The Disolutionment Of Austria-Hungary Essay, Research Paper

Throughout history the struggle for power and peace in Europe has been the

foundation upon which many great events have occurred. Europe’s past, then, could be

characterized as a ruthless struggle between nations, contending for dominance not only

in Europe but globally. Nowhere is this point exemplified more ideally than in the

conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia, which not only drew in other European

powers but ultimately the world. Although it was not recognized at the time, this event

was the beginning of the end for the Austrians. Vienna epitomised the breakdown of

liberalism and a movement to radicalism in Europe. This alarmed other major European

powers and, as a result, the nation of Austria-Hungary was completely dismantled

following World War I. In order to avoid any future internal conflicts, the major powers

of Europe envisioned the demise of the newly developed social, political and economic

ideas; in their place a balance of power which would contribute to a system of stability

within Europe. Instability within a pre-World War I Austria can easily be ascribed to four

major causes: the inadequacy of the Austrian government to deal with the German-Czech

dispute in the 1880’s and 1890’s, their failure to create a genuine parliament in the late

1890’s, the complete omission of the Austrian-Hungarian conflict of the 1900’s and, as a

final catalyst in creating Austrian disintegration, the Southern Slav obstacle which

inevitably engaged the nations of Europe in world wide conflict.

In early 1815, the Treaty of Vienna reshaped the face of Europe. Austria-

Hungary gained new lands in Italy, Germany and Poland; however, with these new lands

a cultural mosaic was created within the empire. Due to its very diverse populace,

Austria-Hungary’s people were understandably disjointed which rendered the assimilation

of new cultures difficult. Austria’s divisions were both intensified and augmented by not

only cultural variances but also by geographical obstacles. Galacia and Bukovina were

cut off from the Habsburgs lands by the Carpathian Mountains, Austria’s only major sea

ports – Triste and Fiume – were not naturally connected to the empire, and the richest

industrial province – Bohemia – had its only outlet on the Elbe river leading to the North

Sea. These geographical factors served only to enhance the rivalry among the populace

within Austria-Hungary. The dispute among the Germans and Czechs of Bohemia soon

exploded into a thoroughly developed national struggle (1).

With 2/5 of the people German and 3/5 Czech, the traditional dominance of the

Germans in Bohemia was threatened. Fortunately the major conflicts between these

peoples never made it to the battlefield; war between the two culturally different people

met head on over the issue of language and administration in schools. The Czechs

wanted equal rights for Czech students and the option of education in Czech (2). But the

Germans successfully maintained the staus quo, although with every passing decade it

became harder to dismiss the Czechs because of their impending resurgence in the area.

Eventually, the Germans could no longer disregard the powerful, liberal minded middle-

class of Bohemia and could not contain the unrestrained growth of the Czech population.

Historically, Prague was predominately German but by the beginning of the First World

War the German populace fell to a meagre 6% (3). As a result, the bitterness of the

Germans within Bohemia and Vienna began to poison the political aspirations of the

nation, making a parliamentary government impossible.

Because of this cultural conflict, the Austrian parliament became a battlefield for

power in the empire. Leading politicians hoped that by creating a parliament the country

could accommodate all the cultures in Austria-Hungary as well as creating a common

economic interest between her peoples; however, this institution failed to create and

achieve its economic goals. As the focus was shifted from the “ideology of

industrialization” to the diverse nationality of the country, the Austrian parliament

became increasingly ineffective. Historian Joseph Redlich referred to the parliament as

“a government without plans, without talent, without ideas” (4). The parliament from

1867 to 1914 was characterized by changing ministries and internal strife. This 47 year

period had 20 different prime ministers in Austria and 17 in Hungary, as compared to

only 5 chancellors in Germany during the same period (5). The executive branch of

government did not have to rely on a vote of confidence in the parliament, although if it

were obstructed by the legislature it could not function. This irregular form of

parliament combined with over 40 political parties made the situation confusing, forcing

most ministries to confront many major problems. The parliamentary government was

not compatible with Austria’s mixed nationality and the growth of nationalism. After the

collapse of the German Liberal Party in Austria, national conflict became a major

component in Austrian politics. 1897 exists as a political turning point in Austria’s

history; Badeni, the prime minister at the time, introduced a bill that would give the

Czech and German languages equal footing in government and schools which angered

the Germans and, eventually, forced his resignation (6). This was a humiliating defeat

for Austria’s parliament and Austria-Hungary’s emperor, Franz Joseph, who lost all

credibility and authority in the eyes of his people from the incompetence which he

displayed in rumnning the nation. Joseph Redlich looked back at this event, declaring

“from this moment the Habsburg relm was doomed” (7).

With political and economic problems rooting themselves deeply into the

Austrian social climate, people began to question both the feasibility of a duellist system

and the practicality of monarchial rule. Politics in Hungary were dominated by the

Magyar aristocracy and the key to the partnership between the Austrian Germans, as well

as the Hungarian Magyars, depended on their supremacy within Hungary. The Magyars

wanted to continue their Maygarization of Hungary without interference from Austria.

They were unwilling to accept reforms, set forth by the Treaty of Vienna, which would

result in the end to their dominance in the empire (8). Young Magyars believed they

could stand alone without Austria but, ironically, it was the financial success of Austria

that fostered Hungary’s national self-confidence. Hungary began to call for a separate

military, with the Magyars in control of it. Franz Joseph realized the importance of a

united army. For 36 years Franz Joseph had ignored Hungary’s non-Magyar population,

threatening both their national and class privileges. However, with the duellist

government in danger of collapse, he intended to introduce universal suffrage. This

presented itself as a direct threat to the Magyars in Hungary, they had slowly become a

minority and would lose considerable power if forced to share the reigns of power.

Because of this they soon withdrew their radical demands in order to protect their

national self interests. This was seen as a betrayal of the minorities in Hungary and

further alienated the government and its people. It was now seen that the dualist system

was no longer compatible with the Habsburg monarchy.

The final “nail in the coffin” for Austria-Hungary occurred in July 1914 when

Austria-Hungary, with the support of Germany, declared war on Serbia. Austria-Hungary

had politically alienated itself from its allies because of its short-sightedness in the

conquest of the Baltic peninsula and because of this Austria enjoyed little support in its

two southern provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina. With the Turks driven out of Serbia,

the new country was now able to persue national interests which included unifying all the

Serbian people under one nation. With 7,300,000 Serbian citizens living in the

monarchy, the unification of Serbia was in direct conflict with Austria-Hungary’s claim in

the Baltics (9). The Austrians could not ignore, nor keep down the fervour, of

nationalism and they wished for any unified Serbian state to be put under the jurisdiction

of the monarchy. If they relinquished control over their southern provinces of Bosnia-

Herzegovina they feared their relegation to a minor power in Europe. The hope of the

Austrians to continue control of Bosnia and Herzegovina was maintained by the large

support of the local Muslims who consisted of 30% of the total population (10). They

used this support as leverage in the area, but as the Yugoslavian historian Vladimir

Dedijer stated, “the inclusion of 1,200,000 Southern Slavs further upset the already

perilous balance of nationalities in the empire” (11).

The Austrian and Hungarian military administration were present, and although

this military occupation finally gave Bosnia-Herzegovina security and an end to rampant

corruption, it exemplified the division between the Austrian and Hungarians. Nowhere

was the disparity between the political objectives of these two nations more conspicuous

than in Bosnia-Herzegovina, where they were entirely unable to co-operate in the

governing of one state. The possibility of any unified nation of Slavs in the empire

would have meant an end to dualism and the disintegration of the German-Magyar

hegemony. This groups power and influence was so intricately woven into the fabric of

Austrian politics that Slavic self-government could be suspended simply becuase they

opposed the notion.

In the early twentieth century the Austrian political sector could best be

characterized as chaotic because of perpetual conflict between ethnic groups, and their

proliferation throughout Austria-Hungary, rendering both components of the dualistic

system ineffective. Neither the monarchy nor the parliament was able to save the

incoherent country. German and Magyar political views were so different that

metaphorically, it tore the country in half. They were unable to successfully combine

workforce, resources and capital together and because of this Austria was slow

industrialize as well as deal the mounting political defeats of the government. Language

and cultural barriers were left in place and separated Austria-Hungary down the centre.

Austria-Hungary’s German and Magyar population was unwilling to accept reforms that

would end their domination of the empire set forth in the Treaty of Vienna.. Change was

slow and politicians had difficulty in maneurvering through Austria’s complex and

irregular system of governing. Increasingly Austria-Hungary was forced to rely on her

only ally Germany due to the systematic alienation of other countries. Austria-Hungary

went to war 1914 to solidify its place in Europe as a major power, it also hoped that the

war would unite her people. Four years later the empire had been defeated and

collapsed. On the 27 of October the dynasty was liquidated, and Emperor Charles

abdicated thus after hundreds of years in Europe in one day the Habsburg monarchy

ceased to exist.