Which party was *primarily* responsible for long periods of bad Russo-Bulgarian relations in the 1880s & 1890s?

[raharris1973]

Which party was *primarily* responsible for long periods of bad Russo-Bulgarian government relations in the 1880s & 1890s?

The Russians? Or the Bulgarians?

The Russo-Bulgarian bad relations, when they occurred in the 1880s, were a surprise to all the great powers, compared with what they expected during and immediately after the Russo-Turkish war and the Congress of Berlin that set up Bulgaria's borders. Russia assumed relations with Bulgaria would be great and accordingly pushed for a very big Bulgaria when pushing terms on the Turks at San Stefano. Austria and Britain also assumed relations would be great, to the extent Bulgaria would simply be a puppet or satellite of Russia, and hence they rejected the Big Bulgaria of the San Stefano map and insisted on holding Bulgaria down to a smaller size. After the Congress of Berlin set up a small Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia, the expectations of St. Petersburg, Vienna, and London, and probably even Sofia and Constantinople, ended up confounded, with a significant Russo-Bulgarian falling out and rise of tensions.

Thinking about causes and responsibility, and throwing guesses out there, maybe it was the Russians, for being too bossy and picky and micromanaging of the Bulgarians, expecting them to be perpetually grateful for Russia's crucial role in defeating the Turks and liberating Bulgaria from Turkish rule, who provoked unbearable resentment and tension with the Bulgarian government?

Or maybe the Bulgarian government, newly free, had a hypersensitivity problem and orneriness that made it feel compelled to be insulting to its erstwhile Russian patrons, to prove 'you're not the boss of me' to demonstrate its authority domestically and internationally?

Which side was more responsible?

In breaking it down to relevant personalities, since countries don't actually have a personality or make decisions, for Russia the relevant personalities would have been the Tsar's Alexander II and Alexander III, and their advisors and Ministers. For Bulgaria, the relevant personalities would have been the Knyaz (Prince) Alexander of Battenberg, and later from 1886 Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg Gotha, and their various Prime Ministers, one of the most important in these formative years being Stefan Stambolov who was also briefly regent during an interregnum.

 

[Geordie]

I'm by no means an expert on this subject, but I have done a little bit of digging into the area.

My lukewarm take is that the Russians wanted a puppet, and as you say, a perpetually grateful one at that. The Bulgarians, on the other hand, might have been too keen to prove they were their own men, without considering the diplomatic niceties and limitations of their situation. I always struggled to find out an awful lot about Alexander of Battenberg, which makes answering this question a bit harder.

If Daniel (@Dyeus Pater) was still about, he might have a greater level of knowledge.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Which party was *primarily* responsible for long periods of bad Russo-Bulgarian government relations in the 1880s & 1890s?

The Russians? Or the Bulgarians?

The Russo-Bulgarian bad relations, when they occurred in the 1880s, were a surprise to all the great powers, compared with what they expected during and immediately after the Russo-Turkish war and the Congress of Berlin that set up Bulgaria's borders. Russia assumed relations with Bulgaria would be great and accordingly pushed for a very big Bulgaria when pushing terms on the Turks at San Stefano. Austria and Britain also assumed relations would be great, to the extent Bulgaria would simply be a puppet or satellite of Russia, and hence they rejected the Big Bulgaria of the San Stefano map and insisted on holding Bulgaria down to a smaller size. After the Congress of Berlin set up a small Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia, the expectations of St. Petersburg, Vienna, and London, and probably even Sofia and Constantinople, ended up confounded, with a significant Russo-Bulgarian falling out and rise of tensions.

Thinking about causes and responsibility, and throwing guesses out there, maybe it was the Russians, for being too bossy and picky and micromanaging of the Bulgarians, expecting them to be perpetually grateful for Russia's crucial role in defeating the Turks and liberating Bulgaria from Turkish rule, who provoked unbearable resentment and tension with the Bulgarian government?

Or maybe the Bulgarian government, newly free, had a hypersensitivity problem and orneriness that made it feel compelled to be insulting to its erstwhile Russian patrons, to prove 'you're not the boss of me' to demonstrate its authority domestically and internationally?

Which side was more responsible?

In breaking it down to relevant personalities, since countries don't actually have a personality or make decisions, for Russia the relevant personalities would have been the Tsar's Alexander II and Alexander III, and their advisors and Ministers. For Bulgaria, the relevant personalities would have been the Knyaz (Prince) Alexander of Battenberg, and later from 1886 Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg Gotha, and their various Prime Ministers, one of the most important in these formative years being Stefan Stambolov who was also briefly regent during an interregnum.

I'm by no means an expert on this subject, but I have done a little bit of digging into the area.

My lukewarm take is that the Russians wanted a puppet, and as you say, a perpetually grateful one at that. The Bulgarians, on the other hand, might have been too keen to prove they were their own men, without considering the diplomatic niceties and limitations of their situation. I always struggled to find out an awful lot about Alexander of Battenberg, which makes answering this question a bit harder.

If Daniel (@Dyeus Pater) was still about, he might have a greater level of knowledge.

According to what a Bulgarian told me, it was Russia's fault, more precisely Tsar Alexander III's fault. Tsar Alexander III alienated Bulgaria with many of his actions.
He told me
"Lots of things. First of all, he helped the Bulgarian prince Alexander Battenberg suspend the constitution and institute a personal regime in 1881, after Battenberg managed to persuade Alexander III that the government was made of the same kind of radicals as the people who killed his father. To facilitate Battenberg's regime, the Russian Tsar sent two generals (Johan Ehrnrooth and Leonid Sobolev) to serve as Prime Minister and they quickly became notorious for their arbitrary and heavy handed rule. Eventually the popular feeling against them rose so much that in 1884 Battenberg gave up on his personal regime and restored the legal government.

Then in 1885, the Unification of Bulgaria was carried out. Battenberg had no choice but to accept it (he was bluntly warned that he would either do so or abdicate), which enraged Alexander III, as it had happened without his permission and would enhance the position of Battenberg which he disliked for personal reasons. So the Tsar ordered the Russian officers leading the Bulgarian army withdrawn, leaving the Bulgarian army on the brink of a war with the Ottomans with no officer rank higher than captain. The Ottomans didn't attack, but the Serbs surprisingly did and then even more surprisingly the Bulgarian army led by its captains defeated the generals of the Serbian army. Furthermore, Battenberg became even more popular for personally troops in battle. Alexander III couldn't abide that, so he arranged a coup by Russophile officers in 1886 which removed Battenberg and sent him into exile. The coup was quickly defeated and Battenberg returned but unwisely tried to make peace with Alexander III. The later coldly refused and Battenberg had no choice but to abdicate again. This left Bulgaria without a monarch, so a regency council was formed to find a new prince and rule the country in the interim. Since the regency council was led by the same people who had defeated the Russian sponsored coup (chief among them Stefan Stambolov), Alexander III was unwilling to accept their legitimacy. He demanded that they delay elections for a Grand National Assembly (which would choose a new prince), but the regents refused. Subsequently, the elections was won by their supporters, whereupon Russia refused to recognize the election and began to threaten the government with military intervention if they continued to desist. Russian warships were sent near the Bulgarian coasts and pro-Russian uprising broke out in several places. When they were suppressed, Russia broke off diplomatic relations with Bulgaria.

After this, Russia made further attempts to incite pro-Russian elements in Bulgarian (there were several officer mutinies in early 1887), which failed, while lobbying for the occupation of Bulgaria among the other Great Powers. These efforts went nowhere, but Russia did succeed in dissuading most potential candidates for the position of prince of Bulgaria. Finally, the delegation sent to Western Europe to search for a new prince could find no one better than Ferdinand, an adventurist with dubious morality and even more dubious competence. Until Alexander III's death in 1894, Russia refused to recognize Ferdinand or the Bulgarian government (now led by the implacable Stambolov). It took the coming of a new Tsar in 1894 and the removal of Stambolov the same year (and then his assassination the next, likely on the orders of Ferdinand) for relations between Bulgaria and Russia to be restored."

 

[raharris1973]

According to what a Bulgarian told me, it was Russia's fault, more precisely Tsar Alexander III's fault. Tsar Alexander III alienated Bulgaria with many of his actions.
He told me
"Lots of things. First of all, he helped the Bulgarian prince Alexander Battenberg suspend the constitution and institute a personal regime in 1881, after Battenberg managed to persuade Alexander III that the government was made of the same kind of radicals as the people who killed his father. To facilitate Battenberg's regime, the Russian Tsar sent two generals (Johan Ehrnrooth and Leonid Sobolev) to serve as Prime Minister and they quickly became notorious for their arbitrary and heavy handed rule. Eventually the popular feeling against them rose so much that in 1884 Battenberg gave up on his personal regime and restored the legal government.

Then in 1885, the Unification of Bulgaria was carried out. Battenberg had no choice but to accept it (he was bluntly warned that he would either do so or abdicate), which enraged Alexander III, as it had happened without his permission and would enhance the position of Battenberg which he disliked for personal reasons. So the Tsar ordered the Russian officers leading the Bulgarian army withdrawn, leaving the Bulgarian army on the brink of a war with the Ottomans with no officer rank higher than captain. The Ottomans didn't attack, but the Serbs surprisingly did and then even more surprisingly the Bulgarian army led by its captains defeated the generals of the Serbian army. Furthermore, Battenberg became even more popular for personally troops in battle. Alexander III couldn't abide that, so he arranged a coup by Russophile officers in 1886 which removed Battenberg and sent him into exile. The coup was quickly defeated and Battenberg returned but unwisely tried to make peace with Alexander III. The later coldly refused and Battenberg had no choice but to abdicate again. This left Bulgaria without a monarch, so a regency council was formed to find a new prince and rule the country in the interim. Since the regency council was led by the same people who had defeated the Russian sponsored coup (chief among them Stefan Stambolov), Alexander III was unwilling to accept their legitimacy. He demanded that they delay elections for a Grand National Assembly (which would choose a new prince), but the regents refused. Subsequently, the elections was won by their supporters, whereupon Russia refused to recognize the election and began to threaten the government with military intervention if they continued to desist. Russian warships were sent near the Bulgarian coasts and pro-Russian uprising broke out in several places. When they were suppressed, Russia broke off diplomatic relations with Bulgaria.

After this, Russia made further attempts to incite pro-Russian elements in Bulgarian (there were several officer mutinies in early 1887), which failed, while lobbying for the occupation of Bulgaria among the other Great Powers. These efforts went nowhere, but Russia did succeed in dissuading most potential candidates for the position of prince of Bulgaria. Finally, the delegation sent to Western Europe to search for a new prince could find no one better than Ferdinand, an adventurist with dubious morality and even more dubious competence. Until Alexander III's death in 1894, Russia refused to recognize Ferdinand or the Bulgarian government (now led by the implacable Stambolov). It took the coming of a new Tsar in 1894 and the removal of Stambolov the same year (and then his assassination the next, likely on the orders of Ferdinand) for relations between Bulgaria and Russia to be restored."

So Alexander III was just being a dick who refused to be pleased or appeased. His attitude was, "I will know what an acceptable Bulgarian government looks like, when I see it"....and he new saw it. Nicholas finally chilled out and allowed relations to improve, although relations soured again after the Balkan Wars in the 20th century.