WI: Polish-Saxon Crisis Escalates

[JonasResende]

The Polish-Saxon crisis occured at the Congress of Vienna's attempts to redraw the map of Europe. In the horse-selling that was happening, Prussia wanted to annex the entirety of Saxony in exchange for giving up the Rhineland, while Russia would swallow the formerly Polish territory of Prussia.

Now Russia was backing Prussia to the hilt. OTOH Austria and France were wary of displacing the king of Saxony from Dresden to somewhere on the Rhine.

Anyway, there is a whole lot about it that I'm sure I've got wrong or mixed up, but say that Prussia-Russia won't back down or compromise, or Austria-France aren't willing to sell the king of Saxony down the river or whatever, and they start rattling the sabres and threatening war. How might things go down?

 

[JonasResende]

Speaking under correction, but due to this being pre-Les Cent Jours, the purge of the Imperial officers from France's army and govt hasn't happened yet. Plus due to France only recently being defeated at Leipzig, it's military/tactical superiority is still fresh in the minds of those opposing her. France sides with Saxony (LXVIII was partial to this idea since he had a Saxon mother, and was angling for a Saxon bride for the duc de Berri) who can count on backing from Auatria too (since Austria wouldn't want to see Russia creeping so far into Europe).

Any other thoughts?

 

[Autocrat]

You forget that the British were also involved. They too opposed the Polish-Saxon deal.

Anyways the war would be very interesting. The Russians have the best and largest army in Europe. The Prussians are exhausted and have recently thrown the French out. The Austrians are still recovering from war. And in Britain many are tired of this continual war. Meanwhile throughout Europe several Napoleonic leaders like Murat and Eugene are still around.

Considering the strength, leadership, and disposition of forces it's likely that the Prussians and Russians would end up winning and imposing their peace in regards to Poland and Saxony. Depending on the sides leaders took we could see some people surviving that OTL were deposed or vice versa.

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

Always an interesting scenario: I suppose that a pre-reequisite would be Napoleon dying or being in Saint Helens (or somewhere else far enough from Europe).

I don't think that the crisis would escalate to full blown warfare, because the alliances are probably balanced enough that no side would be sure of winning and therefore all would be wary of declaring war. This being an AH forum however we can speculate that the war might have strated "by accident" if tensions rise enough. I suppose Alexander is the less stable monarch and might start the affair after feeling insulted by Talleyrand in Vienna or something like that.

Obviously this scenario is very interesting for the fate of Italy, especially if Austria is badly defeated or, conversely, wins but captures enough territory in Germany and Poland that it is forced to let Lombardy-Venetia go (maybe to a cadet branch) for balance of power reasons.

How might the war actually go? The Prussians should stoke the fires of German nationalism against the "French Invasion", while I think that Austria could be beaten by Russia without too much difficulties, especially if they are at the same time engaged by Murat in Italy (and/or Eugène).

What would the UK do? expeditions in Italy would not divert too much forces from the main theatre, her navy would blockade the Baltic and North Sea without significant opposition, but how much good would that do? Wellington would be deployed in Belgium and maybe could beat Bluecher at Waterloo together with the French army () or be defeated when the Russian army finally arrives to break the bloody stalemate .

But I repeat that war is, in my opinion, not the most likely developement of the crisis.

 

[Autocrat]

While the OP is asking what would happen if it escalates, which means war. And in OTL they did nearly go to war over the crisis, but eventually reason took hold. As you suggest an insult could trigger the war or maybe Alexander thinks the British, Austrians, and French are bluffing and it escalates from there.

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

While the OP is asking what would happen if it escalates, which means war. And in OTL they did nearly go to war over the crisis, but eventually reason took hold. As you suggest an insult could trigger the war or maybe Alexander thinks the British, Austrians, and French are bluffing and it escalates from there.

That's right. One important factor will be the commitment of the French army to its new/old Bourbon rulers: if France was to fall into internal turmoil during the campaign, the position of the western allies would become very very difficult.
The other great question is how far and how long can Russia maintain her giant army deep into Germany.

 

[JonasResende]

Who might side with Austria-France? Obv. Saxony, probably Bavaria, maybe one or two of the other south German states?

And I've always found it extremely ironic that if Britain hadn't been so fearful of France rising up again (and thus keeping the French dancing while Britain called the tune), she wouldn't have let Prussia become powerful enough (by seizing part of Saxony and controlling Silesia and the Rhineland) to become one of her chief rivals once German Unification happened.

 

[JonasResende]

That said, why was Prussia given "preferential" treatment at Vienna. AFAIK Napoleon thrashed them repeatedly, and when they weren't being recruited to the Coalitions they were allied to him the same as Austria.

Yet IMHO Austria basically got a status quo antebellum deal as far as territory was concerned, (minus the AN, and including La Serenissima), while Prussia got their portion AND Austria's of Poland, a goodly part of Saxony PLUS the Rhineland.

 

[MrHaakwood]

That said, why was Prussia given "preferential" treatment at Vienna. AFAIK Napoleon thrashed them repeatedly, and when they weren't being recruited to the Coalitions they were allied to him the same as Austria.

Yet IMHO Austria basically got a status quo antebellum deal as far as territory was concerned, (minus the AN, and including La Serenissima), while Prussia got their portion AND Austria's of Poland, a goodly part of Saxony PLUS the Rhineland.

Probably this is the reason that Prussia grew quite big.

 

[Clandango]

I forget, but wasn't part of the deal that the Austrians also had to give up their share of Poland?

 

[Autocrat]

That's right. One important factor will be the commitment of the French army to its new/old Bourbon rulers: if France was to fall into internal turmoil during the campaign, the position of the western allies would become very very difficult.
The other great question is how far and how long can Russia maintain her giant army deep into Germany.

Russia can maintain its army as long as it wants Russia was doing fine at the time.

Who might side with Austria-France? Obv. Saxony, probably Bavaria, maybe one or two of the other south German states?

And I've always found it extremely ironic that if Britain hadn't been so fearful of France rising up again (and thus keeping the French dancing while Britain called the tune), she wouldn't have let Prussia become powerful enough (by seizing part of Saxony and controlling Silesia and the Rhineland) to become one of her chief rivals once German Unification happened.

Britain. Britain was already part of the alliance with Austria and France as I have already said.

That said, why was Prussia given "preferential" treatment at Vienna. AFAIK Napoleon thrashed them repeatedly, and when they weren't being recruited to the Coalitions they were allied to him the same as Austria.

Yet IMHO Austria basically got a status quo antebellum deal as far as territory was concerned, (minus the AN, and including La Serenissima), while Prussia got their portion AND Austria's of Poland, a goodly part of Saxony PLUS the Rhineland.

There was a concept of a balance of power that they wanted to establish and giving Prussia a lot of land was one of the results.

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

What would Bernadotte and the Swedish do? The Dutch?
Prussia would occupy Hannover, but can they hold it and the Rhinelands against Wellington and the French? Theirs was a very difficult situation: could they maybe make a renewed appeal to Pan-Germanism against the French and British? Would it work or backfire horribly causing uprisings in Prussia proper?
Russia should be able to defeat Austria, but it won't be a walk in the park.

The key question imho is what would the French army and its Napoleonic officers do.

 

[pompejus]

What would Bernadotte and the Swedish do? The Dutch?

Probably nothing. Just because there is a war that doesn't mean everybody has to join in. Especialy the Dutch. They have way too good relations with Prussia to oppose Prussia. The relations with Great Britain, Russia and Austria are too important to side against them and siding against France and losing would probably mean the loss of the Southern Netherlands. It is way way better to sit this one out. Try to broker a peace during and after the war and you might even end upwith a good reputation.

 

[JonasResende]

Say France doesn't get riven (or if it does,not cripplingly) by civil war, does Austria-France and friends stand a chance against Prussia-Russia and co?

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

Say France doesn't get riven (or if it does,not cripplingly) by civil war, does Austria-France and friends stand a chance against Prussia-Russia and co?

I think the Eastern powers have still the advantage, but the remnants of Napoleon's army are still formidable. The Western powers also have Wellington on their side and possibly the Archduke Charles.

I wonder what would happen in the Italian theatre. I could bet that Murat would declare against Austria and have some success: if he can somehow pass the Po he can probably rally many veterans from the former Kingdom of Italy: I think he can distract a lot of Austrian troops, or the Habsburg coulddecide to sacrifice their Italian possessions to focus on the Russo/Prussian threat.
The British could do an amphibious landing in the south however, probably with Sicilian troops and this could be a big problem for Murat...
Would France have spare troops for Italy?
I doubt it and I also don't think that Sardinia-Piedmont would act against Murat in such an uncertain situation.

 

[LordKalvan]

Let's try to put the Polish-Saxon in a correct historical perspective:

• Russia and Prussia accounted for over 2/3 of the Alliance troops at Leipzig
• The same ratio was true of the troops who marched on Paris, and were garrisoning France according to the provisions of the treaty of Fontainebleau

Given the above, I'd say that Austrian position would not be very strong. Great Britain and France may give some diplomatic support, as happened IOTL too. More than that, it is a bit doubtful: Great Britain has not a lot of skin in the game, with the only exception of a theoretical defence of the balance of power in Europe and they are coming out of a very long war against Napoleon; Louis xviii has just been put back on the throne, has an army which is not exactly reliable and an occupation army (on the plus side, the relations between Metternich and Talleyrand). Even leaving aside the political scenario (which is not really supportive of a new war either in France or in GB), why would anyone but Austria give a fig for the King of Saxony or to deny the czar the crown of a larger piece of Poland?

On the other side, Alexander is the one who calls the shots. Prussia may have regained some national pride, and Prussians may have their pecker up a bit, but it if the Russian czar says "jump!" The King of Prussia asks "how high?". See both Leipzig and the march on Paris, or even consider the way the Prussians played second fiddle to Russia in OTL post-Vienna history.
Alexander is a difficult man to judge, capable of generosity but also quite conscious of the position which Russia enjoys now in Europe. He may very well decide to go to war, and in such a case it would be a very bad thing for Austria.

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

Well, but Austria, the UK and France signed a secret alliance at the beginning of January 1815 that was clearly aimed against the Russian and Prussian interests on Poland and Saxony. This might have been a bluff, but if say Tsar Alexander reacted badly to it and decided to "call the bluff", I don't think that France and the UK could afford not to honour the treaty. Their commitment could very well be half hearted tough, and the war might and after just a couple of battles. If Austria is defeated on the field I don't see the other two fighting "to the end" for the sake of the Wettins and of "balance of power".

What could the peace terms be in the likely scenario of a limited Russo-Prissian victory?

 

[Yorel]

Wouldn't this crisis happen a few days before Napoleon escaped Elba and the beginning of the Hundred Days?

 

[LordKalvan]

Well, but Austria, the UK and France signed a secret alliance at the beginning of January 1815 that was clearly aimed against the Russian and Prussian interests on Poland and Saxony. This might have been a bluff, but if say Tsar Alexander reacted badly to it and decided to "call the bluff", I don't think that France and the UK could afford not to honour the treaty. Their commitment could very well be half hearted tough, and the war might and after just a couple of battles. If Austria is defeated on the field I don't see the other two fighting "to the end" for the sake of the Wettins and of "balance of power".

What could the peace terms be in the likely scenario of a limited Russo-Prissian victory?

Did they really sign a secret treaty? There is little doubt that Talleyrand was willing to support Austrian positions, but there is quite a large gap between this and committing by treaty. Castlereagh is even more unlikely to undertake any formal commitment, even a secret one, and anyway it's doubtful that his brief contemplated such an eventuality: I'd love to see him before parliament explaining how he went to Vienna to sign a lasting peace for Europe and came back after having committed to support Austria in a possible war scenario. Vienna was a very unusual diplomatic congress, since there were not formal meetings but rather informal discussions among the 4+1 and a lot of informal diplomacy: the suspension of the works at the end of 1814 was very convenient for every one of the Powers, since it provided a breathing space and the opportunity to continue the exploration of possible compromises to defuse the Polish-Saxon crisis.

What happens when the congress meets again in the spring of 1815 depends a lot on how much these attempts are successful, and obviously on how much the czar wants to push. There is also another major wild card in the pack: Napoleon. The escape from Elba was not a spur of the moment decision, but was planned carefully enough and based on the expectation of Bonaparte having a ready power base in France: the potential risk must have been known to the Royal regime too, and IMHO it would have been a powerful incentive not to get involved in a war.
The Napoleonic wild card can certainly be taken out of the pack (either he manages better his suicide attempt or is simply intercepted by the British when trying to escape from Elba) but what actually happens in TTL would be heavily influence by what happens to Napoleon.

Let's say that Napoleon is not a danger, and the Congress meets again on schedule without any external distraction: the most likely outcome is that a compromise will be found to give Prussia all of Saxony and Russia the full kingdom of Poland. Something will be found as a face saving sop for Austria: the most likely place to find it is in Italy where there are some pieces of real estate to carve out (Parma for example, as well as the Papal States) but I would expect that Metternich will want something in Germany to counterbalance a bit the Prussian expansion. There will be a game of musical chairs to be set up, since both FA of Saxony and Charles of Borbone Parma will have to be compensated somehow.

The second possibility is that Metternich stalls for time: it might lead to Prussian encroachments in Saxony, and the threat of a fait accompli. If it gets so far, Austria will have to cave: the compromise will be less palatable for them.

Finally it might get to a war, but it would be really an outlier. Best guess is that Prussia and Russia will concentrate on Austria, while the British and the French make disapproval noises but refrain from committing. A couple of lost battles and the Austrians will have to see the light. I don't envision a punitive peace treaty, but the Austrians will get a slap on the wrist of two. Prussia getting the presidency of the German Confederation for example. Russia gaining some more of Austrian Poland. There might be some repercussions in Italy too, but I would expect them to be mostly related to the game of musical chairs I was mentioning earlier (partitioning the Papal States). Murat should be able to keep the throne of Naples if he does not do anything stupid, but it would be a very strange world if Eugene got Milan.
As far as the British and the French are concerned, Hanover might get something and the French reparations might be reduced.

 

[Yanez de Gomera]

Murat can be counted upon to do stupid things in such a setting Maybe ittl the 100 days would be the lifespan of his "Kingdom of Italy", proclaimed after conquering Milan from an Austrian army of Italy temporarily weakened by the need to defend against the Prusso-Russians.

I think that war could start if the negotiations break down, for example after a shouting match between Alexander and Metternich and later some border accident happens in one of the "occupation zones", forcing Austria and Russia's hands. I agree that it would likely be a "limited" war.

About the secret treaty, look here at page 119 and following (The Congress of Vienna and its Legacy by Mark Jarrett).
It seems there actually was a treaty, but it being strictly defensive it would I think only be triggered if Russia advanced on Austrian Poland.

Reading that I think that the crisis can only go hot after a break at the very start of January caused by Alexander knowing with certainty of the treaty (looks like he got the relevant documentation during the hundred days) and not having been "converted" to Christian Pietism earlier. It is still a long shot, that's certain.

it would be a very strange world if Eugene got Milan.

Yeah, this would require an earlier POD of him managing to keep hold of Milan in march/april. It is almost impossible that he would be reinstated, especiallly with Frederick August in need of a throne.