Fading Giants

European history presents many transformative epochs, and the transition from the 19th to the 20th century is among the most compelling. Empires that had survived for centuries found themselves subject to tremendous change and immediate decline. Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire are two examples facing their final days during World War I.

From Grandeur to Uncertainty

Both the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires symbolized the grandiosity of age-old European dominance. They combined vast swathes of land and dynasties ruling for centuries. These entities were melting pots of numerous cultures, languages, and religions. They weren't just political entities but vibrant tapestries of human civilization. But as the world around them evolved, both empires found their traditional foundations shaken. Neither religion (Islam) nor cleverly arranged marriages (Tu felix Austria nube) could glue together what was meant to fall apart.

Marriages with geostrategic implications: Tu felix Austria nube

The reasons for the decline are manifold and embedded in global developments and domestic processes. It is a curiosity that the beginning of the decline of the Ottoman Empire ("the sick man of Europe") can be dated even before it reached its political peak and maximal territorial expansion: the discovery of the Americas (1492) pulled away trade from the Mediterranean and established the North Atlantic as the major global trading route. This was only 50 years after the final siège and fall of Constantinople (1453). Austria always was an anachronism, with territories being loosely coupled in today's Spain, Belgium, and down the Danube. It was more the art of diplomacy than the art of warcraft that made the Austrian Empire last so long. A combination of systemic pressures of the international system and domestic weaknesses finally brought the two empires down. What unites the two Empires is their inability to reform.

The Looming Clouds of Ethnicity and Nationalism

Empires do usually not care about ethnicity. Rome kept citizenship to a narrow city, and the British ruled an empire where the sun never set. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was a blend of Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Slovaks, Romanians, Croats, Slovenians, and others. Simultaneously, the Ottoman Empire was a mosaic of Turks, Arabs, Greeks, and a myriad of other ethnic groups in the Balkans: Serbs, Bulgarians, Albanians, to mention but a few. This diversity might have been an emblem of strength in earlier eras, but by the 19th century, it became a source of friction. The ideals of the Enlightenment, the romanticization of nationalism, and the desire for self-determination began to strain the ties that bound these multi-ethnic empires. The nation-building processes became overwhelmingly strong, and during the age of industrialization, communication improved. Hungarians, Serbs, and many more discovered their language as the core of their local culture and formed in-groups distinct from the ruling class. Separatism grew faster than the ancient regime was able to adjust. In the end, the enemy was not only abroad but also attacked from within.

Facing the Rising Tides of External Challenges

Outside their territories, the situation was equally tumultuous. The ambitions of emerging and resurgent powers like Russia, penetrating into territories the Ottomans had to abandon and the Austrians claimed for themselves, were existential. If there is a power vacuum, you don't have to wait long until a neighboring power penetrates it. And anyway, the Russian strive towards the Straits (Bosphorus, Dardanelles) is legion. For Russian foreign policy, Istanbul and Vienna were strategic targets. In 1848, Russia came to Austria's help to oppress the revolution militarily. Already then, the Austrian Empire showed signs of weakness. In 1866, Austria lost a war to Prussia. Consequently, it had to agree to a fait accompli with the Hungarians, federalizing the monarchy (1867). The Dual Monarchy was born – but the newborn construct was rotten from the inside.

The economic and geostrategic weakness drove Austria to glue its existence to German protection. Confronting Britain and France against this background was inevitable. The Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria, and Italy) faced the Entente Cordiale (Great Britain, France and Russia). It was a confrontation of progress (Britain, France) against restauration (Germany, Austria). Neither Russia nor Italy fitted their alliances beyond pure geostrategic necessity. Going through a nation-building process, Italy was bound to confront anti-nationalist Austria over ideals and territory. Unsurprisingly, Rome did not fulfill its Treaty obligations when World War I broke out. In 1915, Italy declared war on Austria-Hungary.

The Ottoman Empire sided with Germany and Austria, although Austria had just digested Bosnia, capitalizing on the decline of the Sublime Porte. Istanbul had already given up on the Balkans, trying to consolidate its rule over the Arab Peninsula and in areas labeled under "Panturkism," where it clashed with French and British colonial interests. Germany used growing tension and provided military assistance to the Ottomans, including the mission of General Otto Liman von Sanders, who was tasked with modernizing the Ottoman army. Economically, dependency on Germany grew. The Berlin-Baghdad railway was only one project in which Germany invested high stakes. Siding with Berlin was logical but maybe not necessary. It is doubtful that Germany had the resources and means to coerce the Ottoman Empire into a military alliance given the two-front war, the deadlock on the Western front, and a threatening military over-stretch. In the interwar period, Atatürk knew it better and kept modern Turkey out of the hot phase of the war.

Varied Responses to Shared Difficulties

However, for all their shared tribulations, the responses of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire were distinct. The Ottoman decline had been long in the making, leading to many desperate reform measures. The Tanzimat reforms, for instance, aimed to modernize the Empire's administrative and legal systems and the military by mimicking Western armies, yet results were inconsistent. They proposed "Ottomanism" when nationalism was at its peak. Austria-Hungary, a younger political entity, was thrust into its challenges with less historical baggage but equally dire consequences. Appeasing the Hungarians and not granting the Slavic nations and the Romanians their share by fully federalizing the monarchy was counterproductive but politically necessary – a classical catch-22. It is the irony of history that Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the throne, was a big proponent of a true federation. The last chance to reform the state in this direction faded away with the assassination of Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo.

A Legacy Etched in Time

The interwar era, marked by the dissolution of Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire in the Treaties of Saint-Germain (1919, Austria), Trianon (1920, Hungary), and Sèvres (1920, Turkey), gave birth to modern nation-states in the Balkans and Eastern Europe but just passed on the hegemonic rule to the victors of the war in the area between Lebanon and Egypt. This period's legacies – from redrawn borders to longstanding ethnic conflicts – still echo in today's geopolitics. Minority issues and geopolitical struggles are still manifest in the Balkans and the Middle East. They are the cause of many international conflicts we face. Ironically, Austria and Turkey today are much more stable than their environment.