Congress of Berlin
The Congress of Berlin (13 June – 13 July 1878) was a
The leader of the congress, German Chancellor
The affected territories were instead granted varying degrees of independence. Romania became fully independent, though was forced to give part of Bessarabia to Russia, and gained Northern Dobruja. Serbia and Montenegro were also granted full independence but lost territory, with Austria-Hungary occupying the Sanjak of Novi Pazar along with Bosnia and Herzegovina.[3] Britain took possession of Cyprus. Of the territory that remained within the Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria was made a semi-independent principality, Eastern Rumelia became a special administration, and the region of Macedonia was returned to the Ottomans on condition of reforms to its governance.
The results were initially hailed as a success for peace in the region, but most of the participants were not satisfied with the outcome. The Ottomans were humiliated and had their weakness confirmed as the "
In the long term, the settlement led to rising tensions between Russia and Austria-Hungary, and disputes over
Background
In the decades leading up to the congress, Russia and the Balkans had been gripped by
Balkan Slavs felt they needed both an equivalent to Piedmont to serve as a base and an outside sponsor corresponding to France.[7] The state that was meant to serve as the locus for unification of the Balkans under a "Slavic" rule was not always clear, as initiative wafted between Serbia and Bulgaria. Italian rhetoric by contrast cast Romania as Latin, a "second Piedmont".
The recognition of the Bulgarian Exarchate by the Ottomans in 1870 had been intended to separate the Bulgarians, religiously from the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, and politically from Serbia.[8] Pan-Slavism required the end of Ottoman rule in the Balkans. How and whether that goal would be realised was the major question to be answered at the Congress of Berlin.
Great powers in the Balkans
The Balkans were a major stage for competition between the European
Russia and Austria-Hungary, the two powers that were most invested in the fate of the Balkans, were allied with Germany in the conservative
Ottoman brutality in the
Eventually, Russia sought and obtained Austria-Hungary's pledge of benevolent neutrality in the coming war, in return for ceding Bosnia Herzegovina to Austria-Hungary in the Budapest Convention of 1877. act: The Berlin Congress in effect postponed resolution of the Bosnian question and left Bosnia and Herzegovina under Habsburg control. This was the goal of Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister Count Gyula Andrássy.[12]
Treaty of San Stefano
After the Bulgarian
The Congress was attended by Britain, Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Italy, Russia and the Ottoman Empire. Delegates from Greece, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro attended the sessions that concerned their states, but they were not members.[citation needed]
The Congress was solicited by Russia's rivals, particularly Austria-Hungary and Britain, and was hosted in 1878 by Bismarck. It proposed and ratified the
Other powers' fear of Russian influence
This section needs additional citations for verification. (July 2022) |
The principal mission of the participants at the Congress was to deal a fatal blow to the burgeoning movement of
That sparked the
The arrangement was not acceptable to the British, who considered the entire Mediterranean to be a British sphere of influence and saw any Russian attempt to gain access there as a grave threat to British power. On 4 June, before the Congress opened on 13 June, British Prime Minister Lord Beaconsfield had already concluded the Cyprus Convention, a secret alliance with the Ottomans against Russia in which Britain was allowed to occupy the strategically-placed island of Cyprus. The agreement predetermined Beaconsfield's position during the Congress and led him to issue threats to unleash a war against Russia if it did not comply with Ottoman demands.
Negotiations between Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister
Bismarck as host
The Congress of Berlin is frequently viewed as the culmination of the battle between Alexander Gorchakov of Russia and Otto von Bismarck of Germany. Both were able to persuade other European leaders that a free and independent Bulgaria would greatly improve the security risks posed by a disintegrating Ottoman Empire. According to historian Erich Eyck, Bismarck supported Russia's position that "Turkish rule over a Christian community (Bulgaria) was an anachronism which undoubtedly gave rise to insurrection and bloodshed and should therefore be ended".[16] He used the Great Eastern Crisis of 1875 as proof of growing animosity in the region.[citation needed]
Bismarck's ultimate goal during the Congress of Berlin was not to upset Germany's status on the international platform. He did not wish to disrupt the League of the Three Emperors by choosing between Russia and Austria as an ally.[16] To maintain peace in Europe, Bismarck sought to convince other European diplomats that dividing up the Balkans would foster greater stability. During the process, Russia began to feel cheated despite eventually gaining independence for Bulgaria. Problems in the alliances in Europe before the First World War were thus noticeable.[citation needed]
One reason that Bismarck was able to mediate the various tensions at the Congress of Berlin was his diplomatic persona. He sought peace and stability when international affairs did not pertain to Germany directly. Since he viewed the current situation in Europe as favourable for Germany, any conflicts between the major European powers that threatened the status quo was against German interests. Also, at the Congress of Berlin, "Germany could not look for any advantage from the crisis" that had occurred in the Balkans in 1875.[16] Therefore, Bismarck claimed impartiality on behalf of Germany at the Congress, which enabled him to preside over the negotiations with a keen eye for foul play.[citation needed]
Though most of Europe went into the Congress expecting a diplomatic show, much like the Congress of Vienna, they were to be sadly disappointed. Bismarck, unhappy to be conducting the Congress in the heat of the summer, had a short temper and a low tolerance for malarky. Thus, any grandstanding was cut short by the testy German chancellor. The ambassadors from the small Balkan territories whose fate was being decided were barely even allowed to attend the diplomatic meetings, which were between mainly the representatives of the great powers.[17]
According to Henry Kissinger,[18] the congress saw a shift in Bismarck's Realpolitik. Until then, as Germany had become too powerful for isolation, his policy was to maintain the League of the Three Emperors. Now that he could no longer rely on Russia's alliance, he began to form relations with as many potential enemies as possible.[citation needed]
Legacy
Events leading to World War I |
---|
|
Bowing to Russia's pressure, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro were all declared independent principalities. Russia recovered
In Russia, the Congress of Berlin was considered to be a dismal failure. After finally defeating the Turks despite many past inconclusive Russo-Turkish wars, many Russians had expected "something colossal", a redrawing of the Balkan borders in support of Russian territorial ambitions. Instead, the victory resulted in an Austro-Hungarian gain on the Balkan front that was brought about by the rest of the European powers' preference for a stronger Austria-Hungarian Empire, which threatened basically no one, to a powerful Russia, which had been locked in competition with Britain in the so-called Great Game for most of the century. Gorchakov said, "I consider the Berlin Treaty the darkest page in my life". Many Russians were furious over the European repudiation of their political gains, and though there was some thought that it represented only a minor stumble on the road to Russian hegemony in the Balkans, it actually gave Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia over to Austria-Hungary's sphere of influence and essentially removed all Russian influence from the area.[20]
The Serbs were upset with "Russia... consenting to the cession of Bosnia to Austria":[21]
Ristić who was Serbia's first plenipotentiary at Berlin tells how he asked Jomini, one of the Russian delegates, what consolation remained to the Serbs. Jomini replied that it would have to be the thought that 'the situation was only temporary because within fifteen years at the latest we shall be forced to fight Austria.' 'Vain consolation!' comments Ristić.[21]
Italy was dissatisfied with the results of the Congress, and the tensions between Greece and the Ottoman Empire were left unresolved. Bosnia-Herzegovina would also prove to be problematic for the Austro-Hungarian Empire in later decades. The
Two states that didn't participate in the war, Great Britain and Austria-Hungary, achieved great benefits from this Congress. The former was granted administrative control of Cyprus in exchange for guarantees that Britain would use the island as a base to protect the Ottoman Empire against possible Russian aggression. The latter obtained the administration of Bosnia-Herzegovina and secured the control of a corridor leading to the Aegean Sea. Both of these territories had to remain de jure part of the Ottoman Empire, but in 1914 the British Empire formally annexed Cyprus, whereas Bosnia-Herzegovina was annexed by Austria in 1908.[citation needed]
Thus, the Berlin Congress sowed the seeds of further conflicts, including the Balkan Wars and (ultimately) the
In 1954, the British historian A. J. P. Taylor wrote:
"If the treaty of San Stefano had been maintained, both the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary might have survived to the present day. The British, except for
Beaconsfield in his wilder moments, had expected less and were therefore less disappointed. Salisbury wrote at the end of 1878: We shall set up a rickety sort of Turkish rule again south of the Balkans. But it is a mere respite. There is no vitality left in them."[24]
Though the Congress of Berlin constituted a harsh blow to Pan-Slavism, it, by no means, solved the question of the area. The Slavs in the Balkans were still mostly under non-Slavic rule, split between the rule of Austria-Hungary and the ailing Ottoman Empire. The Slavic states of the Balkans had learned that banding together as Slavs benefited them less than playing to the desires of a neighboring great power. That damaged the unity of the Balkan Slavs and encouraged competition between the fledgling Slav states.[25]
The underlying tensions of the region would continue to simmer for thirty years until they again exploded in the
-
Allegorical depiction of Bulgarian autonomy after the Treaty of Berlin.
Lithograph by Nikolai Pavlovich -
Greek Delegation in the Berlin Congress
Internal opposition to Andrássy's objectives
Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister
On 28 September 1878 the Finance Minister, Koloman von Zell, threatened to resign if the army, behind which stood the Archduke Albert, were allowed to advance to Salonika. In the session of the Hungarian Parliament of 5 November 1878 the Opposition proposed that the Foreign Minister should be impeached for violating the constitution by his policy during the Near East Crisis and by the occupation of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The motion was lost by 179 to 95. By the Opposition rank and file the gravest accusations were raised against Andrassy.[29]
Delegates
- Benjamin Disraeli Earl of Beaconsfield (Prime Minister)
- Marquess of Salisbury (Foreign Secretary)
- Baron Ampthill (Ambassador to Germany)
- Prince Gorchakov (Foreign Minister)
- Count Shuvalov (Ambassador to Great Britain) [30]
- Baron d'Oubril (Ambassador to Germany)
- Otto von Bismarck (Chancellor) [31][32]
- Prince Hohenlohe (Ambassador to France)
- Bernhard Ernst von Bülow (State Secretary for Foreign Affairs)
- Count Andrássy (Foreign Minister)
- Count Károlyi (Ambassador to Germany)
- Baron Heinrich Karl von Haymerle (Ambassador to Italy)
- Monsieur Waddington (Foreign Minister) [33]
- Comte de Saint-Vallier
- Monsieur Desprey
- Count Corti(Foreign Minister)
- Count De Launay
- Karatheodori Pasha
- Sadullah Pasha
- Mehmed Ali Pasha
- Catholicos Mkrtich Khrimian (representing Armenian population)
- Ion C. Brătianu
- Mihail Kogălniceanu
- Theodoros Deligiannis
- Božo Petrović
- Stanko Radonjić
- Abdyl Frasheri
- Jani Vreto
See also
- International relations of the Great Powers (1814–1919)
Notes
- ISBN 978-1-136-63088-0.
- ^ [https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/berlin-congress-of. Congress of Berlin
- ^ "Vincent Ferraro. The Austrian Occupation of Novibazar, 1878–1909 (based on Anderson, Frank Maloy and Amos Shartle Hershey, Handbook for the Diplomatic History of Europe, Asia, and Africa 1870–1914. National Board for Historical Service. Government Printing Office, Washington, 1918". Archived from the original on 19 January 2012. Retrieved 13 July 2011.
- ^ Jerome L. Blum, et al. The European World: A History (1970) p. 841
- ISBN 978-0-8203-3614-5.
- ^ Ragsdale, Hugh; Ponomarev, V. N. (1993). Imperial Russian Foreign Policy. Woodrow Wilson Center Press. p. 228.
- ^ Glenny 2000, pp. 120–127.
- ISBN 0-19-881270-1.
- ^ a b Glenny 2000, pp. 135–137.
- ISBN 978-1-136-24317-2.
- ^ David MacKenzie (1967). The Serbs and Russian Pan-Slavism, 1875–1878. Cornell University Press. p. 7.
- ^ Dimitrije Djordjevic, "The Berlin Congress of 1878 and the Origins Of World War I." Serbian Studies (1998) 12 #1 pp 1–10.
- ^ Ragsdale, Hugh, and V. N. Ponomarev. Imperial Russian Foreign Policy. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 1993, pp. 239–40.
- ^ Glenny 2000, pp. 135–138.
- ^ Albertini 1952, p. 20.
- ^ a b c Erich Eyck, Bismarck and the German Empire (New York: W.W. Norton, 1964), pp. 245–46.
- ^ Glenny 2000, pp. 138–140.
- ISBN 0-671-51099-1.
- ^ Oakes, Augustus; Mowat, R. B. (1918). The Great European Treaties of the Nineteenth Century. Clarendon Press. pp. 332–60.
- ^ Ragsdale, Hugh; Ponomarev, V. N. (1993). Imperial Russian Foreign Policy. Woodrow Wilson Center Press. pp. 244–46.
- ^ a b Albertini 1952, p. 32.
- S2CID 143664377.
- ^ Walker, Christopher J. (1980). Armenia: The Survival of A Nation. London: Croom Helm. p. 112.
- ISBN 0-19-881270-1.
- ^ Glenny 2000, pp. 133–134.
- ^ Glenny 2000, p. 151.
- ISBN 978-1-351-01869-2.
- ^ Albertini 1952, p. 19.
- ^ a b Albertini 1952, p. 33.
- S2CID 144951273.
- .
- JSTOR j.ctt7zvf42.
- .
- ^ MacKenzie, David (2004). "Jovan Ristic at the Berlin Congress 1878". Serbian Studies. 18 (2): 321–339.
References and further reading
- Albertini, Luigi (1952). The Origins of the War of 1914: European relations from the Congress of Berlin to the eve of the Sarajevo murder. Oxford University Press.
- Djordjevic, Dimitrije. "The Berlin Congress of 1878 and the Origins of World War I". Serbian Studies (1998) 12 #1 pp 1–10.
- Fabry, Mikulas (24–27 March 2002). The Idea of National Self-Determination and the Recognition of New States at the Congress of Berlin (1878). ISA Annual Convention. New Orleans. Archived from the original on 21 June 2008.
- ISBN 978-1-86207-073-8.
- Langer, William L. (1950). "5–6". European Alliances and Alignments 1871–1890.
- Medlicott, William Norton. Congress of Berlin and After (1963)
- JSTOR 4202362.
- Millman, Richard. Britain and the Eastern Question, 1875–78 (1979)
- Phillips, Walter Alison (1911). . In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 3 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 790–791.
- Seton-Watson, R.W. Disraeli, Gladstone, and the Eastern question: a study in diplomacy and party politics (1935) pp 431–89. online
- Sumner, B. H. (1937). Russia and the Balkans 1870-1880.
- Taylor, A. J. P. (1954). The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848–1918. Oxford University Press,Mumbai. pp. 228–54.
- Waller, Bruce (1974). Bismarck at the crossroads: the reorientation of German foreign policy after the Congress of Berlin, 1878–1880.
External links
- Media related to Congress of Berlin at Wikimedia Commons
- Full text of the Treaty of Berlin in The History of the Eastern Question.