It's even more funny that the Austrians and the Ottomans after fighting each other for centuries eventually fought together on the same side in their last great struggle and at the end both ancient empires died together
They had fought together numerous times during the 19th century and the Habsburg Empire viewed the Ottomans as an important ally in containing Russia. The K.U.K. Foreign Minister Count Andrassy worked with the Ottoman Empire to occupy Bosnia Herzegovina after the Congress of Berlin. The early Victorian Era saw a lot of old rivalries die, look at Great Britain and France. And multi-ethnic, multi-lingual empires like Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire had a lot in common
I mean it also depends on how quickly the tension builds. Franz Ferdinand wanted to reform the Empire and, while there would be tension, I think he would end up creating not just a triple crown (like originally planned), but a quituple one like Karl I proposed. Croatia-Slovenia would essentially be allowed their Illyrian aspirations, Galicia would have its own culture super charged, Bohemia would be able to potentially industrialize the empire faster and Hungary could double down on being the breadbasket of the Empire. Furthermore, such reforms would streamline the Parliamentary structure, allowing for more effective decision making, allowing Austria to potentially hold out until France kicks Italy's butt and arrives to aid the Austrians, with Britain more than likely doing the tried and true naval blockade strategy. *Edit for critics:* The idea that I came up with would imply that the country would have a much tighter federal constitution and parliament from the start, perhaps even creating a supranational senate house to deal with legislation at the level of the entire country, as opposed to the Austria-Hungary model which essentially made Hungary an independent entity. Also the reason I argued it would 5 kingdoms is because only making 3 would cause dissent in Bohemia and Galicia (the latter especially). The idea is that, by having 5 kingdoms, no stalemate can occur. Also let's not forget that the 5 kingdoms idea was something that Karl I had proposed so as to save the monarchy.
To be brutally honest with you you are grossly overestimating even a reformed AH especially with their position in this setting, in otl they buckled against the poorly equipped and motivated Russian Army and almost collapsed if not for help from the Germans, they could barely push on Serbia until the Bulgarians got involved,they underperformed on every single front, they are not holding out on that many fronts, they were the biggest meme of the war and fell apart completely.
@@buzter8135 Well yes, but that was a consequence of their poor organizational structure, which caused internal dissent. In my interpretation I assume that reform would bring a higher degree of cooperation from all the regions, in turn creating a more organized and prosperous Austrian Empire.
@@buzter8135 My explanation is obviously oversimplified, since Austria could very well fail if it does not also deal with developing its industry at the same pace as France and Britain, not to mention that it would have to improve every poor region in the Empire somehow in order to generate enough faith in the system and create a loyal united front that would allow it to resist the nationalism that Prussia and the Russian Empire would no doubt weaponise against it.
@@Wendeta-hq2cp The Austrian Empire was built on the basis of the economic dominance of the major sectors, one of which was Hungary who detested the idea of making any concessions in their influence, it was this dynamic that almost destroyed them in the past and brought about the compromise that created the dual Monarchy, any attempts at reform would not only not get past the magyars it would exacerbate the problem, the ruling class in Vienna weren't stupid, they were to terrified to try and decided to hold in people who were already weary of their domination.
Problem with the extra kingdoms thing on the A-H model is that it reduced it further from a coherent state, to more or less a group of mutual protectorates, as other than combining some parts of the military, overall diplomacy towards the outside world being shared, and a shared head of state, the two countries internally were essentially completely Sovereign, right down to things such as citizens of one not being citizens of the other and being unable to freely move from one to the other. Overall the duel-crown/country idea was a bad idea that arguably hurt the whole and acted as mostly legally independent countries rather than a proper federation, and adding a third or fourth crown likely would have hurt it all even further.
I feel austro-hungary always gets a bed rep for being 'too divided' whilst most empire like the Roman, Arabian, Mongolian etc. etc. were all very ethnically divided. The biggest mistake they made was not playing the sides against each other
The cause is Propaganda. AH was the best empire for minorities while yugoslavia had multiple civil wars and genocides... its just propaganda that AH was a "prison of nations". Not reality. But people believe the propaganda.
Its the modern nation state conception of affairs that colors this. Many countries today are just as deeply divided based along ideological lines yet they keep chugging along since nukes made major wars near impossible.
Well the Hungarian crown was opposed to any reform propose to help modernise the empire. As a Romanian, I can safely put all the World's blame on Hunagrians and be happy
As a Hungarian, I dont know what are you talking about, the Hungarian crown was owned by the king of Austria and we made a lot of reforms and allowed ethnicities like Croats to be represented in the parlaiment
@@42carlos not have seen it yet (probably) but this one is special to me, i love writting, and this just oppened a whole new perspective of how the ww1 could have go, and this is just fuckin inspiring.
@@VigiooLante you should watch the one I suggested seriously, it's somehow entertaining all the way through, though a lot more crazy and complex and in-depth, might overwhelming lol
@@42carlos I loved it in the beginning, until the USA joined. And later basically the whole world. Initially it was great, but then I became like the highest unrealistic story ever. Not that the rest is a lot more feasable, but yeah, it escalated unnecessarily.
To be honest, this feels more like a "what if Britain and France joined the central powers and Germany joined the entente?" Especially looking at the alliances map
fue un buen Rey realizó buenas reformas y de hecho dejo un sucesor que pudo haber evitado la guerra de sucesión española un heredero de la dinastía Wittelsbach Jose Fernando de Baviera pero murió de viruela siendo un niño sería interesante que hubiera pasado si no fallcía
This is a really interesting timeline, I got suggested a scenario on what if Germany joined the Entente and didn't think too much of it. Austria-Hungary joining the Entente is a very fresh idea. You can do the Germany one too!
Also, you forgot to mention the USA in your scenario. Remember that if Britain took out the same loans from the usa to fund the war as in our timeline,(which they would have if they weren't defeated very quickly, which was very unlikely)then the US would join the entente on Britain's side just like in our timeline, to make sure they get their money back... you should have accounted for that in this video as well... it would have made things very interesting and looked even more different.
If Austria Hungary would have changed the sides, the German speakers within the Austrian/Hungarian Monarchy would have refused to follow. As did the tcheques in reality. Complete bohemian units deserted on the Russian front. In fact with the rise of nationalism this state was doomed and there was no possibility, that he could have survived.
Finally some alternate history and not some common knowledge shorts! (PS. I know its Josh's channel and he can do anything he wants with it, but c'mon. Those videos are the reason why he has subscribers in the first place)
i feel like austria's addition into the triple entente would not work, russia would probably leave the alliance seeing as russia and austria as we knew, had conflicting ideas hence the collapse of the Holy alliance (the alliance of Germany, Austria and Russia which devolved in the 1880s and 90s), Germany will look forward to Italy and Russia, Austria will struggle in the Balkans because Russia has major influece in that region, so austria would genuinely be surrounded by enemies if this alliance was to happen (if somehow Britain and France found a way to appease between Russia and Austria). If we look to a future world war 1, germany will seem in a sketchy position, seeing as the Austro-german border at the time was around 1400 kilometers if not a little more, but remember, austria is SURROUNDED by enemies, if this scenario happens, we will still have an italo-turkish war, the balkan wars will most likely remain the same, it is unlikely that Greece or Bulgaria get constantinople, the ottomans will be much weaker in this timeline, if the war starts via the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, Serbia will rather feel happy to try to take all the lands with slavs in them when it has a Russian AND a German on their back to create a potentially stronger and bigger Yugoslavia than in our own timeline. Russia might provoke the ottomans as it is clearly much stronger in this alliance and would take advantage before the ottomans join the triple alliance(meaning the ottomans will be supported by the French and British navies in the Dardanelles and the black sea) , as Russia is a historical enemy of the ottoman empire , Bulgaria will most likely stay neutral in the war, if not join the triple alliance to defeat the ottomans, after the defeat of Austria (which made them give up hopes of trying to get macedonia) and also the proximity of the entente will likely dissuade them from participating in this war on the side of the Entente, even though it looks very plausible, the ottomans will join the triple alliance to try and fight britain (which is gonna be easier in the egyptian side because italy has libya, so we might see an overrun of egypt somewhere in mid 1916). Romania will join the Triple alliance to get Transylvania before Austria is defeated. on the western front, france is likely to be overrun faster, but will still take time, it might happen somewhere in 1916, the war was infavor of the triple alliance before it even began, but IF the russians provoke the ottomans very early before they join. this war will prolong decently, as even though, the ottomans being very weak, and Bulgaria will join if this case happens on the triple alliance side, they will still fight on even if constantinople is taken by the way, but it might just be me making up stuff, this is a alternate scenario, there is very much a lot of illogical things ive said in this comment.
If I can point out as well Britain was mostly on the sidelines in this conflict weighing its trade relations with Russia and others. What brought them in the war was the violation of Belgium. Both Germany and Britain were guaranteeing Belgiums neutrality in any conflict. Also a tissue thin alliance with France
Is your head stuck in a oven he literally shown the correct austro-Hungarian flag in the video even if he mostly focused on austria but it was mainly him focusing on Austro-Hungarian empire in ww1
The lack of a major eastern european front would open up a big question on what happens with communist. As the shorter war means theres less disgruntled populations for them to call on.
The only thing i really have to say about this is that a ruso-german alliance probably would have been pretty unlikely since the germans were afraid of the russians because of their massive population and their potential to indsutrialize therefore catching up with nations like germany. So even if they were to ally, germany probably wouldnt allow russian domination over the balkans, and any radical russian expansion.
In WW2 nothing will change because they was incompétent ans literaly in the reality was more a Bad thing for Germany But Germany will collapse more faster with the size of the Land they must keep ans défend it. On WW1 this could be différents meaby liké the Real story with a deafeat of the Germany
This video missing a lot of points why this is a unrealistic, 1, the German would have never allied with the Russians simply because they were too afraid of Russian dominance, 2, even if we assume this alliance continues, while the Austrian front rather easily, they will likely will not be able to make a big advance into Anatolia due to British naval capabilities, which will make German-Russo victory hard, also, Italy likely wouldn't join right away if at all, like mention, they Brits dominated the sea which could have created massive problems for them, 3, assuming this grand alliance start, we will likely sea far more American involvement twards the Brits, this kind of German victory would have likely terrified the Americans, it would be far harder for them, it even likely France would have fell, but long term, the alliance couldn't win, especially considering resentment over the war as a whole inside Russia, the change in alliance didn't change Russia's international problems
You should do this scenario in reverse, "What if Germany joined the entente in ww1?" This is more realistic and historically likely to have happened in real life. Austria is seen as aggressive against Serbia, so Germany joins entente to annex Austria and grants independence to the other countries. This is more likely to have happened and actually almost did at one point (except for the naval buildup problem), but I can see this happening, and then we see really big United Germany.
I very much doubt Serbia would want to side with Austria though, considering their ambitions on Bosnia-Herzegovina, which was held by Austria IRL and the Ottomans in this timeline. Aside from that, great video.
While I understand needing unrealistic scenarios for these videos, the idea that Bismarck would support Russia is not at all “likely” as you said, for two reasons. 1: Everybody and their mother in Germany was scared that if Russia continued expanding their influence in Eastern Europe while industrializing they’d eclipse Germany and dominate them as well. 2. Just because Bismarck changes his mind doesn’t mean the other powers will too. Britain especially was incredibly concerned with the treaty of San Stefano (the one mentioned about Bulgaria’s borders). This was because it put a Russian ally on Constantinople’s doorstep, an area which if taken by the Russians would lead to potential threats over British naval hegemony in the Mediterranean, which was obviously unacceptable at the time. This is why Britain also heavily protested Bulgaria’s status and would have immediately made diplomatic moves to secure the Bosphorous straits. Even if Germany sided with the Russians, they would immediately isolate themselves from the greatest power in the world at the time and launched themselves into a conflict they simply were not prepared for
You didn't explain British interests in the Balkans very well IMHO. I'm no expert but if memory serves me correctly those were them supporting the establishment of Greece and in a few island possessions. In the scenario you draw that would more likely draw them in on the "central powers" side as they had no interest in Bulgaria but plenty both in propping up Greece, taking territory from the ottomans (remember Egypt was still a British colony at this point), and as a continuation of the centuries old Anglo-French feud. Remember Great Britain only joined the war(in spite of being in the entente) when Germany marched through Belgium which GB had an alliance with. Also supposedly GB and Germany were already in some form of talks about an alliance. Just a few thoughts I had. Also that would change WWI into a continuation of the Catholic/Protestant wars with a dab of Orthodoxy mixed in.
Nice video, I had the same thought the last few days. But far too much land for Italy. Tyrol is German and would not be divided and would be part of Germany as a whole. Likewise Carniola with its capital Ljubljana to Germany. Trieste, Istria and a part of Dalamtia would go to Italy, I agree.
what would happen to the habsburgs in this timeline? would one of the heirs be put in charge of the archduchy? would all their lands be annexed into prussia? just wondering how that would look like since germany was technically a confederation of various monarchies.
I think they would most likely separate Bohemia-Moravia from Austria, allow one of the habsburg heirs to be king or archduke of Austria and have another heir from a different German monarch become the king/archduke/duke of Bohemia-Moravia
If I can point out a fact here you blame Bismarck but the Kaiser Wiihelm II of Germany dismissed Bismarck in 1890 thereabouts because of his arrogance.
If this were true then there would most likely never had been a WW1 where germany came to there aid. England and France would have been the ones to do that. Germany would then just need to sit back and pick up the parts if after it was all over.
What if Grand Duke Dmitri Pavlovich of Russia restored the Russian Empire(if the Whites won the Russian Civil War and went to monarchy path; HOI4 style)?
It's a great video, i just guess that it would be more likely that Italy and Germany would be at eachothers throoat. To qoute the austrians when they demanded South Tyrol for them to allign with the Central Powers "They shall have the italian lands, but not an inch of german lands". Germany would surely want to have the german speaking parts of South Tyrol while Italy would claim it's proclaimed "natural border" Germany and Russia on the other hand had way more to gain from an alliance than Germany and Italy would. Germany would have it's eastern border secured and russia it's western, both could work together to prevent an independent Poland rising which would claim territories from both, also Germany could heavily benefit from russian resources while Russia could industrialise faster with german technology.
I mean surely the UK isnt guarenteed, it would be nuetral unless germany did the schlieffen plan again, which is doubtful at best. their medditerean goals wouldnt be enough to bring them into the alliance alone.
San Stefano Bulgaria was not a "pan-slavic bulgarian state", it's population of other slavs aka serbo-croats was less than the gypsies or vlachs. Not to mention that bulgarian nationalism isnt cemented in slavism and groups that are not slavic linguistically (romance speaking and turkic speaking) are also acceptes as bulgarian under historical or ethnic context. The reason San Stefano Bulgaria was a danger to Austria was because Russia would have just had too much influence in the Balkans and through it even better access to the Aegean Sea and a platform for further domination over the region. Bulgaria itself has never had any policy of dominating the southern slavs under some sort of pan-slavism. The only yugoslavists Bulgaria has ever had were early revolutionaries who believed that some sort of pan-balkan state would help bulgarians liberate themselves from the Ottomans or ZVENO which were stratocratic corporatists from the 20th century and saw Bulgaria joining Yugoslavia as the only way for it to avoid partition by the other balkan powers. It's more possible that Bulgaria and Romania unite into a single country than a bulgarian-led Yugoslavia and even in such a scenario as you presented, Bulgaria would most likely just take the territories with ethnic bulgarians like the Pomoravie and parts of Kosovo and maybe give historical claims for owning Belgrade which is a stretch.
"IF BISMARCK HAD REALIZED THIS..." - I just LOVE the arrogance of some RU-vidr lecturing one of the most accomplished and capable statesmen in history in a 10min video🤣🤣
Honestly, I think this scenario is interesting from the Germans expanding, Russia gaining more influence and etc, and Belgium is not on the map. If only..
So....how would that work? AH invaded Serbia which was protect by russia. So does germany lose AH but GAINS russia? Italy might keep its pact with Germany to gain austrian real estate.
of you look at history they literally forced us to be part of their empire, there wad a traty between the habsburgs and the hungarians, after the death of matias corvinus if they won't have a male children the throne would be given to the habsburgs, matias was assasinated(poisoned) and so the habsbrg ruled over us, they neglected us and used as a buffer between hre and the ottomans. we were a a bastion for their use, yes they did saved us after tossing us into the wrath of the turks
