THE SOUTH SLAV QUESTION PART I: THE DOUBLE EAGLE ARRIVES IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA “We´re on our own ground here, and anyone else who comes is a stranger and won´t be able to hold out for long. Many people have come here intending to stay, but so far we´ve seen the back of all of them. ” Hamid Bey, in: Ivo Andrić, “Bosnian Chronicle” The Congress of Berlin And AustriA’s WAy to SArAjevo “The Congress for the peaceful settlement of the Eastern turmoil has begun today in a solemn manner; it is the third major Congress in this century, which met today in Berlin, and as the Congress of Vienna of 1815, the one of Paris of 1856, the Congress of 1878 will as well significantly reshape the map of our part of the world.”i Berlin 1878. The leading statesmen of European Great Powers and the Ottoman Empire hold a conference in purpose to reorganize the Balkans after the Russo-Turkish War. The congress chaired by the German chancellor Otto von Bismarck aims to revise the Treaty of San Stefano to satisfy the interests of Great Britain and the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. As a result of the four-week convention the states of Serbia, Montenegro and Romania gain independence, while Bulgaria is established as an independent principality inside the Ottoman Empire, though without the territories of Macedonia and Thrace, which remain under Ottoman rule. Moreover, Great Britain takes over Cyprus, whereas the Austro-Hungarian Empire obtains the right to occupy the territories of Bosnia and Herzegovina. With the signing of the final agreement the so called Eastern Question seems to be solved, at least for those, who could enforce their interests on the Balkans, such as Austria-Hungary, while the public opinion hereof doesn´t share any reason for an optimistic attitude. One of the leading daily newspapers of the Habsburg-Monarchy wrote on 14 July 1878: “Unfortunately, it would be a foolish hope to consider the Treaty of Berlin as the gate, through which Europe enters the valley of eternal peace. The whole work of the Congress is a piecemeal, calculated only for the immediate future, without duration and stability.”ii The outcomes of the Congress not only significantly changed the geopolitical situation on the Balkan Peninsula, but thus once again worsened the relationship between the Austria-Hungary and the Russian Empire since the Crimean War and Austrian´s politics of neutrality. Followed by the Conference the Austro-Hungarian and German Empire contracted a defensive alliance in 1879 obligating the two powers to support each other in case of an attack by the Russian Empire and furthermore neutrality in case of an engagement with any other power. The alliance was joined by Italy in 1882. In 1892 the Russian Empire formed an alliance with France, which was to be remained in force as long as the Triple Alliance between Austria-Hungary, Germany and Italy was in force. In addition, France signed a series of agreements with the United Kingdom in 1904. This alliance policy is one stone of the compleX mosaic that led towards the outbreak of the First World War. The territorial integration of Bosnia-Herzegovina into the Monarchy takes place in two steps. Two weeks after the Treaty of Berlin, the Austrian-Hungarian Empire starts with the first step: the occupation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Sanjak of Novi Pazar with an imperial army of 72 000 soldiers. Contrary to eXpectation, they faced fierce resistance especially in the Muslim population. After a three week campaign the imperial troops occupied Sarajevo, whereas it took further three months and an expanded force of 268 000 soldiers to bear down the rising in the rest of the country. The occupation of predominantly Catholic Austria-Hungary caused a mass eXodus among the Muslim population, for instance to avoid conscription. Referring to official reports of Austria-Hungary some 32 625 Muslims fled to Istanbul between 1883 and 1905 with 4 042 returning, whereas an estimated number of 24 000 bolted in the period of 1907 and 1918. The British historian Noel Malcolm adds that these numbers just indicate the migration after 1883 (five years after the occupation), when Austro-Hungarian officials startled by the immense number, so that John Lampe suggests a number of 200000 Muslims fleeing during the time of occupation.iii Even in the Monarchy the act of occupation was not without controversy. Especially the Hungarian politicians feared that an increase in Slavic population could tip the demographic balance of the Monarchy with political consequences for the Hungarians. What is more, the mandate of the Congress of Berlin imposed a “civilizing mission” on Austria- Hungary, which meant a great financial burden. Therefore the occupation had primarily strategic reasons. Already in 1856 General Radetzky presented the view to protect the desirable coastline of Dalmatia by taking possession of Bosnia and Herzegovina, especially after the war with France the loss of territory was supposed to be compensated with an eXpansion in the south.iv In addition, it was hoped that the expansion of power in the Balkans could minimize Russian influence and could enable a better control of the smaller neighboring countries, as for instance the aggressive territorial nationalism and Pan-Slavism of Serbia posed a direct threat to the Monarchy. An important question was as well how to benefit economically from the new territories. The Viennese newspaper “Neue Freie Presse” examined in an article from 13 July 1878 the qualities of the inhabitants, which represent “the value of a country”: “Moreover, the population of Bosnia as well as of Herzegovina is of a strong, beautiful race; in particular the Herzegovinians resembles the Dalmatian, a notoriously efficient human race in all its habitus. The only question is whether it will succeed easily to take advantage for Austria of the, in the national character slumbering efficiency, or if we rather must be concerned that pretty much all of the energy and character down there, will be used against the new Lord, against us.”v The occupation enabled indeed the development of a new market. Therefore the modernization of infrastructure was the most important prerequisite for the cultural and economic development, especially the construction of the railroad played an important role, particularly regarding the military importance of it. To put it in a nutshell: “civilization means transport”. vi Within the first decade, the Habsburg-Monarchy financed thousand miles of new roads and railway tracks, which led to a tremendous growth in commercial and industrial sectors. That is to say that a number of factories were constructed to process the area’s resources, such as the very productive steel mills of Zenica, which were built in 1892 and still exist today.vii In 1908 the second step of the integration of Bosnia into the Monarchy took place: the act of annexation. After the huge investments in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the fact that for instance private investors hesitated in investing in the new territories as long as the international status of Bosnia was unclear, the official anneXation by the Habsburg-Monarchy was indeed a logical and predictable step. Nevertheless, the act of anneXation was followed by protestation from all the Great Powers and in particular from Montenegro and Serbia. Russia felt humiliated by the strategy of Austria-Hungary´s foreign minister Count Aehrenthal, who without an arrangement with the Russian Empire went ahead with the anneXation, while Serbia´s dream of a Greater Serbia receded into the distance, so that Serbia´s prime minster Nikola Pašić even demanded a declaration of war against the Monarchy.viii The Bosnian Crisis represents another small step towards the First World War, since it once again impaired the relationship with Belgrade and St. Petersburg and besides changed the political and ethnic conditions within the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. The AdministrAtion in BosniA And the future structure of the Monarchy After the occupation and later on the annexation, Bosnia and Herzegovina became neither part of Austria (“Cisleithania”) nor of Hungary (“Transleithania”), but “imperial land” (“Reichsland”) and therefore administrated by the Joint Ministry of Finance and the subordinated provincial government “Landesregierung”. One of the most important and challenging task since the very beginning of the administration had been to somehow develop a strategy to stabilize the political and social situation. So the question was, how to proceed to obtain a semblance of ethnic cohesion and hence stability. The most formative policy hereof was made under the authority of Béni Kállay, who held the office of Minister of Finance for a period of 21 years (1882-1903). His approach was to isolate the Bosnian people from the strong nationalist influence of Serbia and Croatia through banning all kind of national organizations and cultural institutions, while supporting the development of a Bosniak identity (“bošnjaštvo”). This concept aimed to create a unified Bosnian identity beyond religious creed. With his concept Kállay relied first of all on the Muslim population, as this certain group had the most prominent position in the Bosnian society due to their large land ownership. Aside from that, the Austrian-Hungarian administration in Bosnia underlay as well the principle of dualism and therefore had to consider the interests of both halves of the Empire. As a consequence the administration couldn´t actively support neither the Croats nor the Serbs, but the Muslim population. This concept couldn´t gain a broad support in the Bosnian society and eventually failed due to various reasons, such as the fact that especially the Serb nationalist ideology was already too advanced to effectively suppress it. Kállay´s administration has also been criticized for a lack of understanding of ethnic dynamics particularly in the rural sector.ix Although foreign minister Count Andrássy eXplained during the Congress of Berlin, that an important social problem of the Bosnian society was the feudal agrarian systemX, the Austrian-Hungarian administration decided not to remove it.