WI Carol I and Stefan Stambolov pushed forward a Romanian-Bulgarian personal Union in 1887?

[raharris1973]

WI Carol I and Stefan Stambolov pushed forward a Romanian-Bulgarian personal Union in 1887?

The deal would Crown Carol I, Kng of Romania, also as Prince of Bulgaria, when Bulgaria was looking for a new ruler after the abdication of Alexander of Battenberg under Russian pressure, but before the selection of Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg.

This was a plan in real life, and Carol entertained it seriously. From the Bulgarian side, master politician Stefan Stambolov supported it.

OTL, the idea of Union was dropped when Russian (which seemed to have a policy principle at that time of opposing any move by Bulgaria originated anyplace but St. Petersburg) threatened war in response, and Austria-Hungary, which previously had secretly pledged Triple Alliance protection to Romania, said it couldn’t help Romania in this instance.

In the ATL, the British, who loved opposing every Russian move, get wind of the personal Union plan and pledge support against the Russians to the Romanians and Bulgarians, and communicate similar intent to Austria-Hungary, saying it is included under the Mediterranean agreements.

The British govt, despite vague written assurances, and stronger verbal assurances, is careful not to put the words alliance or commitment in writing to avoid a paper trail for parliamentary investigators. But the affect of British moves is to get the Balkan duo and Vienna to stand firm.

they do, and the Union go forward…

the ball is then in Russia’s court…

 

[raharris1973]

Russia in this instance has had its bluff called, because of either Romanian and Bulgarian hope that Russian threats are a bluff, hopes that London and Vienna, and London, and Berlin share, alongside with desires to check excess Russian influence and demands on Balkan states like so recently witnessed in Bulgaria in the crises over unification with Eastern Rumelia and the deposition of Alexander of Battenberg. To the extent Bucharest, Sofia, Vienna, and London believe Russia may actually go to war, they believe risk is tolerable and the outcome is preferable to backing down under Russian pressure yet again because St. Petersburg's appetite for micromanaging Bulgaria and now Romania seems limitless, with no end in sight, whereas native Balkan support for resisting Russia appears strong, with the Obrenovic rulers of Serbia recently aligned with Austria and the Romanians (to be joined by the Bulgarians) also recently under the protective wing of the Triple Alliance.

Taking the Russians at their word, and their contempt for the smaller Balkan countries, one might assume they would invade Romania forthwith to force them to renounce the union with Bulgaria. But one of the bigger fans of Alexander III on this board, @alexmilman, has often said that Alexander III was too wise and realistic about Russia's need to grow economically to overcome its industrial backwardness to allow itself to get drawn into a war with outside powers, especially ones like Austria with potential alliance links with even more advanced western powers.

If Russia does not fight over the new union, Russian intimidation power abates in the Balkans for the near term. If Russia does go to war, Crimean War II is likely on, with Austria-Hungary and Britain backing up Balkan resisistance, and Germany, reluctantly, backing up Austria. Given already tense Franco-German relations in this year (1887) France is unlikely to skip the opportunity to declare war on Germany while Germany also faces a war in the east against Russia due to its obligations against Austria. This spread of the conflagration through Europe starts WWI early, with the difference of Britain being on the German and Austro-Hungarian side.

 

[Hippomotapus]

I doubt Russia would go to war over Romania-- the Crimean War was still in recent memory and Alexander was considerably less jingoistic than his dad

 

[raharris1973]

I doubt Russia would go to war over Romania-- the Crimean War was still in recent memory and Alexander was considerably less jingoistic than his dad

If we go with the idea of Russia restraining itself from war or backing up threats, can Alex III, or Nicholas II later on, kiss and make up with Romania-Bulgaria?

Would Carol’s executive influence keep Romania-Bulgaria Triple Alliance/CP aligned for his reign?

How do the governments of Romania and Bulgaria, perhaps with a mix of shared institutions, handle their distinct irredentisms? Romania’s anti-Hungarian and anti-Russian form, and Bulgaria’s anti-Ottoman hankering for Macedonia and Thrace?

If R-B becomes pro-Russian, it could support ‘balanced’ expansion at Ottoman and Hungarian expense. Or, that might not work, Romanians or Bulgarians, fearing the growth in relative power of the other within the personal Union or dual monarchy, may veto each other’s expansion.

Your thoughts?

 

[raharris1973]

Under a common monarch, I imagine the Romanian and Bulgarian governments could and would be persuaded to agree to a customs union. I don't know if that would be a formal violation of the 1878 Treaty of Berlin, and the formal remaining vassalage of Bulgaria to the Ottomans in that document.

[This brings up an interesting point. Perhaps merely opposing the Russians could not be a sufficient reason for Austria-Hungary to say it has Carol's back in a Romanian-Bulgarian personal union project, but Austria-Hungary becomes willing to support it in 1887 at the price of Romanian-Bulgarian support for Austro-Hungarian annexation of Bosnia-Hercegovina (and possibly the Sanjak of Novi Pazar) at that time. - Vienna excusing violations by others - Bucharest and Sofia, by getting a pass on its own violation/revision.]

A customs union should be good for the economic development of both halves of the personal union.

If Romania-Bulgaria remains CP & Austrian aligned, rather than switching to ties to the emerging Franco-Russian alliance, by 1900, things get interesting.

If the Balkan dual monarchy is nosy or ambitious, it might intervene against the Black Hand revolution in Serbia in 1903 - though I don't see it as bloody likely.

Or, if Carol and his politicians are especially bold and ambitious, perhaps they try to grab Bessarabia from Russia while it is losing the Russo-Japanese war and facing internal revolution. If they want to spoon on more recklessness, they might choose this moment to attack Ottoman Constantinople, Thrace, and Macedonia while there is no Russian competition. Chances are far less than an even 50-50 they do either though.

If Romania-Bulgaria is pro-CP but calm and serene, it should be immune to the Russian-inspire charms of the Balkan League with Serbia, Montenegro and Greece in 1910 and 1911, making the Balkan War of 1912 much less likely.

Things could be equally interesting if Romanian-Bulgarian union sympathies tilt in 1900 and after away from the Triple Alliance/CP and toward the emergent Franco-Russian alliance.

For example, asssuming there is still Russo-Japanese war and Russian defeat like OTL, and then later a Bosnian crisis in 1908-1909, Romania-Bulgaria's existence could introduce a new, independent power factor. For example, Russia knew in OTL knew it was too weak in this instance to stand with Serbia against Austria-Hungary over the Bosnia dispute. But here, Romania-Bulgaria may decide that it has the strength to stand with Serbia and against Austria and seeks the outbreak of an Austro-Serbian war as an opportunity to try an assault on Transylvania. It hopes it can encourage Russia to come in as a supportive ally, but feels strong enough that it is not vital, and Bucharest feels Italy could be an alternative viable ally in taking on Austria?

 

[fraa Jad]

It would be interesting how Evlogi Georgiev would react to that.

EDIT: or be involved in.

 

[raharris1973]

It would be interesting how Evlogi Georgiev would react to that.

EDIT: or be involved in.

Thank you for your interest in this!

I have never heard of this person. Tell me more about them, what their role was, and what they could do if they either really liked the union or really hated it. Thanks!

 

[Dude-a-Buck]

Out of curiosity, what do you think the united Romanian/Bulgarian kingdom would be called?

 

[fraa Jad]

He was a Bulgarian banker who, in his will, donated almost all of his funds to constructing the current main building of Sofia University. He also lived, for most of his life, in Bucharest. At the main entrance to the building are statues of him and his brother.

 

[fraa Jad]

Out of curiosity, what do you think the united Romanian/Bulgarian kingdom would be called?

Not a united kingdom (and at the time Bulgaria was a princedom (княжество) in vassalage to the Ottoman Empire), a personal union. Bulgaria only became a tsardom in 1908. They'd be separate countries sharing a monarch.

 

[pls don't ban me]

Not a united kingdom (and at the time Bulgaria was a princedom (княжество) in vassalage to the Ottoman Empire), a personal union. Bulgaria only became a tsardom in 1908. They'd be separate countries sharing a monarch.

Honestly Speaking, the second Bulgarian empire was basically a union with the Walachs fo some time so maybe the country at some point can become the "secon bulgar-romanian empire"? there might be some issue on the religion /language as Bulgarians use Cyrillic with Gregorian calendar while Romanians use the Latin Alphabet with Julian Calendar.
Also, pointing to earlier claims: Macedonia it's fixed claim on the Bulgarian side. Thrace and Salonika are the second options. On the Romanian side we have Transylvania, Bucovina and Bessarabia.
thing i would consider also.
Bulgaria moving the capital to Tarnovo after the union for strategic reasons and the fact that Romania this time won't have an army outdated like OTL but a lot better considering how much Bulgaria Invested into it's own. Considering also the larger manpower… a true Prussia of the Balkans.

P.s I'm sorry to the mods for commenting after 3 month the last comment. i found it randomly and it picked my interest. Hope it can be forgiven this once.

 

[fraa Jad]

Romania was switching from Cyrillic to Latin in the second half of the 19th century, even innovating hybrid letters. They had not yet adopted Latin fully at that time.

 

[Kurd Gossemer]

Makes me wonder if a united Bulgaria and Romania could've not won both the first and second Balkan wars and stretch from the Black Sea towards the Aegean Sea as well as being a full on dagger pointed at Constantinople's neck as well as having actual desires in the city itself.


Makes me wonder how an alt ww1 with them could play out, they can either go with the Entente to gain Transylvania, Constantinople and the rest of Macedonia from Greece if the latter joins with the Central Powers or they can go Central Powers in order to get Bessarabia from Russia as well as Macedonia from Greece since it's likely they would go join the Entente.

 

[pls don't ban me]

Makes me wonder if a united Bulgaria and Romania could've not won both the first and second Balkan wars and stretch from the Black Sea towards the Aegean Sea as well as being a full on dagger pointed at Constantinople's neck as well as having actual desires in the city itself.


Makes me wonder how an alt ww1 with them could play out, they can either go with the Entente to gain Transylvania, Constantinople and the rest of Macedonia from Greece if the latter joins with the Central Powers or they can go Central Powers in order to get Bessarabia from Russia as well as Macedonia from Greece since it's likely they would go join the Entente.

ok, let's be honest. IF ( and it's kinda a very big IF) everything goes well for this romanian-Bulgarian empire, you can make a remake of Simeon's Empire. ( check first bulgarian empire peak borders) streching from Odessa to Salonika and from Banat to Costantinople/Tsarigrad.

Romania was switching from Cyrillic to Latin in the second half of the 19th century, even innovating hybrid letters. They had not yet adopted Latin fully at that time.

Didn't know that. This solves a lot of Issues. due to the Bulgarians being Slavs the Romanians will also keep the Cyrillic alphabet. if the two population are that friendly the an kinda start merging into a single culture at some point. as i stated before there was already a Wallachian/bulgarian empire ( and cumans) before so it would be easy to use that and start have names like Ivan Dumitrescuv and other mix-ups.
The real question becomes the alignements. and the divergences it might cause. A small Bulgaria won't have huge effect on OTL history after 1880. But the Balkan behemot is being created now yes. it can easily doom the CP and end the great war in 2 years ( imagine AH and Germany having to face an eastern front ranging from Lithuania to Montenegro) or help the CP win by defeating earlier Russia, destroy the serbs and then send reinforcemente to both the OE and western front.
Also, let's say we get a somehow similar ww2. If the soviet union get's the empire as a puppet it will be dissolved or god forbids it, merged into yugoslavia( tito's death will be even more scary). otherwise will be a second Turkey shenanigans with the whole Missiles crisis etc.

 

[Tibi088]

Please also consider that King Carol was of the house Hohenzollern. That was one of the reasons for the germans being very pro-Romanian in their outlook on the Balkans.

 

[pls don't ban me]

Please also consider that King Carol was of the house Hohenzollern. That was one of the reasons for the germans being very pro-Romanian in their outlook on the Balkans.

Ok. i can give you a scenario based on that.
from union to 1900:
Romania goes almost the same, but under the influence of Stambolov and the Bulgarian culture, the Romanian stay with the cyrilic alphabet and adopt the gregorian calendar as well. Also the Romanian army starts receiving more attention. Stambolov reign supreme with the Kings support and takes several loans like OTL to improve the nation. in 20 years of unopposed rule the bulgarian Bismarck transforms the bulgarian principate from an antiquated region to a modern nation with railways, schools hospital and a strong army. The main party's are like otl : liberal, agrarian and conservative. there will be some underground military organizazione funded by Russia by like OTL and even better they'll be defused and destroyed. Also like OTL Stambolov will have good relations with OE and get the Sultan to recognize BUlgarians as the only minority in Thrace and Macedonia.
After 1900:
1908: Bosnia crisis, Bulgarian governmen declares full independence, Carol I becomes Tsar of Bulgarians.
1911: Italo-Lybian War. Russia tries to organize a Balkan league but Romangaria is influnced by Germany and Austria and ignores the proposition, preferring to keep the good relations. result: Deterioration of reation between the the balkan states and Romangaria. Montenegro declares independence under russia support, the OE recognizes
1913: to surprise of no one the Romano-Bulgarian empire is declared ( RB for short), the two countries are unified. under the AH model both the countries maintain their parliaments, the imperial parliament is formed.
1914: guess who dies in sarajevo.( i'm keeping it the same, because i suppose the event is kinda destined if Austria annexes Bosnia). ww1 starts. Serbia has less people but a better army with no exhaustion from a balkan war. it holds. RB, OE and Italy are the main neutrals for now.
1915. after failing t take down Serbia, the CP tries to negotiate and entry of the OE or BR in the war. BR is promised Pirot from Serbia and Bessarabia from Russia, but the countriy for the moments stalls. OE enters the war on CP side after a similar event of OTL. Gallipoli still happens as a mean to savr Serbia, Greec also Joins the war on entente side, with british forces pouring in. Italy is leaning toward the entente. With the hevay losses the Austrians finally cede to demands of both the BR and Italian diplomats, agreeing to cede some territories under extreme german pressure.
1916: The BR and Italy join the war. contrar to initial beliefs, Italy struggles against france and is having a nightmare in the colonies. BR instead performs greaty, managin to quickly destroy the serbian army splitting then it's army i 2 groups: eastern front and greek front. the eastern front start to advance more rapidly while the greek front is halted under the leadership of generals Ataturk and Vazov.
1917: Russia is forced to surrender. the republic is formed and the royal family exiled. Same Brest Litovks, but BR seized also Odessa. France faces a series of Huge mutinies and the Germans manage to finally break the front lines, June 1917 Paris is occupied. France surrenders. Britain is left alone with some occupied areas in GReece and middle-east. so they surrender.
1918: in the peace:

• Germany: straight line border with France. Belgium puppet. Maybe in order to appease the british the split up the country with Netherlands taking the sea ( wallonia, right? i Always confuse the 2 regions). Madagascar, Indochina and middle africa colonies. France keeps Algeria and something in north-west Africa.
• AH: gain control over Ukraine with Habsburg King. Serbia annexed( they've been occupied since early 1916), Montenegro annexed.
• Italy gains Savoy, Nice, Trent( no Sud-tyrol), Corsica, Istria and Fiume( AH can use freely the port as condition), Tunisia. They are left a bit angry for not gaining Djibouti and British Somalia.
• RB gains Bucovina, Bessarabia, Odessa, Pirot. free access to Mediterranean negotiated with Turkey. Some disputes over not gaining Macedonia.
• OE Gain all the Aegean Islands except Crete and Negroponte. Greeks expelled from Turkish peninsula, Most go to Greece, some( less then 25%) go to OE Balkans. Forced to accept loss of Egypt and recognize it as British domain. all the Caucasus is under their control with Georgian princedom and Azerbajan Emirate as buffers on the Russia country.
• Russia: Ukraine, Baltic duchy, Poland Liberated.Caucasus allowed to keep but increased ( by a lot) war reparations.
• Japan same gain OTL. Germany can't do shit about them and Japan refuses to leave.

Basically, it's almost a Kaiserreich with the exception of Italy being on the winner side. I made them join apparently together with RB but the idea is Italy sees the impact of RB and decides that CP is the winning horse.

anyone wants to keep up to modern day?

 

[fraa Jad]

That's quite a lot to extrapolate from a single event. I would focus on the immediate consequences -- How do Austria-Hungary and Russia react, and how do Bulgarians and Romanians react. I think some parties in the Bulgarian parliament would be unhappy, but not too much (I think Stambolov might wing it) not to mention the Ottomans. Stambolov was friendly with the Ottomans at that time.

 

[pls don't ban me]

That's quite a lot to extrapolate from a single event. I would focus on the immediate consequences -- How do Austria-Hungary and Russia react, and how do Bulgarians and Romanians react. I think some parties in the Bulgarian parliament would be unhappy, but not too much (I think Stambolov might wing it) not to mention the Ottomans. Stambolov was friendly with the Ottomans at that time.

Austria won't take it happily but if it helps piss off the Russians plans to control the Balkans they'll gladly accept it.
Russia is the key. they might accept it, hoping to exploit the orthodox faith and pro-russian sentiment to their advantage.
The OE will follow what the other two above do. if one of them goes to war they'll follow hoping to regain territories and prestige. The best scenario for Austria would be Russia invading and the OE doing the same. Russia will lose their status as Slavic protector and all the Balkan nations will turn to Austria and Britain and France for future support.

 

[ghappy1000]

Ok. i can give you a scenario based on that.
from union to 1900:
Romania goes almost the same, but under the influence of Stambolov and the Bulgarian culture, the Romanian stay with the cyrilic alphabet and adopt the gregorian calendar as well. Also the Romanian army starts receiving more attention. Stambolov reign supreme with the Kings support and takes several loans like OTL to improve the nation. in 20 years of unopposed rule the bulgarian Bismarck transforms the bulgarian principate from an antiquated region to a modern nation with railways, schools hospital and a strong army. The main party's are like otl : liberal, agrarian and conservative. there will be some underground military organizazione funded by Russia by like OTL and even better they'll be defused and destroyed. Also like OTL Stambolov will have good relations with OE and get the Sultan to recognize BUlgarians as the only minority in Thrace and Macedonia.
After 1900:
1908: Bosnia crisis, Bulgarian governmen declares full independence, Carol I becomes Tsar of Bulgarians.
1911: Italo-Lybian War. Russia tries to organize a Balkan league but Romangaria is influnced by Germany and Austria and ignores the proposition, preferring to keep the good relations. result: Deterioration of reation between the the balkan states and Romangaria. Montenegro declares independence under russia support, the OE recognizes
1913: to surprise of no one the Romano-Bulgarian empire is declared ( RB for short), the two countries are unified. under the AH model both the countries maintain their parliaments, the imperial parliament is formed.
1914: guess who dies in sarajevo.( i'm keeping it the same, because i suppose the event is kinda destined if Austria annexes Bosnia). ww1 starts. Serbia has less people but a better army with no exhaustion from a balkan war. it holds. RB, OE and Italy are the main neutrals for now.
1915. after failing t take down Serbia, the CP tries to negotiate and entry of the OE or BR in the war. BR is promised Pirot from Serbia and Bessarabia from Russia, but the countriy for the moments stalls. OE enters the war on CP side after a similar event of OTL. Gallipoli still happens as a mean to savr Serbia, Greec also Joins the war on entente side, with british forces pouring in. Italy is leaning toward the entente. With the hevay losses the Austrians finally cede to demands of both the BR and Italian diplomats, agreeing to cede some territories under extreme german pressure.
1916: The BR and Italy join the war. contrar to initial beliefs, Italy struggles against france and is having a nightmare in the colonies. BR instead performs greaty, managin to quickly destroy the serbian army splitting then it's army i 2 groups: eastern front and greek front. the eastern front start to advance more rapidly while the greek front is halted under the leadership of generals Ataturk and Vazov.
1917: Russia is forced to surrender. the republic is formed and the royal family exiled. Same Brest Litovks, but BR seized also Odessa. France faces a series of Huge mutinies and the Germans manage to finally break the front lines, June 1917 Paris is occupied. France surrenders. Britain is left alone with some occupied areas in GReece and middle-east. so they surrender.
1918: in the peace:

• Germany: straight line border with France. Belgium puppet. Maybe in order to appease the british the split up the country with Netherlands taking the sea ( wallonia, right? i Always confuse the 2 regions). Madagascar, Indochina and middle africa colonies. France keeps Algeria and something in north-west Africa.
• AH: gain control over Ukraine with Habsburg King. Serbia annexed( they've been occupied since early 1916), Montenegro annexed.
• Italy gains Savoy, Nice, Trent( no Sud-tyrol), Corsica, Istria and Fiume( AH can use freely the port as condition), Tunisia. They are left a bit angry for not gaining Djibouti and British Somalia.
• RB gains Bucovina, Bessarabia, Odessa, Pirot. free access to Mediterranean negotiated with Turkey. Some disputes over not gaining Macedonia.
• OE Gain all the Aegean Islands except Crete and Negroponte. Greeks expelled from Turkish peninsula, Most go to Greece, some( less then 25%) go to OE Balkans. Forced to accept loss of Egypt and recognize it as British domain. all the Caucasus is under their control with Georgian princedom and Azerbajan Emirate as buffers on the Russia country.
• Russia: Ukraine, Baltic duchy, Poland Liberated.Caucasus allowed to keep but increased ( by a lot) war reparations.
• Japan same gain OTL. Germany can't do shit about them and Japan refuses to leave.

Basically, it's almost a Kaiserreich with the exception of Italy being on the winner side. I made them join apparently together with RB but the idea is Italy sees the impact of RB and decides that CP is the winning horse.

anyone wants to keep up to modern day?

This is because with Carol I of Romania leading the personal union of Romania-Bulgaria as the king of Romania and Tsar of Bulgaria and with him and Romania dominating the Romania-Bulgaria union, once Bulgaria declared independence from the Ottoman Empire, it would be ruled by Romania and Carol I of Romania instead of Bulgaria itself and Ferdinand I of Bulgaria. The rule of Carol I of Romania with his pro-German and pro-Austrian policy and Romania dominating the Romanian-Bulgarian Union in Bulgaria instead of the less pro-German and less pro-Austrian Ferdinand I of Bulgaria and Bulgaria in Bulgaria in this timeline would result in this timeline's Bulgaria being very unlikely to start or be involved in the Balkan Wars during the Balkan Wars' timeframe, butterflying the Balkan Wars, although Romania-Bulgaria would (most likely) join the Central Powers in WW1 during the WW1 timeframe (WW1 timeframe in this timeline same as otl).