No Russian expansion south of the Caucasus

[Ricardolindo]

Let's say that in the late 18th century, Russia decides that expanding south of the Caucasus is not worth it. What would have happened to the Ottoman Empire, to Qajar Iran and to the Georgian Kingdoms? Keeping what's now Azerbaijan and Armenia would definitely benefit Iran. Azerbaijan has oil, Azeris are Shia and Armenia would be majority Muslim without Russian rule and the Armenian Genocide. Iran doesn't really benefit from Kartli-Kakheti, though, with its overwhelmingly Christian population.
Without the Russian conquest of Persian Armenia, an Armenian ethnostate would almost certainly never have formed. However, this also almost certainly butterflies away the Armenian Genocide.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Let's say that in the late 18th century, Russia decides that expanding south of the Caucasus is not worth it. What would have happened to the Ottoman Empire, to Qajar Iran and to the Georgian Kingdoms? Keeping what's now Azerbaijan and Armenia would definitely benefit Iran. Azerbaijan has oil, Azeris are Shia and Armenia would be majority Muslim without Russian rule and the Armenian Genocide. Iran doesn't really benefit from Kartli-Kakheti, though, with its overwhelmingly Christian population.
Without the Russian conquest of Persian Armenia, an Armenian ethnostate would almost certainly never have formed. However, this also almost certainly butterflies away the Armenian Genocide.

So, does anyone have any thoughts on this? Maybe @Jackson Lennock?

 

[Jackson Lennock]

Alexander III of Imereti swore an oath of allegiance to Tsar Alexis of Russia in 1651. Russian control wasn't super firm, but Western Georgia was already a vassal of Russia by the mid-17th century sort of.

Russia moved into the Caucasus as part of its campaigns against the Turks. They grabbed more land from the Persians because they wanted to better position themselves against the Turks. And the point of going after the Turks in the Caucasus was to put more pressure on the Turks via the opening of another front.

Have the Russians not recognize the Superior rights of the Ottomans in Western Georgia in the Treaty of Jassy. The Kingdom of Imereti had submitted itself to the East Georgian Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti by that point. If they can gobble up/re-vassalize the West Georgian Principalities (Guria, Mingrelia, and Abkhazia) than you've got a unified Georgia that can be a buffer between the Turks, the Ottomans, and the Iranians.


Why would Armenia end up muslim?

 

[Ricardolindo]

Alexander III of Imereti swore an oath of allegiance to Tsar Alexis of Russia in 1651. Russian control wasn't super firm, but Western Georgia was already a vassal of Russia by the mid-17th century sort of.

Russia soon ignored the Georgians and Imereti returned to being an Ottoman vassal. Russian interest only appeared again in the late 18th century with the Treaty of Georgievsk.

Why would Armenia end up muslim?

Modern Armenia was majority Muslim at the time of the Russian conquest. It only became majority Armenian again because many Muslims left for Iran in addition to some who had died during the war and Russia encouraged Armenians from Iran and the Ottoman Empire to settle there. Read this 1980 study, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/...rsian_armenia_annexation_bournoutian_1980.pdf. However, George Bournoutian said in 2015 that he had previously overestimated the Persian elite of the Erivan Khanate who almost entirely left immediately following the Russian conquest as being 10000 people and that it was by then known that it was no more than 1000. Thus, Armenians were 30-33% of the population, not 20%. Still, Armenians were a minority in Persian Armenia at the time of the Russian conquest.
Russia is the only reason that Armenia exists.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Russia moved into the Caucasus as part of its campaigns against the Turks. They grabbed more land from the Persians because they wanted to better position themselves against the Turks. And the point of going after the Turks in the Caucasus was to put more pressure on the Turks via the opening of another front.

What is your evidence that was the reason? Either way, after the conquest of the Northern Black Sea Coast, the wars against the Ottomans brought Russia no benefit.

Have the Russians not recognize the Superior rights of the Ottomans in Western Georgia in the Treaty of Jassy. The Kingdom of Imereti had submitted itself to the East Georgian Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti by that point. If they can gobble up/re-vassalize the West Georgian Principalities (Guria, Mingrelia, and Abkhazia) than you've got a unified Georgia that can be a buffer between the Turks, the Ottomans, and the Iranians.

I don't think the Georgians were able to unify.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Modern Armenia was majority Muslim at the time of the Russian conquest. It only became majority Armenian again because many Muslims left for Iran in addition to some who had died during the war and Russia encouraged Armenians from Iran and the Ottoman Empire to settle there. Read this 1980 study, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/...rsian_armenia_annexation_bournoutian_1980.pdf. However, George Bournoutian said in 2015 that he had previously overestimated the Persian elite of the Erivan Khanate who almost entirely left immediately following the Russian conquest as being 10000 people and that it was by then known that it was no more than 1000. Thus, Armenians were 30-33% of the population, not 20%. Still, Armenians were a minority in Persian Armenia at the time of the Russian conquest.
Russia is the only reason that Armenia exists.

This is interesting as a lot of people online ask how Armenia remained majority Christian and the answer is that it did not. By 1800, there was nothing distinguishing Armenians from other stateless West Asian Christian minorities.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Alexander III of Imereti swore an oath of allegiance to Tsar Alexis of Russia in 1651. Russian control wasn't super firm, but Western Georgia was already a vassal of Russia by the mid-17th century sort of.

Russia moved into the Caucasus as part of its campaigns against the Turks. They grabbed more land from the Persians because they wanted to better position themselves against the Turks. And the point of going after the Turks in the Caucasus was to put more pressure on the Turks via the opening of another front.

Have the Russians not recognize the Superior rights of the Ottomans in Western Georgia in the Treaty of Jassy. The Kingdom of Imereti had submitted itself to the East Georgian Kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti by that point. If they can gobble up/re-vassalize the West Georgian Principalities (Guria, Mingrelia, and Abkhazia) than you've got a unified Georgia that can be a buffer between the Turks, the Ottomans, and the Iranians.


Why would Armenia end up muslim?

With the new information that I provided you, do you have anything more to say?

 

[NotDavidSoslan]

Let's say that in the late 18th century, Russia decides that expanding south of the Caucasus is not worth it. What would have happened to the Ottoman Empire, to Qajar Iran and to the Georgian Kingdoms? Keeping what's now Azerbaijan and Armenia would definitely benefit Iran. Azerbaijan has oil, Azeris are Shia and Armenia would be majority Muslim without Russian rule and the Armenian Genocide. Iran doesn't really benefit from Kartli-Kakheti, though, with its overwhelmingly Christian population.
Without the Russian conquest of Persian Armenia, an Armenian ethnostate would almost certainly never have formed. However, this also almost certainly butterflies away the Armenian Genocide.

Iranian would annex Azerbaijan once modern concepts of sovereignty became a thing.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Iranian would annex Azerbaijan once modern concepts of sovereignty became a thing.

Azerbaijan didn't exist back then, it was several Khanates under Iranian suzerainty.

 

[NotDavidSoslan]

Azerbaijan didn't exist back then, it was several Khanates under Iranian suzerainty.

I should've said present-day Azerbaijan, my bad. It was only founded in 1918.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Russia soon ignored the Georgians and Imereti returned to being an Ottoman vassal. Russian interest only appeared again in the late 18th century with the Treaty of Georgievsk.

Modern Armenia was majority Muslim at the time of the Russian conquest. It only became majority Armenian again because many Muslims left for Iran in addition to some who had died during the war and Russia encouraged Armenians from Iran and the Ottoman Empire to settle there. Read this 1980 study, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/...rsian_armenia_annexation_bournoutian_1980.pdf. However, George Bournoutian said in 2015 that he had previously overestimated the Persian elite of the Erivan Khanate who almost entirely left immediately following the Russian conquest as being 10000 people and that it was by then known that it was no more than 1000. Thus, Armenians were 30-33% of the population, not 20%. Still, Armenians were a minority in Persian Armenia at the time of the Russian conquest.
Russia is the only reason that Armenia exists.

This is interesting as a lot of people online ask how Armenia remained majority Christian and the answer is that it did not. By 1800, there was nothing distinguishing Armenians from other stateless West Asian Christian minorities.

On the other hand, as I said, no Russian Armenia almost certainly butterflies away the Armenian Genocide. In addition, it could be argued that Armenians might have been better off as a minority in Turkey and Iran rather than having a small, landlocked and blockaded ethnostate.

 

[fluttersky]

On the other hand, as I said, no Russian Armenia almost certainly butterflies away the Armenian Genocide. In addition, it could be argued that Armenians might have been better off as a minority in Turkey and Iran rather than having a small, landlocked and blockaded ethnostate.

Sounds unlikely to me- the lack of Russian presence in Assyria didn't stop the Assyrian Genocide. I don't think Armenian nationalism would be killed off by the lack of Armenian majority areas either.

One interesting implication though may be that with the migration of Armenians from Western Armenia to Russian Armenia no longer occurring in this timeline, the Armenian population remains more well-distributed across historic Armenia- I could easily imagine an independent Armenian state emerging in Cilicia instead if there's more Western support there (cf French presence in Cilicia in otl WW1)

 

[Ricardolindo]

Sounds unlikely to me- the lack of Russian presence in Assyria didn't stop the Assyrian Genocide. I don't think Armenian nationalism would be killed off by the lack of Armenian majority areas either.

One interesting implication though may be that with the migration of Armenians from Western Armenia to Russian Armenia no longer occurring in this timeline, the Armenian population remains more well-distributed across historic Armenia- I could easily imagine an independent Armenian state emerging in Cilicia instead if there's more Western support there (cf French presence in Cilicia in otl WW1)

I think no Russian Armenia almost certainly butterflies away the Armenian Genocide as the Ottomans would not associate the Armenians with the Russians.
There weren't enough Armenians in Cilicia to form an independent state.
Also, no Russian Armenia almost certainly butterflies away World War I as a whole as Russia conquered Persian Armenia over 80 years before World War I.

 

[fluttersky]

I think no Russian Armenia almost certainly butterflies away the Armenian Genocide as the Ottomans would not associate the Armenians with the Russians.
There weren't enough Armenians in Cilicia to form an independent state.
Also, no Russian Armenia almost certainly butterflies away World War I as a whole as Russia conquered Persian Armenia over 80 years before World War I.

WW1 would not happen in a recognizably similar way, but the long term trends of Ottoman decline, a rise in nationalism among minorities in the Ottoman Empire (Greeks, Armenians, Bulgarians, Assyrians, etc), and an increase in hostility to the Christian minorities by the Ottoman leadership, are all things which I expect would still occur.

In OTL there was certainly Western discontent over Ottoman actions in the late 19th/early 20th century- for example the Belgian king offered to send a private army to invade Armenia following the Hamidian massacres of the 1890s- but there was also a desire not to upset the balance of power and an awareness that a weaker Armenia meant a stronger Russia. In the event of Russia not posing a threat in this region, I wonder if there might be more of a chance of the rest of the Great Powers attempting an outright partition of the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century.

 

[Ricardolindo]

WW1 would not happen in a recognizably similar way, but the long term trends of Ottoman decline, a rise in nationalism among minorities in the Ottoman Empire (Greeks, Armenians, Bulgarians, Assyrians, etc), and an increase in hostility to the Christian minorities by the Ottoman leadership, are all things which I expect would still occur.

In OTL there was certainly Western discontent over Ottoman actions in the late 19th/early 20th century- for example the Belgian king offered to send a private army to invade Armenia following the Hamidian massacres of the 1890s- but there was also a desire not to upset the balance of power and an awareness that a weaker Armenia meant a stronger Russia. In the event of Russia not posing a threat in this region, I wonder if there might be more of a chance of the rest of the Great Powers attempting an outright partition of the Ottoman Empire in the 19th century.

Abdul Hamid II turned reactionary following the Ottoman defeat in the 1877-78 Russo-Turkish War, suspended the Ottoman Constitution and started promoting Pan-Islamism. Without that war, he would have remained liberal.
The Ottomans would have more room to reform without the Russians pressing in the Balkans and the Caucasus.
BTW, in the middle of the 19th century, Armenians were considered the loyal Christians of the Ottoman Empire as opposed to Greeks, for example.

 

[fluttersky]

Abdul Hamid II turned reactionary following the Ottoman defeat in the 1877-78 Russo-Turkish War, suspended the Ottoman Constitution and started promoting Pan-Islamism. Without that war, he would have remained liberal.

I'm not convinced that a weaker Russia would have stopped something similar occurring though. The Ottoman Empire was on the decline regardless, nationalism was on the rise. If Russia was still interested in the Balkans then one could imagine them supporting Bulgarian independence.

 

[Ricardolindo]

I'm not convinced that a weaker Russia would have stopped something similar occurring though. The Ottoman Empire was on the decline regardless, nationalism was on the rise. If Russia was still interested in the Balkans then one could imagine them supporting Bulgarian independence.

The 1877-78 Russo-Turkish War only happened because Tsar Alexander II foolishly decided to listen to Pan-Slavist intellectuals who wanted to liberate Bulgaria.

 

[fluttersky]

The 1877-78 Russo-Turkish War only happened because Tsar Alexander II foolishly decided to listen to Pan-Slavist intellectuals who wanted to liberate Bulgaria.

I'm not sure how Russia deciding against expansion south of the Caucasus means they won't decide to get involved in Bulgaria.

 

[Ricardolindo]

I'm not convinced that a weaker Russia would have stopped something similar occurring though. The Ottoman Empire was on the decline regardless, nationalism was on the rise. If Russia was still interested in the Balkans then one could imagine them supporting Bulgarian independence.

I added an important bit to my reply while you wrote this reply. Please, check it out.

 

[Ricardolindo]

I'm not convinced that a weaker Russia would have stopped something similar occurring though. The Ottoman Empire was on the decline regardless, nationalism was on the rise. If Russia was still interested in the Balkans then one could imagine them supporting Bulgarian independence.

I'm not sure how Russia deciding against expansion south of the Caucasus means they won't decide to get involved in Bulgaria.

A Russia with less interest in the South Caucasus is likely also one with less interest in the Balkans.