WW1 never happened

[Adler17]

Franz Ferdinand was murdered by a Serbian with traces to Serbia. Austria wanted so as main point an investigation in Serbia to find the persons behind Princip. Serbia was going to accept when Russia came in and backed up their ally. Also the Serbian government was involved! So Austria indeed had a casus belli. With France and Russia backing up Serbia a war was immanent at the time, as neither Germany nor Britain were able to calm down their allies. And the treaty of Belgish neutrality elapsed some 30 years before...

Adler

 

[Verbose]

Serbia was going to accept when Russia came in and backed up their ally.

And that was a huge Austrian worry. They didn't want Serbia to accept. They wanted Serbia to not accept it, so they could invade it properly. The only flaw was that Germany was supposed to scare Russia into backing down, and that failed.

To make a very looong story quite short.

All in all, sooner or later Austria would throw its weight around in the Balkans, meaning the Russian would have to put out or shut up. Or the inverse, which might be just as likely a development. If the rest of Europe erupts in war over it would remain to be seen, but considering the alliance system, it's damn likely.

 

[Dachs]

All in all, sooner or later Austria would throw its weight around in the Balkans, meaning the Russian would have to put out or shut up. Or the inverse, which might be just as likely a development. If the rest of Europe erupts in war over it would remain to be seen, but considering the alliance system, it's damn likely.

If the Russians are having domestic problems (which has been posited by several posts in this thread, no pun intended), then they will be at best unable to intervene. If Slavania is created, as I've previously noted, then Serbia will probably go for a rapprochement anyway.

 

[Arwon]

The popular view is that the assassination was pretext and superficially any event would have done, but I feel specifics always matter - more for the character of the war rather than whether it would have happened or not.

I've read a couple of things that Franz Ferdinand was relatively anti militarist (specifically, opposed to war in the Balkans against Serbia, and was in favour of a more federalist setup with the slavic lands as a third crown) in the Austria-Hungarian government, just as his friend Kaiser Wilhelm was likewise not anticipating a European war on two fronts with the same glee as his general staff.

If this is true then the assasination eliminated two potential dissenting voices against the all-out war advocated by General Staff groupthink. The Archduke due to his death, obviously, and the Kaiser due to his anger at the assassination. Also worth mentioning is that the Kaiser was away on a cruise controlling things by telegram rather than there in person to manage the crisis, as well as his general erraticness.

A great European war may have been fairly inevitable, but another trigger for war would have left these two figures in a different position and may well have altered the proceedings of the war quite dramatically.

 

[Traitorfish]

Also Germany was working on the tank during the war to so it is possible if the war is delayed 5 years that the Germans will deploy tanks onto the battle field in 1920 and actually be able to take Paris because classical defenses would be over come by the tanks.

But the tank was developed as a response to large-scale trench warfare, something which none of the great powers predicted prior to 1914. Besides, even the best tanks of WWI were pretty limited- while they could deal with trenches, they weren't much good against solid, traditional fortifications.

 

[aronnax]

I've read a couple of things that Franz Ferdinand was relatively anti militarist (specifically, opposed to war in the Balkans against Serbia, and was in favour of a more federalist setup with the slavic lands as a third crown) in the Austria-Hungarian government, just as his friend Kaiser Wilhelm was likewise not anticipating a European war on two fronts with the same glee as his general staff.

Now heres a better reason to a more peaceful world. Assuming that Franz Ferdinard survived/assasinationed never attempted and ascended the throne quickly, AH would not have backed Germany in war, Germany would not be able to fend off two large attacks and a naval blockade and would not have started the war or lost more quickly.

 

[Dachs]

Now heres a better reason to a more peaceful world. Assuming that Franz Ferdinard survived/assasinationed never attempted and ascended the throne quickly, AH would not have backed Germany in war, Germany would not be able to fend off two large attacks and a naval blockade and would not have started the war or lost more quickly.

If we want to keep the peace, though, and say that Franz Ferdinand not only survives but takes the throne with little incident, then his tripartite plan - reducing Hungarian power by creating a Triple Monarchy of Austria, Hungary, and Slavania - would have gone a long way to reducing Serbian revolutionary power. Dragutin Dimitrijevic might be discredited; the Serbs could very well, after Pasic dies, seek some sort of rapprochement with Vienna the way that the Serbs had before Aleksandar was murdered.

And, as possibly previously noted, the Austro-Hungarian-Slavanian state will have the ability to prevent Slavic dissent, reduce Magyar power, and overall improve the position of the central government to act under Franz Ferdinand, who was no man's fool.

If there's no 1914 crisis - the entire premise behind everything I've said so far - then the Austrians won't have the proper casus belli for attacking Serbia. Franz Ferdinand will ascend to the throne and Slavania will be created out of Bosnia and formerly Hungarian territories, creating a Triple Monarchy. Serbia will probably continue making trouble after that, but with equality within the Empire, the South Slavs under Vienna's control will be much less likely to go over to their side. Eventually, the Serbs will either stop their dissent fomentation or they'll get caught, both of which end in a rapprochement with Vienna as they had before the murder of Aleksandar.

[...]

Why would the South Slavs unite behind a Serbian-dominated banner if they can stay in the Austro-Hungarian-Slavanian Triple Monarchy and have peace and prosperity instead, with equal rights thrown in for good measure? Serbia sure wasn't going to give those up to their fellow South Slavs (we already saw that post-1913 with the Macedonian situation and in OTL after 1918 in Montenegro, Croatia, and Bosnia). Besides, by the time 1914 rolled around, a lot of Serbs were pissed off enough with Dragutin Dimitrijevic to start to abandon his policy of fomenting rebellion in the Balkans; this process will speed up if Slavania is created. I don't see Serbia having the ability to effectively foment rebellion after that, nor do I see them particularly wanting to.

[...]

All in all, I don't think that Serbia has the ability to successfully lead a Balkanian revolt after 1914 if the Entente Powers have nothing to do with it. After 1916 and Franz Ferdinand's succession, they don't have the ability even if the Entente assists them due to the existence of Slavania. It's not just the overwhelming military force that the Entente Powers have, but the ability to appeal to stability and equality with the Germans and Magyars, which is more than Serbia can offer. There is simply no incentive for a general South Slav rising.

[...]

Britain also lacked the money with which to resist the coalition, money that Austria-Hungary-Slavania would have, if not from their own coffers then from the Germans, who certainly aren't interested in a South Slav revolt. Comparing the two is apples and oranges. Yes, anyone would concede that there is inherent possibility for a miracle to happen. But circumstances and the massive power that a Great Power and a major regional one can bring to bear militate against even a minor likelihood that a South Slav uprising will succeed.

Ever since my very first post, I've been talking about Franz Ferdinand's succession and the Triple Monarchy's possibilities, including the eventual adaptation to a federal state that, with more or less equal rights for Slavs, Germans, and Magyars, has a fair chance of surviving into the later 20th century (albeit after much reform) and eliminating many of the Balkan troubles that we saw in the 1990s. Think of it as a future "United States of South-Central Europe".

Nice of you to pay attention, btw.

 

[REDY]

I think you are right, at least in Bohemia case there was not significant fighting for independence, it was more thirst for federation. The first support raised with Austro-Hungarian attacking of slavic nations and recruiting Czechs to army.

But I hardly belief it in Polish case.

 

[Dachs]

But I hardly belief it in Polish case.

Poles actually weren't that badly off in the Austrian Empire, from what I've read. Goluchowski got to be Foreign Minister after all, and they were also pretty handy to have friendly in the event of a war with Russia. The Habsburgs would've been pretty dumb to antagonize the nationality in whose territory the great fortresses of Przemysl and Lemberg lay. As for Cracow - that's just one city.