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.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?
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.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.
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.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..
I look for PODs between 1916 and '18, wich would not alter the frontlines until '18 oct and the Entente victory in overall.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.
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.
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.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?
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.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.
Fair enough about Vittorio Veneto. I'll need to read up on it.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.
It's so true! If they would been, there wouldn't been any war in the first place.The leaders of the Great War weren't the most rational bunch, after all.![]()
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?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.