Why didn't Austria expand overseas?

[jsweeney]

Austria was a major European power for several centuries and had a good chunk of Mediterranean coast. They had a huge grudge against the Ottomans for sometime, so why didn't they go after libya or egypt? Sure, they would have needed a good navy but they could have easily built and trained a good sized one. and taking the fight with the ottomans into the sea and africa would've helped Austria not hurt it. So, why do you think the Austrians didn't follow their fellow Europeans and gain power overseas?

 

[Dachs]

They were mostly busy doing other things. Besides, the Ottomans were too powerful for a harebrained expedition to Libya and Egypt until probably the late 18th century, especially when the Habsburgs' actual land borders with the Ottoman Empire were under a much more considerable threat. And then there's the issue of those territories being extremely untenable and also full of Muslims and also probably not worth the money even if they could be held, especially Libya. I mean, what would the Habsburgs do with Libya and Egypt, assuming they could take and hold them?

 

[jsweeney]

They would use Libya for more fronts against the Ottomans and use Egypt for its cotton and then they could be like the british and have a canal.

 

[Dachs]

They would use Libya for more fronts against the Ottomans and use Egypt for its cotton and then they could be like the british and have a canal.

They didn't need more "fronts" against the Ottomans, they were usually outnumbered in Hungary as it was and a further dilution of an already badly diluted military would be extraordinarily counterproductive. Especially when the troops in Libya and Egypt would have had about zero chance of population support or anything like that. Cotton probably wouldn't be worth the effort it would have taken to capture Egypt (hell the native rulers of the place had issues gearing the economy to produce it in the 19th century) and a canal would have made no sense, because Austria didn't have significant trade with the Indian Ocean. Besides probably being out of the fiscal question. Austria never was good at getting loans, and their government was generally teetering on bankruptcy even at its height in the early 19th century.

 

[Dragonlord]

I'd say the Habsburgs already had their hands full with their multi-cultural empire as it was. Instead of colonizing overseas, they 'colonized' on the European mainland.

 

[Harvin87]

The Habsburgs were even in Mexico ... around 1860-1865 ... with Maximilian

 

[Winner]

I'd say the Habsburgs already had their hands full with their multi-cultural empire as it was. Instead of colonizing overseas, they 'colonized' on the European mainland.

This.

Plus there is the obvious factor that they didn't have access to open sea. Their navy was meant more as an overpowered coast guard, not a real blue water navy.

 

[Dachs]

The Habsburgs were even in Mexico ... around 1860-1865 ... with Maximilian

Don't try to fog the issue. In the 1862-7 adventure, the troops were primarily French (and after the British and Spanish dumped the expedition early on, they were wholly French), and Maximilian was disavowed by the Habsburg dynasty and forced to resign any and all possible claims he might make towards the Austrian throne. It was not an Austrian overseas expansion attempt.

 

[Traitorfish]

This.

Plus there is the obvious factor that they didn't have access to open sea. Their navy was meant more as an overpowered coast guard, not a real blue water navy.

This is an important point- significant overseas expansion was exclusively the domain of those nations with an Atlantic coastline. The only exception to this rule is, perhaps, Russian Alaska, and that was never quite the same thing.

 

[RedRalph]

This is an important point- significant overseas expansion was exclusively the domain of those nations with an Atlantic coastline. The only exception to this rule is, perhaps, Russian Alaska, and that was never quite the same thing.

Holland, Belgium and Scandinavia

 

[Squonk]

In the first half of XVIII century, there were some attempts, f.e. Nicobares (? polish Nikobary) were a posession of Austria for some time, and Vienna tried to make Ostenda a great centre of colonial trade.
But its ally, England, demanded that to stop.

In XIX century, the archduke who was the most enthusiastic about colonisation became the emperor of Mexico and was executed, so the idea of austrian colonialism lost an important supporter as well...

These are only two of many factors, though, and they only apply to a limited period of time.

 

[Beamed]

I think there was a small colony on the Golden Coast, like Prussia had for a bit.

But, why did Austria need to? It was hard-pressed enough at home, and immense colonies were already "in the family" perse, and when such stopped being so, everything but Africa was pretty much taken, and it would require a huge investment into Naval resources to gain a chunk of Africa or Asia. There was just no point. May as well spread Germans at home rather than abroad - it's not like they didn't have a lot of space in the country as it were.

 

[Traitorfish]

Holland, Belgium and Scandinavia

I was given to believe that the North Sea is part of the Atlantic Ocean, at least technically. Also, you forgot Germany.

 

[Cynovolans]

Austria claimed the Nicobar islands and made a small colony, but that only last a few years and was a disaster. I think they created some company, but other colonial powers pressured them to stop. Austria also got the city of Tianjin as part of the Eight-Nation Alliance.

 

[aronnax]

What would you want to ship Austrians, out of Austria when you need them to kill the rebelling Slavs and Magyars?

 

[Arwon]

Don't try to fog the issue. In the 1862-7 adventure, the troops were primarily French (and after the British and Spanish dumped the expedition early on, they were wholly French), and Maximilian was disavowed by the Habsburg dynasty and forced to resign any and all possible claims he might make towards the Austrian throne. It was not an Austrian overseas expansion attempt.

Interestingly, by that measure, the Spanish empire was never Spanish, either.

 

[Dachs]

Interestingly, by that measure, the Spanish empire was never Spanish, either.

The Spanish Empire involved no Spanish colonial administrators, no Spanish cultural imperialism of any kind, no Spanish military or Spanish government-hired mercenaries, no allegiance to the Spanish government whatsoever?

 

[REDY]

What would you want to ship Austrians, out of Austria when you need them to kill the rebelling Slavs and Magyars?

They should ship slavs and magyars

 

[Arwon]

The Spanish Empire involved no Spanish colonial administrators, no Spanish cultural imperialism of any kind, no Spanish military or Spanish government-hired mercenaries, no allegiance to the Spanish government whatsoever?

Not none, but the majority of soldiers, financiers and generals were from outside the peninsula, or Portugal.

Alternative answer: yes, because there was no such thing as "Spanish" back then.

 

[classical_hero]

Well we arrived too late on the scene for that.