WI/How?: More stable Hungary in the end of WW1

Hi there! I'm looking for some ideas about, how could Hungary remain more stabilized at the end of the Great War, and what could/would it change in short-mid-longterm on local and on European levels. What do you think?
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 1487

Let's say István Tisza takes charge of Hungary on 28th october, after the resignation of Sándor Wekerle, and crushes the revolution in the following days.
What could happen afterwards? In this sceniario the armed forces of Hungary doesnt's desintegrate or become disbanded, and the Truce of Padova wouldn't be overwritten by the Convention of Belgrade neither. There's a big opportunity for many butterflies, so what do you think?
Is it even possible for Tisza to rally enough people to shut down the revolution? As it was soldiers killed him historically. The english language article on his late life is pretty garbage, but IIRC he was dumped from the PM position and had lost much of any political authority he had to rally any opposition to the revolution.
 
Is it even possible for Tisza to rally enough people to shut down the revolution? As it was soldiers killed him historically. The english language article on his late life is pretty garbage, but IIRC he was dumped from the PM position and had lost much of any political authority he had to rally any opposition to the revolution.
Well, actually it's not certain who killed Tisza, there are many rumours about that. I don't know how plausible for him to getting appointed by the king, but assuming on his political career, I don't think it would hold him back to jump through some legal steps to take the power in the sake of reestablishing the order.
About the needed manpower, which could suppress the revolution, the troops, who freshly arrived from the Italian front (, who actually still had a somewhat high morale) would be fit for the task, I think..
 

Deleted member 1487

Well, actually it's not certain who killed Tisza, there are many rumours about that. I don't know how plausible for him to getting appointed by the king, but assuming on his political career, I don't think it would hold him back to jump through some legal steps to take the power in the sake of reestablishing the order.
About the needed manpower, which could suppress the revolution, the troops, who freshly arrived from the Italian front (, who actually still had a somewhat high morale) would be fit for the task, I think..
From what I gather the army was not really loyal to the landed elite that ran parliament, which is why the Aster Revolution succeeded. Tizsa was forced out because he wasn't deemed sufficiently radical by the nationalists, while the Left hated his guts, so he really lacked the power base to rally resistance against the revolution. At least that is my understanding.
 
Is there a reason why János Hadik can't succeed in forming a government, which wouldn't require Tisza somehow getting the appointment instead?

Honestly, Tisza is a bigger problem than one would expect. Not because he was somehow incapable; quite the contrary. The problem is that in the Entente countries, he had an awful reputation as one of the warmongers that pushes the war. It wasn't true at all, but it's still what they believed.

Anyways, whoever gets appointed Prime Minister has a lot of work to do. In my opinion, there is just no way that the Kingdom can survive the revolutions and the wars with its neighbours without significant political reforms. Suffrage desperately needs to be expanded. Perhaps promising that plus immediately giving suffrage to veterans, as Károly had tried to push during the war, would keep the reformed army loyal to the government?

I also think that an important thing to do is to keep Archduke Joseph August as Palatine and de facto head of state as per OTL. He was popular and well respected and was only forced out as Regent by the allies. If the Aster revolution is crushed in its infancy, then Hungary has a much, much better chance of fighting off the Entente and this could legitimise the Archduke and his Prime Minister's government in the eyes of the Entente.

Finally, maybe the Hungariand in this case don't push for a seperate, much harsher truce?

In the end, this could lead to a continuation of the Kingdom in a much better position than iOTL with more Magyars within its borders. I doubt they could manage to retake the pre-war borders, though. The butterflies are huge: a more stable central Europe with a Hungary that isn't treated like garbage is a massive plus. With the successes of this Hungarian royal government also has butterflies in Austria; perhaps the Reichsrat is able to maintain power over the German-Austrian assembly (iOTL what was left of the Reichsrat was still meeting in concurence; basically both German-Austria and Habsburg Austria existed at the same time), which could weaken the pro-Anschluss faction.

Then again, I've always lived the idea of a more united Central Europe fighting Nazi Germany. :biggrin:
 
According to what you wrote, I think, I have to change the thread question. Thank you for your answers, I hope others will give some ideas too. :)
 
What would be an acceptable PoD for you in thia case? Obviously, the earlier the better for Hungary. A victorious CP or simply an Austria-Hungary that peaces out early somehow is the best case scenario. Of course, one could cheat and simply keep the war from happening as it did in OTL. :biggrin:

In my very biased opinion, the Hungarians need the Habsburgs for stability, but Hungary is in such desperate need for massive political reform that if the political elite doesn't do enough, there is no way it can stay stable. Expanded suffrage is ridiculously overdue by 1914 and, hell, universal suffrage is overdue by 1918. Of course, the other issue that needs to be addressed are the minorities, but extending suffrage is already a massive improvement in that area.
 
What would be an acceptable PoD for you in thia case? Obviously, the earlier the better for Hungary. A victorious CP or simply an Austria-Hungary that peaces out early somehow is the best case scenario. Of course, one could cheat and simply keep the war from happening as it did in OTL. :biggrin:

In my very biased opinion, the Hungarians need the Habsburgs for stability, but Hungary is in such desperate need for massive political reform that if the political elite doesn't do enough, there is no way it can stay stable. Expanded suffrage is ridiculously overdue by 1914 and, hell, universal suffrage is overdue by 1918. Of course, the other issue that needs to be addressed are the minorities, but extending suffrage is already a massive improvement in that area.
I look for PODs between 1916 and '18, wich would not alter the frontlines until '18 oct and the Entente victory in overall. :)

Yeah Habsburgs are indeed needed to maintain the stability, but still, at the end of the war, the union with Austria had many negative effects too. What do you think about dethroning Carl IV and crowning Archduke Joseph as King of Hungary?
 
I look for PODs between 1916 and '18, wich would not alter the frontlines until '18 oct and the Entente victory in overall. :)

Yeah Habsburgs are indeed needed to maintain the stability, but still, at the end of the war, the union with Austria had many negative effects too. What do you think about dethroning Carl IV and crowning Archduke Joseph as King of Hungary?
Technically, there's nothing wrong with putting Joseph on the throne per se other that it messes with the succession and requires dethroning Karl, which I think is unnecessary at that point and iffy when it comes to laws and tradition. After all, Karl was still popular outside of the Left and radical nationalists. Especially with the troops. It's more likely that the German-Austrians dethrone Karl first, whom have no intentions of maintaining the Monarchy.

What if the KuK and German armies are victorious at Vittorio Veneto? How likely is that? That would really butterfly things as it puts A-H in a much better situation yet doesn't affter the Western Front.
 
Technically, there's nothing wrong with putting Joseph on the throne per se other that it messes with the succession and requires dethroning Karl, which I think is unnecessary at that point and iffy when it comes to laws and tradition. After all, Karl was still popular outside of the Left and radical nationalists. Especially with the troops. It's more likely that the German-Austrians dethrone Karl first, whom have no intentions of maintaining the Monarchy.

What if the KuK and German armies are victorious at Vittorio Veneto? How likely is that? That would really butterfly things as it puts A-H in a much better situation yet doesn't affter the Western Front.
The problem with Carl is his claim to the Austrian throne, which would worsen the relation between Hungary and the Entente. They probably would be less cooperative and compromisable (I hope it's an existing word^^). Joseph wouldn't have such claim, for clear reasons, so he would be more acceptable in the eyes of Entente; but it's only my opinion.

I don't think that's quite plausible, in my opinion, a tactical retreat would be much more effective, since it would shorten the supply lines, and would allow the KuK and German armies to defend on a more ideal terrain, even though it might lengthen the frontline. In such situation A-H might be able to transfer some of its troops to the Balkan front, where they could build an effective defending line on the river Drina, Sava, Danube.
 
The problem with Carl is his claim to the Austrian throne, which would worsen the relation between Hungary and the Entente. They probably would be less cooperative and compromisable (I hope it's an existing word^^). Joseph wouldn't have such claim, for clear reasons, so he would be more acceptable in the eyes of Entente; but it's only my opinion.

I don't think that's quite plausible, in my opinion, a tactical retreat would be much more effective, since it would shorten the supply lines, and would allow the KuK and German armies to defend on a more ideal terrain, even though it might lengthen the frontline. In such situation A-H might be able to transfer some of its troops to the Balkan front, where they could build an effective defending line on the river Drina, Sava, Danube.
Fair enough about Vittorio Veneto. I'll need to read up on it.

Karl was one of the few sane people in the CP that was willing to negociate peace rather early on. With a better situation on the Italian front, this is possible. Otherwise, I can't really argue with you. The leaders of the Great War weren't the most rational bunch, after all. :coldsweat:
 
The Hungarian half played their cards very badly - letting themselves being bribed into supporting the war and enthusiastically at that, which then led to the incredibly humiliating peace of Trianon. No nation could be stable after such a devastating blow, I'd say.

Just find a good way to give the Entente some reason to support Hungary - a well-timed uprising, more coherent ouvertures on a possibke secession, and you'll definitely get an internally stable Hungarian nation.
 
The Hungarian half played their cards very badly - letting themselves being bribed into supporting the war and enthusiastically at that, which then led to the incredibly humiliating peace of Trianon. No nation could be stable after such a devastating blow, I'd say.

Just find a good way to give the Entente some reason to support Hungary - a well-timed uprising, more coherent ouvertures on a possibke secession, and you'll definitely get an internally stable Hungarian nation.
But... the Hungarian elite was very much against the war in 1914 and contributed in the the month-long delay between the Assassination and the declaration of war... and how could they not be enthusiastic after that? All the nations were; why wouldn't the Hungarians be?

Having Hungary in the Entente is completely impossible without a way earlier PoD and you can't have that without Austria in the Entente as well.

Finally, you just can't have Entente support either. Not when they are committed to the Italians Serbs, Roumanians and Czechs; all willing to tear the Empire apart. If Trianon is any indication, the Entente has no intention of respecting Hungary whatsoever. Not after 1916 or so. After all, they had no intentions of applying the Fourteen Points to the defeated after 1917. There's also absolutely no chance of secession before 1918. If there had been, the Empire would have collapsed way before it did historically.
 
I only did a quick scour of Wikipedia, notably this article, and it doesn't paint such an extreme scenario - just one in which Hungary found itself more or less in the wrong situation all along.
As for the Entente - remember that much like the Russian Empire, nobody expected A-H to suddenly implode overnight nor were there war aims to liberate, say, the Romanians or the Czechs. If Hungarian élites can see the writing on the wall and clearly segnal for some cooperation before the late 1918, it's still pretty easy to salvage at least most of the Hungarian heartlands - Romania may technically be a winner, but so would be Hungary, Italy is easy to bribe by yielding claim on tertiary Kingdom areas of Fiume/Dalmatia and will gladly help containing Serbian claims.
I don't know how likely this would be, but I wouldn't think it's too unlikely either.
 
You would need the Allies to treat Hungary much more favorably. Instead of seeing Hungary as the enemy as part of Austria-Hungary, they see Hungary as a potential ally in the new central Europe. They don't blockade Hungary allowing food and coal to enter the country. Then they impose a less harsh Trianon which keeps many more ethnic Hungarians inside Hungary's borders. Perhaps with the idea that a strong Hungary would be necessary as a bulwark against both German and Russian domination. It would also make sense for some kind long term, but temporary, unified customs zone exist among the new states of the former AH empire (Austria, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia at the very least). It was all one economic unit, and the arrival of trade barriers disrupted trade too quickly. All states needed some time to plan for the adjustments.

To do that, you need some pre-1918 POD to make the Allies well disposed to the Hungarians - or at least the leader of the Hungarians after the armistice. Perhaps if there was an ethnic Hungarian-American who was good friends with Woodrow Wilson and part of his peace delegation, the Americans would use their influence to secure a good peace for Hungary just as they did for the Czechoslovakians because of Tomas Masaryk.
 
Top