You are visiting nbulgaria web site        [Next Page]

A web page about Balkans, Balkans States developments, Europe, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, Serbia, Turkey, Trade, Economy, Cooperation, Development, Society, History, Culture by Neytcho Iltchev

The Balkans States Developments up to the Crisis of 1908

  Bulgaria

The Congress of Berlin had created an autonomous Bulgarian principality of two million inhabitants, subject to the Ottoman Empire. Eastern Rumelia, with its 800,000 people, was made into an Ottoman province headed by a Christian governor at Plovdiv (Philipponpolis) chosen by common consent of the Great Powers and the sultan.

In conformance with the resolutions of Berlin, the Russians were responsible for setting up a government in the Bulgarian principality. A Constituent Assembly was elected and met at Tarnovo on February 22, 1879. Despite opposition from the conservatives supported by Russian authorities, the liberal majority in the assembly voted to adopt a constitution that granted power to a National Assembly elected by universal suffrage. The office of chief of state was unanimously entrusted to Prince Alexander of Battenberg, a nephew by marriage of the Tsar and an officer in the Prussian army. On July 31, 1879, the prince moved to Sofia, which was proclaimed the capital city. Prince Alexander knew that he had the support of Russia behind him when he began to set up a reign of personal power in Bulgaria. In April, 1881, he suspended the constitution. The Russians felt that through Prince Alexander, who was loyal to them, they could make the young Bulgaria a vassal principality. They were in for a disappointment because the prince wanted to retain his new authority and keep his country independent. In 1884, the Russian Tsar and his nephew broke off relations and the Russian advisors were sent home. In order to gain the popularity of the Bulgarian people - who disliked his authoritarian regime - Prince Alexander appealed to national pride by promoting Bulgarian unity. The National Assembly and the Romanian population were pleased. On September 18, 1885, led by the writer Zachary Stojanov, Rumelians who wanted to unite with Bulgaria seized power at Plovdiv. Two days later, Prince Alexander triumphantly entered the capital of Romania.

After five centuries of Ottoman domination, the Bulgarian people were reunited within an independent state of 3,500,000 inhabitants. Unified Bulgaria remained fragile, however; Turkey refused to recognize the forceful takeover, and Serbia, faced with the disquieting prospect of a powerful state at its borders, took the offensive and attacked. The Serbian army was easily beaten at Slivnitza on November 5, 1885, and only the mediation of Austria saved Serbia from an even greater catastrophe. An international conference held at Constantinople recognized the de facto union of the two Bulgarian principalities. This personal triumph of Prince Alexander, the "hero of Slivnitza, " provoked the wrath of the Russian Tsar. A regiment led by officers sympathetic to Russia invaded the royal palace and forced Alexander to abdicate on August 9, 1886. The Bulgarian people fought back, and the president of the National Assembly, Stefan Stambolov, called back the sovereign to whom the Bulgarians owed their unification. Prince Alexander then returned to his capital, while the Russian government continued to demand his resignation.

Stambolov, who held the reins of power and had popular support, became the spokesman for Bulgarian nationalism confronting this Russian interference. Pro-Russian elements were weeded out of the army, and elections held in late 1886 resulted in a wide majority for the anti-Russian nationalists. Stambolov then began his search for a prince to reign over Bulgaria, for in late-19^th century Europe it was inconceivable for an independent state to become a republic. After long negotiations with the Great Powers, an overwhelming majority in the Bulgarian assembly called Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg to the throne on July 7, 1887. Until then, the new prince had served as an officer in the Austro-Hungarian army. He came from a family that had given Belgium its first king, Leopold I, and had given England a husband for Queen Victoria, Prince Albert. His maternal grandfather was none other than King Louis-Philippe. Thus, the coronation of Prince Ferdinand was generally considered a victory for Austria-Hungary and Germany, and a second setback for Russia in Bulgaria. The Russian government refused to recognize the new prince for a long time. Russia came out of the affair embittered; it had assisted in the emancipation of Bulgaria in the hope of acquiring a subordinate state, but twice successively Bulgarians and their chosen princes had refused to substitute the Russian yoke for Ottoman domination.

During the first years of Ferdinand's reign, Stambolov was the power behind the throne. He resigned in May 1894, and in July of 1 895 was assassinated. From that time on, Prince Ferdinand himself governed with the support of a coalition of conservatives and liberal Stambolists. As the century drew to a close, new political groups began to form alongside the traditional parties. The Social-Democratic party, champion of the budding working class, was founded secretly in 1891 by Dimitri Blagoev (1856-1924). It was later strengthened by Georgi Dimitrov (1882-1949) with the creation of the first Socialist Union in 1904, and by the Agrarian Union in 1899, which promoted agrarian reform and the abolishing of peasant debts. The Bulgarian working class was small in number, and the effects of its Social-Democratic party were correspondingly weak. Under the leadership of Alexander Stambolijski (1879-1923), the Agrarian Union made rapid progress among the peasants and managed to obtain 29 percent of the vote in the 1911 elections.

Despite all the political activity, Bulgaria was still theoretically under Ottoman rule. Autonomy was not independence, regardless of the similarities. This equivocal situation was settled on September 22, 1908. Taking advantage of the Ottoman Empire's internal difficulties and of the international crisis provoked by the Austro-Hungarian annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Prince Ferdinand declared the kingdom of Bulgaria independent and proclaimed himself Tsar of the Bulgarians, a title once used by his medieval forbearers.

At that moment in history, the Great Powers were divided into two antagonistic factions, the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy, and the Triple Entente of France, Britain and Russia. Clearly, there was some danger in reproducing these divisions on a small scale in the Balkans, even more so since there were numerous quarrelsome elements among the Balkan people, and the slightest dispute could generate a conflict.

Romania

The coronation of Prince Charles of Hohenzollern in 1866 marked the beginning of independent Romania. A constituent assembly elected by landholders and the bourgeoisie adopted a constitution in 1866, which made Romania a constitutional monarchy with a bicameral legislature. The senate had 120 members elected by the wealthier citizens, while members of the chamber of deputies were elected by quasi-universal suffrage. Until World War I, Romanian politics were dominated by the Boyars and the large landowners, and by the Liberal party of John Bratianu, which defended the interests of the bourgeoisie.

Matters of foreign policy played a major role throughout this period. The Romanian parliament took advantage of the Russo-Turkish war to declare total independence on May 21, 1877, which was ratified by the Treaty of San Stefano and the Congress of Berlin. The Romanian army also fought alongside the Russians in the war for Bulgarian liberation. Shortly thereafter, in 1881, Prince Charles took the title of King of Romania. His long reign (1881-1914) coincided with Romania's entry into international politics. With family ties to the Hohenzollerns of Germany, King Charles had a natural preference for the central empires. In 1883, on the advice of most of his ministers, he made a secret agreement with Austria-Hungary and remained faithful to this alliance despite public opinion, which tended towards France.

Throughout this period, most of the politically aware and the population as a whole demonstrated a kind of uncompromising nationalism which surfaced in two forms. The first, irredentism, represented a desire to gather all Romanians together within a single state. Territories they considered irredentist, or belonging to them because they contained a large proportion of Romanian inhabitants, were Bessarabia, ceded to the Russians in 1878, and Transylvania. Transylvania had been Hungarian since the time when the ancestors of the Romanians were still in Albania, but the Romanians had been moving there gradually since the 13^th century, eventually making up half of the population. Nationalist elements in Bucharest financed the activities of the National Romanian party in Transylvania, and offered scholarships to Romanians on the outside who wanted to come and study in Bucharest. The Cultural League, founded in 1890, strengthened the links between Romanian intellectual circles in Romania and Transylvania.

The second type of Romanian nationalism took shape as anti-Semitism. This anti-Semitism was facilitated by legislation; as late as 1888, the Court of Appeals still denied Romanian nationality to Jews, even those born in Romania. This was contrary to the resolutions of the Congress of Berlin that had given equal rights to all the inhabitants of the newly independent countries. The only way for Jews to escape subjugation was to request naturalization, but between 1880 and 1900 only 200 naturalizations were granted. Moreover, there were hundreds of pogroms that were met with complicity by the authorities. Parisian academics were quick to lash out against Austria-Hungary during the trial of the petitioners in 1894, when several Transylvanian Romanians were condemned to prison and freed the following year; but these same academics remained strangely silent on the matter of the daily persecution of Jewish victims in Romania, and were willing to sacrifice the 100,000 Transylvanian Jews to Romanian irredentism. Socially, Romania was particularly traditional. Most of the people were poor peasants. In spite of the poorly managed agrarian reform of 1864, the peasants' condition deteriorated because available plots of land became inadequate to meet the rapidly increasing population. Demands on the land grew and were joined by heavy taxation, made even heavier by a corrupt administration. Two major peasant revolts broke out, one in March, 1888, and a more serious one in February-March, 1907. The latter uprising was brutally suppressed by the army under General Avarescu. In the Giurgiu region, the army resorted to artillery to subdue unruly villages. In the closing years of the 19^th century, the birth of industry built on extraction of resources (oil from Ploesti, for example), and on processing of agricultural products, led to the formation of the Social Democratic Workers' party of Romania in 1893. This party sought to improve the harsh living conditions of the workers and to obtain universal suffrage. The Russian revolution of 1905 and the Romanian uprising of 1907 reinforced the socialist movement, which reorganized in 1910 to become the Marxist-inspired Social Democratic party.

Serbia and Montenegro

The Congress of Berlin had recognized Serbia's independence, but the country was still small and archaically organized, with a population of a little over two million inhabitants. (Belgrade, the capital and the only major city, had less than 30,000 inhabitants.) With no access to the sea and no railroad -- the Belgrade-Nis line was only completed in 1881 -- Serbia consisted of peasants with small- and medium-sized holdings devoted principally to raising grains, trees, shrubs and pigs. The few existing industries specialized in processing agricultural products.

A long tradition of struggle against the Turkish occupying forces had hardened the Serbian peasants, who used their primitive tools as weapons with ardour. Even such arms were precious while the liberation of the Serb populations was still not complete. Some Serbs were still subjects of the Ottoman Empire while others were subjects of Austria-Hungary, and Serbia had not forgotten them. In addition to the Turks, the Serbs saw another enemy in Bulgaria who, like Serbia and Greece, had eyes on a key passageway between the worlds of the Danube and the Aegean: Macedonia.

Since the early 19^th century, Serbia had been almost exclusively governed by princes from the Obrenovitch family. Michael (1859-1868), the son of Miloch, frequently visited Western Europe. He knew his country was backward and hoped to modernize it, but his attempts at changes within the regime provoked opposition. After his assassination on June 10, 1868, possibly by a supporter of the rival Karageorgevitch dynasty, power went to a 14-year-old, French-educated nephew, Milan Obrenovitch. During Milan IV's reign (1861-1889), Serbian institutions were liberalized. The constitution of 1869 made the country a constitutional state in which, at least in principle, major freedoms were guaranteed. The prince, who took the title of king in 1882, retained executive powers but shared legislative powers with a parliament, the Skupshtina, which was composed of 160 delegates, 120 of them elected by the people and the rest appointed by the prince. There were two political parties. The liberal party was actually conservative, favoring alliance with Austria, and had the support of the wealthy peasants who saw Austria-Hungary as the natural market for agricultural surpluses. The radical party spoke for the poor peasants and favored closer ties with Russia. In the September 1883 elections, the radicals won, but the king continued to rule with the conservatives. This led to a major peasant uprising, which was severely suppressed. Milan IV provoked further conflict with his subjects when he divorced his immensely popular Russian wife, Natalie, in 1888. Faced with a mounting wave of discontent, the king brought out a new, more liberal constitution in 1888, in which all of the delegates to the parliament were to be elected.

Suddenly, on March 6, 1889, the king abdicated in favour of his 12-year-old son, Alexander, for whom he appointed three regents. The regents adopted a policy of extreme dependence on Austria-Hungary, and bloody political confrontations multiplied. King Alexander momentarily resolved the crisis when, on April 13, 1892, he made it known he was personally taking over the reins of government. The radicals, who held a majority in parliament, expected a lot from the young king, but were quickly disappointed. In 1894, Alexander abolished the constitution of 1888 and reverted to the more authoritarian one of 1869. In fact, Alexander I ruled as an absolute monarch, while his wife Draga, who was divorced from a Serbian officer, engaged in a variety of intrigues. Over 80 percent of Serbian trade was with Austria-Hungary, and these growing ties added to the general discontent. During the night of June 10, 1903, a military plot, organized by the brother of Queen Draga's ex-husband, resulted in the assassination of the king, the queen, all members of the Obrenovitch family and several ministers and court dignitaries. Several days later, the parliament unanimously decided on Peter Karageorgevitch as king. Thus the descendant of George the Black, hero of the uprising of 1804, became King Peter I.

The new sovereign had spent most of his life abroad. Peter I had fought in the French army under General Bourbaki in 1870-l871, and had distinguished himself at the battle of Villersexel. His coronation marked a decisive change in Serbia's foreign policy. Under Peter I, pro-Russianism took hold, and the king entrusted Nikola Pashitch, the head of the radical party and staunch supporter of alliance with Russia, with considerable power. The king immediately reinstated constitutional rule, and the elections brought in a solid radical majority.

Peter I turned to France for financial credit that he used to buy military equipment from Creusot. Austria-Hungary countered in 1905 by closing its border to Serbian agricultural products, which were then sold to France. As a result of the coup d'etaf in Belgrade, Russia reversed its defeat at the Congress of Berlin.

In Montenegro, a tiny state of 3470 square miles and 236,000 inhabitants, independent since 1878, development was peaceful. Prince Nicholas (1860-1918) tried to modernize the country, reorganize the administration, and put an end to the patriarchal and tribal system that had characterized the country up until then. Economic progress led to the formation of an embryonic socialist party in 1903, under the direction of Jovan Hajdukovitch. Simultaneously, a liberal party favoring union with Serbia was created in educated circles, whose numbers had increased under the more open policy of the prince. Having proclaimed himself king of Montenegro, Nicholas gave his subjects a constitution in 1905, although he actually retained exclusive power and gave parliament only a minor role. Nevertheless, the majority of Montenegrins looked toward Belgrade for direction, rather than to their king.