Russia throws Serbia under the bus in 1914

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Peter89
Member
Posts: 987
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Spain

Re: Russia throws Serbia under the bus in 1914

Post by Peter89 » 18 Apr 2021 10:43

ljadw wrote:
17 Apr 2021 12:58
And, about Romania : it was NOT in the German/AH orbit : it was considered by Tisza as the biggest enemy of Hungary .Bulgaria,OTOH, was nothing , it was considered by Tisza as a potential ally, only because it was an enemy of Romania .The Kaiser had a very negative opinion of the king of Bulgaria .
Romania was NOT considered by István Tisza as the biggest enemy of Hungary.

First of all, "Hungary" did not exist as a souvereign entity in Tisza's time - thus, souvereign foreign policy was out of the question; second, István Tisza's biggest enemy/ies were the Franz Ferdinand's Hungarian supporters (like József Kristóffy - the father of the later embassador in the SU) and Franz Ferdinand wanted to elevate not the Romanians, but the Slavs, and in order to do that, wanted to reform the Compromise. Other enemies of István Tisza were the local political formations that demanded social reforms: social democrats, etc. Third, what actually hallmarked István Tisza's policy towards the Romanians, was that he wanted to cooperate with those who accepted the status quo and the authority of the A-H Empire.

While he forcibly crushed the Romanian nationalists on the violent 1910 election, where they've got political support from Franz Ferdinand (who wanted to weaken Tisza and the Hungarian ruling elite), Karl Lueger (a Christian-Socialist antisemite mayor of Wien, who wanted to keep Budapest's rise in check), Károly Khuen-Héderváry (a former PM who wanted to overthrow Tisza) amongst others, and got serious financial support from Ioan I. C. Brătianu (a leader of the liberals in Bukarest), Vasile Stroescu and others. In the end, they ran 33 MEPs and won only 5 seats, including 3 where there was no other candidate. On the other hand, István Tisza's Nemzeti Munkapárt (National Party of Work) had 9 ethnic Romanians in their seats.

The state of affairs of the Romanian issue was such that during the 1910-1914 years, ethnic Romanians, Romanians from Romania, etc. protested against each other's cultural institutions, mostly because István Tisza provided all the moderate contemporary Romanians wanted - closure of political prosecutions, unlimited rights to establish associations, etc. he even allowed the Romanians to wear their tricolor and sing the Deșteaptă-te, române which were in fact another country's symbol.

István Tisza had little to no interest in "weakening Romania", quite the contrary: he understood that he has to appease Romanians in order to counterbalance the pressure from Franz Ferdinand and the Empire's Slavic population. If anything, the 1910-1914 period saw a general improvement in the relations between moderate Hungarians and moderate Romanians.
“And while I am talking to you, mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." - FDR, October 1940

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11582
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Russia throws Serbia under the bus in 1914

Post by ljadw » 18 Apr 2021 11:27

Romania demanded Transylvania and got it in 1918.Thus Romania,and not Serbia, was the enemy of Hungary.
That Hungary was not a sovereign state in 1914 ,is not correct . It was de facto sovereign,this process started with the Ausgleich of 1867 and that was accelerating .
Austria and Hungary had their own parliament and government ,they had as common the same head of state . And they had the same minister of foreign affairs and of defense : Berchtold and Conrad were not minister of foreign affairs of AH and commander of the army of AH, but minister of foreign affairs of Austria and Hungary and chief of staff of the Austrian and Hungarian army .
Berchtold could decide nothing against the will of Tisza. The same for Conrad . The foreign policy of AH was decided by Stürghk and Tisza, not by Berchtold.
The fact that it took a month after Sarajevo to declare war on Serbia is caused by the opposition of Tisza :as long as Tisza said : no, there could be no declaration of war .
That the Romanians quarreled among each other does not mean that they did not want Transylvania : they took it in 1918, lost it in 1940 and took it back in 1945 .
And, it was the presence of Romania an Russia that was keeping AH together :without Russia, Romania would not be such a danger ,and Hungary would leave .
That between 1910 and 1914 relations improved between moderates from both sides,is something meaningless : it does say nothing about the power of these moderates .Hungary followed a policy of magyarisation , When Romania took Transylvania in 1918, it persecuted the Hungarians .
Franz Ferdinand wanted to change AH from a federalism with two to a federalism with three, because he was convinced that the Czechs needed more freedom and power. Tisza objected because in a federalism with three Hungary would have less influence .
Not only Tisza objected, the Sudeten Germans and the inhabitants of ''Austria '' were also opposing this idea,because they also would have less power .
Besides, it is very unlikely that, if FF became emperor and king, his plans would become reality : Stürghk and Tisza would say no .

Peter89
Member
Posts: 987
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Spain

Re: Russia throws Serbia under the bus in 1914

Post by Peter89 » 18 Apr 2021 17:41

ljadw wrote:
18 Apr 2021 11:27
Romania demanded Transylvania and got it in 1918.Thus Romania,and not Serbia, was the enemy of Hungary.
I did not say it was Serbia, and I deny the assumption that it was "Hungary".
ljadw wrote:
18 Apr 2021 11:27
That Hungary was not a sovereign state in 1914 ,is not correct . It was de facto sovereign,this process started with the Ausgleich of 1867 and that was accelerating .
We are diving deep here into linguistics; "Hungary", as Saint Stephan founded it, was a multiethnic state that occupied the Carpathian Basin, and continued to exist in an administrative form even after its dissolution in 1526. Transsylvania existed as a vassal or tributary state of the Ottoman Empire until the Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699, and some of the southern part of the St. Stephen's kingdom did not return to Habsburg rule until Treaty of Passarowitz in 1718. Also, administratively, the Military Frontier did not return to Hungarian civil administration until 1867/1868.

The point is that "Hungary" - or Uhorsko in Slovak - was the St. Stephan's multiethnic state. Magyarország - or Madarsko in Slovak - however, meant a Magyar national state, which had no continuity and legitimate claim to the lands of the multiethnic medieval kingdom of St. Stephan.

You are talking about a national state of the Magyars, which is Magyarország, not Hungary; Hungary was and is different, and thus, as a medieval entity, belonged to the Habsburg crown. If the Magyars tried to overplay their hand as Magyars (and not as Hungarians), the Habsburg King of Hungary (Ferdinand V.) was exchanged to Franz Joseph, and the Magyar claim to Hungary was shattered, with the help of the nationalities and the Russians.

By the way, this is nothing new under the sun; Scotts don't like to be confused with English, and Ukrainians don't like to be confused with Russians. Therefore, I don't use "English" for the people of the British Empire, and I don't use "Russian" for the people of the Soviet Union.
ljadw wrote:
18 Apr 2021 11:27
Austria and Hungary had their own parliament and government ,they had as common the same head of state . And they had the same minister of foreign affairs and of defense : Berchtold and Conrad were not minister of foreign affairs of AH and commander of the army of AH, but minister of foreign affairs of Austria and Hungary and chief of staff of the Austrian and Hungarian army .
Berchtold could decide nothing against the will of Tisza. The same for Conrad . The foreign policy of AH was decided by Stürghk and Tisza, not by Berchtold.
I wasn't talking about them, besides, the foreign policy making of the A-H Empire was quite more complicated. I'd love to go deeper into the topic, if you are ready.

(Btw Croatia also had its own Sabor ~ Parliament.)
ljadw wrote:
18 Apr 2021 11:27
The fact that it took a month after Sarajevo to declare war on Serbia is caused by the opposition of Tisza :as long as Tisza said : no, there could be no declaration of war .
István Tisza was a minor player in this match. See above, we can talk about it, but not in this manner.
ljadw wrote:
18 Apr 2021 11:27
That the Romanians quarreled among each other does not mean that they did not want Transylvania :
We are talking about millions of people, thousands of them with dual or mixed identities. Back then, many Romanians in the A-H Empire felt that they will do worse if they'd join an impoverished, powerless buffer state in the Balkans, instead of being part of a big and prosperous market, network and society in the A-H Empire.
ljadw wrote:
18 Apr 2021 11:27
And, it was the presence of Romania an Russia that was keeping AH together :without Russia, Romania would not be such a danger ,and Hungary would leave .
Hungary could not leave, only Magyarország; and that country's borders would not be respected by its neighbours or about a third of its inhabitants; so that would be the Balkan Wars in Carpathian Basin edition.

Besides, Romania was no strategic threat to the A-H Empire.
ljadw wrote:
18 Apr 2021 11:27
That between 1910 and 1914 relations improved between moderates from both sides,is something meaningless : it does say nothing about the power of these moderates .Hungary followed a policy of magyarisation , When Romania took Transylvania in 1918, it persecuted the Hungarians .
Franz Ferdinand wanted to change AH from a federalism with two to a federalism with three, because he was convinced that the Czechs needed more freedom and power. Tisza objected because in a federalism with three Hungary would have less influence .
Not only Tisza objected, the Sudeten Germans and the inhabitants of ''Austria '' were also opposing this idea,because they also would have less power .
I agree. This is kind of obvious, I wrote it myself on this very forum a couple of times.
ljadw wrote:
18 Apr 2021 11:27
Besides, it is very unlikely that, if FF became emperor and king, his plans would become reality : Stürghk and Tisza would say no .
See above; we can talk about this, but not in this manner. Franz Ferdinand was 50 years old when he was assassinated, and would be 52 when Franz Joseph died. How many years did he have, given his compromised health? Maybe 10, maybe 20, and it is not clear that his passive-agressive internal politics would not shift the Empire to a way where parts of the Hungarian elite would not seek another Compromise.
“And while I am talking to you, mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." - FDR, October 1940

ljadw
Member
Posts: 11582
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Russia throws Serbia under the bus in 1914

Post by ljadw » 19 Apr 2021 06:18

About the Romanian danger, the following is the opinion of ..Tisza on July 7 1914
Source :Ministerrat für gemeinsame Angelegenheiten
''Gegenwartig müsse man damit rechnen,dass die Agitation gegen uns in Rumänien eine sehr starke sei,dass wir,angesichts die aufgeregten öffentliche meinung mit einem rumänischeAngriffe würden rechnen müssen und auf jeden Fall eine beträchtliche Macht in Siebenbürgen würden halten müssen,um die Rumänen einzuschüchtern ''
Translation :
''We must consider the fact that the agitation against us in Romania is very strong and that because of the agitated public opinion,we must take in account a Romanian attack and that in every eventuality we must keep a considerable force in Transylvania to scare the Romanians . ''

This proves that for Tisza Romania constituted a big danger .
About the importance/influence of Tisza :
Lajos Hollos said in 1906 : ''Ich kenne gemeinsame Minister,aber keine gemeinsame Regierung .''
There are common ministers, but there is no common government .
And, common means here : for both Austria and Hungary , thus not for Austria-Hungary .
Berchtold was the foreign minister of Austria and of Hungary and, to make sure that he would defend the interests of Austria and of Hungary, both his superiors were also present : Tisza and Stürgkh .
On July 7 Conrad asked for an immediate attack on Serbia. Tisza said no and asked for an ultimatum that would be acceptable for Serbia and Russia ,and said : wait til we have the answer of Serbia .
And Tisza won : there was such an ultimatum .
Thus the position of Tisza was not that weak .The others asked for an immediate attack, but Tisza said : no . And the DOW,followed by a small fighting,happened 3 weeks later .
PS : Russia did not give AH an ultimatum after its DOW on Serbia, which proves that the whole thing was essentially a lot of big words followed by sabre-rattling and a diplomatic failure for Germany .

Return to “What if”