border just to prevent something of the kind from happening.

It doesn't take much of a POD to get both Austria and Sweden on board for that war, and once that happens Russia is pretty much pooched. The Austrian army could easily give Russia a run for its money just by showing up.
 
It doesn't take much of a POD to get both Austria and Sweden on board for that war, and once that happens Russia is pretty much pooched. The Austrian army could easily give Russia a run for its money just by showing up.

Austrian army was not good enough to intimidate anybody just by its appearance (being routinely beaten by pretty much everyone worth mentioning) and Sweden did not remain quite neutral during the CW. In OTL as a result of the diplomatic pressure Russians evacuated the Principalities which had been re-occupied by the Austrians and Ottomans but that's approximately as much as Austrian "showing up" could achieve.

Then you keep ignoring the obvious fact that the whole fighting had been happening on the Russian borders and it took practically all available French and British resources and a year to take a southern part of Sevastopol (Northern, across the bay was untouched). OTOH, the Ottomans had been suffering serious defeats on the Caucasus (lost Kars). Hardly a promising scenario for "pooching". The problem for Russia was not as much military as economic: the war was too expensive to continue. With Kars as a bargaining chip, Russia ended up with the minimal territorial losses (and a huge government debt to pay).
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Austrian army was not good enough to intimidate anybody just by its appearance (being routinely beaten by pretty much everyone worth mentioning) and Sweden did not remain quite neutral during the CW. In OTL as a result of the diplomatic pressure Russians evacuated the Principalities which had been re-occupied by the Austrians and Ottomans but that's approximately as much as Austrian "showing up" could achieve.

Then you keep ignoring the obvious fact that the whole fighting had been happening on the Russian borders and it took practically all available French and British resources and a year to take a southern part of Sevastopol (Northern, across the bay was untouched). OTOH, the Ottomans had been suffering serious defeats on the Caucasus (lost Kars). Hardly a promising scenario for "pooching". The problem for Russia was not as much military as economic: the war was too expensive to continue. With Kars as a bargaining chip, Russia ended up with the minimal territorial losses (and a huge government debt to pay).

So no chance of making even smallish gains, like Bessarabia?
 
So no chance of making even smallish gains, like Bessarabia?

IIRC, by the Peace of Paris Russia returned to Moldavia a small piece of a territory it annexed in 1812 (and got it back after the war of 1877-8). Hapsburgs had to evacuate the Principalities. It is rather optimistic (or naive) to expect that the Brits, French, Sardinians and the Ottomans would willingly give a piece of an Ottoman territory to Austria.
 
Austrian army was not good enough to intimidate anybody just by its appearance (being routinely beaten by pretty much everyone worth mentioning)
At the time of the Crimean War it would have certainly been more than a match for the Russian army, which had been watered down to the point of being an overgrown marching band. Prior to Molke's reforms the Austrian army was probably second only to the French in Europe.
 
At the time of the Crimean War it would have certainly been more than a match for the Russian army, which had been watered down to the point of being an overgrown marching band. Prior to Molke's reforms the Austrian army was probably second only to the French in Europe.

AFAIK, these were not "Moltke's reforms" but "Roon's reforms". Unlike Moltke, Roon was Minister of War.:cool:
 
And get Austrian instead. Why do you think that there was any love lost among the participants? Austria was still considered a Great Power and its possession of the Danube provinces would extent it dangerously close to the Straits to the French and British displeasure. Why would Austria get the Ottoman territories as a reward for (formally) defending the Ottomans is a little bit unclear to me. ;)

Austria would have immense trouble absorbing the Danubian Principalities, and it's obvious to everyone that Austria is much weaker than Russia.

Furthermore, relative to the Aegean, which would require Serbia, Macedonia, and Greek Macedonia to fall to Austria, it's clearly obvious that getting to the Black Sea requires far less expansion than getting to the Aegean.
 
Austria would have immense trouble absorbing the Danubian Principalities, and it's obvious to everyone that Austria is much weaker than Russia.

Furthermore, relative to the Aegean, which would require Serbia, Macedonia, and Greek Macedonia to fall to Austria, it's clearly obvious that getting to the Black Sea requires far less expansion than getting to the Aegean.

I was talking about the Adriatic access to which they had in OTL and have no idea how Aegean Sea got into the picture.

Chance for a realistic expansion to the Black Sea was in the XVIII (2nd time with Russian help) and Austria lost it twice. The Crimean War hardly provided a realistic chance because Austria would have to fight the Ottomans (Russian troops withdrew from the Principalities) in defense of whom the French and Brits had been presumably fighting: the Ottomans were OK with the Austrian co-occupation of the Principalities during the war but had no intention to give them up.
 
At the time of the Crimean War it would have certainly been more than a match for the Russian army, which had been watered down to the point of being an overgrown marching band. Prior to Molke's reforms the Austrian army was probably second only to the French in Europe.

The austrian army was never really the best on the continent but never really the worst either. They seem weaker than reality because they tended to fight someone stronger. But even in one of their worst performances, WWI they can point at Italy when asked for someone worse.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
IIRC, by the Peace of Paris Russia returned to Moldavia a small piece of a territory it annexed in 1812 (and got it back after the war of 1877-8). Hapsburgs had to evacuate the Principalities. It is rather optimistic (or naive) to expect that the Brits, French, Sardinians and the Ottomans would willingly give a piece of an Ottoman territory to Austria.

Good point, what if I amend the proposal that the anti-Russian coalition, with the addition of Austria, force Russia yield all Bessarabia to Moldavia. After the war, Moldavia remains dependent on Austria to hold on to the regained territory. Possibly Austria encourages Wallachia and Moldavia to remain independent of each other, to lessen their potential for claims against Transylvania.
 
Good point, what if I amend the proposal that the anti-Russian coalition, with the addition of Austria, force Russia yield all Bessarabia to Moldavia. After the war, Moldavia remains dependent on Austria to hold on to the regained territory. Possibly Austria encourages Wallachia and Moldavia to remain independent of each other, to lessen their potential for claims against Transylvania.

IIRC, something of the kind was initially on the table but Russia also had a bargaining chip, Pashalik of Kars.

No, I don't think that your schema is working because it means taking from the Ottomans a territory and .... give it to Austria while still claiming that the purpose of the war was to prevent occupation of the Ottoman territory by Russia. The arguments like "Austria was weaker than Russia..." are hardly convincing, especially taking into an account that neither France nor Sardinia had excessively warm feelings toward Austria.

Then, of course, while Palmerston was all for the continued war (which, typically, would be conducted mostly by the troops of other nations), the main player, France, wanted it to end and, IIRC, even a simple mobilization of the troops and peaceful occupation of the Principalities proved almost prohibitively expensive for Austria. From Little Nappy's perspective his goals had been achieved: (a) there was a military glory, (b) Russian influence in the Middle East had been limited and (c) from Alexander II he got a proper addressing which Nicholas I refused to grant to him (and which was probably the most important thing for him).

As I said before, the only realistic time slot was somewhere in the XVIII when Austria could do it (if its generals commanding in the region demonstrated a little bit of a talent and if it was not trying so hard to conquer Serbia) with a complete Russian cooperation.
 
Top