Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Discussions on all aspects of Austria-Hungary. Hosted by Glenn Jewison.
Futurist
Member
Posts: 2535
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 00:02
Location: SoCal

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Futurist » 05 Sep 2020 21:31

Sid Guttridge wrote:
05 Sep 2020 10:56
Hi Guys,

The fact remains that Italy had only one active enemy in WWI - Austria-Hungary.

By contrast, Austria-Hungary had a much larger foe in Russia, which absorbed the bulk of its military effort, and periodically several smaller foes, such as Serbia in 1914-15 and Romania in 1916-18.

The Italians only absorbed a minority of Austria-Hungary's military effort and yet it still managed to tie down the entire Italian military effort.

I would characterize Austria-Hungary as a marginal Great Power and Italy as a "wannabe" Great Power.

Cheers,

Sid.
I wonder who got more help--Austria-Hungary from the Germans or Italy from the Anglo-French?

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 7619
Joined: 12 Jun 2008 11:19

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Sid Guttridge » 06 Sep 2020 08:17

Hi futurist,

Definitely Austria-Hungary overall, but probably not on the Italian and Western Fronts Fronts.

Germany provided six divisions to the Italian Front for the Caporetto offensive in 1917, but the Austro-Hungarians had already supplied vital super heavy Skoda artillery to help the Germans over run Belgian forts obstructing the Schlieffen Plan in 1914 and sent four divsions to the Western Front in 1918. So in the Italian and Western Theatres assistance was more reciprocal.

By contrast, the French and British had to send 11 divisions between them to Italy after Caporetto in 1917, whereas the Italians only reciprocated with two divisions on the Western Front in 1918.

There are a couple of interesting PhD These on line about the Austro-Hungarians, (https://kb.osu.edu/handle/1811/87594#:~ ... the%20West.), and the Italians, (https://www.google.com/search?q=italian ... e&ie=UTF-8), on the Western Front in 1918.

Sid.

User avatar
Loïc
Member
Posts: 854
Joined: 14 Jun 2003 03:38
Location: Riom Auvergne & Bourbonnais France

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Loïc » 06 Sep 2020 12:45

the 11th November 1918 on the Italian Front

there were 75 000 British, 41 000 French and 5000 US vs 22 000 Germans (while at such date 124 000 Austro-Hugarians were on the western front helping the Germans)

France sent troops over the Alps but with reciprocity Italy had 55 000 men in the sister-nation and others theaters, as 144 000 Italians in the Balkans one of the 3 larger allied contingents with the French and Greek Armies

so if we enter in this kind of considerations the Italian reciprocity and "help" to the Allied war effort has also to be appreciated on the scales

Peter89
Member
Posts: 472
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Hungary

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Peter89 » 09 Sep 2020 08:25

Kelvin wrote:
04 Sep 2020 14:07
Any reason why Habsburg Army always suffered defeat by Russian Army in World War I, Russian army was always defeated by German but when facing Habsburg Army , Russian army always won. In 1914 , in Galicia with over 100,000 Habsburg POW, in 1915 captured fortress of Prsemysl with 117,000 Habsburg POW and Brusilov offensive with 400,000 Habsburg POW. Anyone have comment on that ? Thank
The Russians knew the KuK war plans (just as the Serbians and Italians).

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 2710
Joined: 06 Apr 2007 14:49

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Kelvin » 09 Sep 2020 10:44

Peter89 wrote:
09 Sep 2020 08:25
Kelvin wrote:
04 Sep 2020 14:07
Any reason why Habsburg Army always suffered defeat by Russian Army in World War I, Russian army was always defeated by German but when facing Habsburg Army , Russian army always won. In 1914 , in Galicia with over 100,000 Habsburg POW, in 1915 captured fortress of Prsemysl with 117,000 Habsburg POW and Brusilov offensive with 400,000 Habsburg POW. Anyone have comment on that ? Thank
The Russians knew the KuK war plans (just as the Serbians and Italians).
Hi, Peter, you overestimate the importance of Redl affair, Conrad von Hotzendorff must be held responsible for that. If he did know Austrian army 's information leaked into Russian military, he must find some way to adjust his warplan or mobilitzation plan. German improvisation is good like Tannenberg.

Regarding the Austrian collapse in Brusilov offensive, I think nothing to any Russian knowlegde on Austrian warplan.

Peter89
Member
Posts: 472
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Hungary

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Peter89 » 09 Sep 2020 11:27

Kelvin wrote:
09 Sep 2020 10:44
Peter89 wrote:
09 Sep 2020 08:25
Kelvin wrote:
04 Sep 2020 14:07
Any reason why Habsburg Army always suffered defeat by Russian Army in World War I, Russian army was always defeated by German but when facing Habsburg Army , Russian army always won. In 1914 , in Galicia with over 100,000 Habsburg POW, in 1915 captured fortress of Prsemysl with 117,000 Habsburg POW and Brusilov offensive with 400,000 Habsburg POW. Anyone have comment on that ? Thank
The Russians knew the KuK war plans (just as the Serbians and Italians).
Hi, Peter, you overestimate the importance of Redl affair, Conrad von Hotzendorff must be held responsible for that. If he did know Austrian army 's information leaked into Russian military, he must find some way to adjust his warplan or mobilitzation plan. German improvisation is good like Tannenberg.

Regarding the Austrian collapse in Brusilov offensive, I think nothing to any Russian knowlegde on Austrian warplan.
If we want to go into the details, first of all: the Habsburg Army didn't always lose against the Russian Army. In the Battle of Limanowa, they defeated the otherwise advancing Russians.

The war plans for the Central Powers in 1914 surmised a quick victory by the Germans over the French in the west, and it counted on the slow mobilization of the Russian forces in the East. The plan included some preemptive strikes on the Eastern front, but the armies of the Central powers should have been on the strategic defense. In any case, the Habsburg Army and the Eastern had to hold the line against the Russians and attack Serbia simultaneously. The Serbians correctly fashioned their strategy to pin down as much of the A-H troops as they coud, and the Russians were able to mobilize faster than expected. Also, the French forces did not collapse. The German promises to intervene in the East by September the latest were not kept.

So the A-H Empire, that was not ready for a long war in the first place, faced overwhelming odds against the Russians. By sticking to the original strategy and by holding the line for the Germans, the A-H armies lost most (about two thirds) of their (best trained and equipped) troops they sent aganinst the Russians in 1914/1915.

Then the Germans repaid this kindness by branding the A-H leadership incompetent and effectively took control over the armies of the A-H Empire when most of the troops and equipment was sacrificed to halt the Russian advance.

Anyway, the A-H troops were still part of most of the greatest victories of the Central powers.

By the time of the Brusilov offensive, there was hardly anyone from the original A-H army on the Eastern Front. So yes, the leaked war plans had a long-term effect on the A-H fighting capabilities.

Futurist
Member
Posts: 2535
Joined: 24 Dec 2015 00:02
Location: SoCal

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Futurist » 13 Sep 2020 04:23

Sid Guttridge wrote:
06 Sep 2020 08:17
Hi futurist,

Definitely Austria-Hungary overall, but probably not on the Italian and Western Fronts Fronts.

Germany provided six divisions to the Italian Front for the Caporetto offensive in 1917, but the Austro-Hungarians had already supplied vital super heavy Skoda artillery to help the Germans over run Belgian forts obstructing the Schlieffen Plan in 1914 and sent four divsions to the Western Front in 1918. So in the Italian and Western Theatres assistance was more reciprocal.

By contrast, the French and British had to send 11 divisions between them to Italy after Caporetto in 1917, whereas the Italians only reciprocated with two divisions on the Western Front in 1918.

There are a couple of interesting PhD These on line about the Austro-Hungarians, (https://kb.osu.edu/handle/1811/87594#:~ ... the%20West.), and the Italians, (https://www.google.com/search?q=italian ... e&ie=UTF-8), on the Western Front in 1918.

Sid.
Very interesting information; thank you, Sid! :)

Anyway, do you know of any other interesting PhDs--not necessarily about this topic?

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 2710
Joined: 06 Apr 2007 14:49

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Kelvin » 13 Sep 2020 12:59

Peter89 wrote:
09 Sep 2020 11:27
Kelvin wrote:
09 Sep 2020 10:44
Peter89 wrote:
09 Sep 2020 08:25
Kelvin wrote:
04 Sep 2020 14:07
Any reason why Habsburg Army always suffered defeat by Russian Army in World War I, Russian army was always defeated by German but when facing Habsburg Army , Russian army always won. In 1914 , in Galicia with over 100,000 Habsburg POW, in 1915 captured fortress of Prsemysl with 117,000 Habsburg POW and Brusilov offensive with 400,000 Habsburg POW. Anyone have comment on that ? Thank
The Russians knew the KuK war plans (just as the Serbians and Italians).
Hi, Peter, you overestimate the importance of Redl affair, Conrad von Hotzendorff must be held responsible for that. If he did know Austrian army 's information leaked into Russian military, he must find some way to adjust his warplan or mobilitzation plan. German improvisation is good like Tannenberg.

Regarding the Austrian collapse in Brusilov offensive, I think nothing to any Russian knowlegde on Austrian warplan.
If we want to go into the details, first of all: the Habsburg Army didn't always lose against the Russian Army. In the Battle of Limanowa, they defeated the otherwise advancing Russians.

The war plans for the Central Powers in 1914 surmised a quick victory by the Germans over the French in the west, and it counted on the slow mobilization of the Russian forces in the East. The plan included some preemptive strikes on the Eastern front, but the armies of the Central powers should have been on the strategic defense. In any case, the Habsburg Army and the Eastern had to hold the line against the Russians and attack Serbia simultaneously. The Serbians correctly fashioned their strategy to pin down as much of the A-H troops as they coud, and the Russians were able to mobilize faster than expected. Also, the French forces did not collapse. The German promises to intervene in the East by September the latest were not kept.

So the A-H Empire, that was not ready for a long war in the first place, faced overwhelming odds against the Russians. By sticking to the original strategy and by holding the line for the Germans, the A-H armies lost most (about two thirds) of their (best trained and equipped) troops they sent aganinst the Russians in 1914/1915.

Then the Germans repaid this kindness by branding the A-H leadership incompetent and effectively took control over the armies of the A-H Empire when most of the troops and equipment was sacrificed to halt the Russian advance.

Anyway, the A-H troops were still part of most of the greatest victories of the Central powers.

By the time of the Brusilov offensive, there was hardly anyone from the original A-H army on the Eastern Front. So yes, the leaked war plans had a long-term effect on the A-H fighting capabilities.
Hello, Russian needed to divide its army into two : two armies for invasion of East Prussia and four armies for invasion of Galicia. She needed to deal with two great powers. On the other side, Austrian army engaged 2/3 Russian military might and with small force for invasion of tiny Serbia and Montegreo. And Conrad von Hotzenzorff had a year to redraw warplan after Rehl affair. He had spent a lot of time in his desk to draft warplans : Plan Red for Italy, Plan Yellow for Serbia and plan brown for Russia and also planned a simultaneous attacks on Italy, Serbia and Montegreo. The change of warplan is not so difficult for him to do.A H Army was not so sacrificed for German, after all, the war is caused by AH and Serbia.

Peter89
Member
Posts: 472
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Hungary

Re: Austria-Hungary, a Great Power?

Post by Peter89 » 14 Sep 2020 09:53

Kelvin wrote:
13 Sep 2020 12:59

Hello, Russian needed to divide its army into two : two armies for invasion of East Prussia and four armies for invasion of Galicia. She needed to deal with two great powers. On the other side, Austrian army engaged 2/3 Russian military might and with small force for invasion of tiny Serbia and Montegreo. And Conrad von Hotzenzorff had a year to redraw warplan after Rehl affair. He had spent a lot of time in his desk to draft warplans : Plan Red for Italy, Plan Yellow for Serbia and plan brown for Russia and also planned a simultaneous attacks on Italy, Serbia and Montegreo. The change of warplan is not so difficult for him to do.A H Army was not so sacrificed for German, after all, the war is caused by AH and Serbia.
Hello Kelvin,

the A-H Empire initially mobilized 3 of its 6 armies for the Serbian campaign, the Second army was slowly redirected to the Russian front. That means the A-H Empire committed half or third of her armies against the Serbians.

The question was why to change the plans:
- the A-H Empire did not anticipate / want a prolonged, Europe-wide war
- they still thought that the Russians were not able to mobilize in time
- in any case, Hötzendorf (thought) he could still count on German help against Russia

So there was no real need to alter the plans from his point of view: a quick victory in Serbia and a slow Russian mobilization with a promise of an early German help meant that Austria will not be defeated in East, and it will be victorious in the South.

The war wasn't caused by A-H and Serbia - it served as a casus belli.

Return to “Austria-Hungary 1867–1918”