To what extent did the economic and political transformations in the late nineteenth and

early twentieth century contribute to the growing nationalist sentiments in the Balkans?

There is nothing inherently aggressive in nationalist ideology, yet in some instances, nationalist aspirations
have been underpinned by the excessive use of violence. Mark Beissinger differentiates between
‘nationalism that barks and nationalisms that bite’. The Balkan region has traditionally been associated
with the biting type of nationalism. The popular perception of the Balkans are of a region prone to
rampant nationalism and incessant violence.

The competitive environment in Europe in the years leading up to 1914 was stiff and the mood of the
period was overwrought with arm races, economic and colonial rivalries, hostile alliance systems, and the
growth of popular nationalism. While the wars of independence were generally greeted with enthusiasm in
the West, attempts by the newly independent Balkan states to establish autonomy from the Great Powers
at the end of the nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries provoked profound animosity in the major
European capitals.

The Balkans had a lot of variety in terms of weather, geography and demography. Topographic and
political factors hindered the modernisation of the region. Balkans were vulnerably located on the disease
routes from the Near East to western Europe. Yet, the region managed to multiply its population, resulting
in pressure on the land. The coming of Ottoman rule, although claimed by some to usher in a new dark
age, was beneficial to the masses in terms of new economic opportunities. However, the older Ottoman
land regime was being replaced by private estates, which encroached upon common lands and these
chiflik estates deteriorated the condition of the peasantry. After two to three centuries of Ottoman rule, the
empire began to confront new difficulties, facing tougher military opposition as it expanded and finding it
harder and harder to raise taxes.

Balkan nationalism has been traditionally viewed as an outburst of oppressed European Christians against
Muslim Turkish domination, in ethnic and religious terms. Balkan nationalism has also been seen as an
important factor in the origin of the First World War, especially since it was the Balkan crisis which
provided the immediate occasion for war.

The 20th century Balkan lands were largely a land of peasants. Due to the unique isolated Balkan terrain,
the dominant form of consciousness was village patriotism. The peasantry was active in nationalist
activities and assisted in the downfall of the Turks.

There was a divide between the rural areas dominated by people of Slav origin and the urban areas
populated largely by Greeks. The identity of the people was asserted at two levels; ethnic identity based on
linguistic differences and religious identity in which the Greek Orthodox Church was perceived as distinct
from the Roman Catholic Church. The religious identity of the common man was however much stronger.
In the largely religious protest movements, peasant participation was high due to their religious
millenarianism. Overthrow of Turkish rule was also seen by them in religious terms. It should of course be
noted that Christians were not against the Muslim Turks in a united manner.

The Ottoman Empire of the 17th century was multi-ethnic and multi-religious. The Ottomans had created a
millet system, in which the people would be governed by their religious authorities who would be
answerable to the central authorities. These religious and administrative local elite were unpopular figures.
An influential intellectual class emerged in the Balkans, who had prospered and risen under the Ottomans.
They began to espouse modern values of nationalism and were a testimony to the liberal and tolerant
character of the Balkan state. The Greeks, in particular the Phanariots, were one such group. They were
also instrumental in the preservation and fostering of a modern Greek identity. Early Balkan nationalism
was understood in the context of Enlightened Despotism. Libertarian Enlightenment of the time of
Napoleon, the French Revolution and romantic reaction to Enlightenment, with its focus on culture and
preservation of tradition, also influenced Balkan nationalism. Many of these westernized intellectuals
went to the countryside in search of the ‘soul of the country’, and came out disillusioned with reality. The
intellectuals were however a divided group and could not constitute a unified movement since their
secular nature inevitably ran them against the hierarchy of the Greek Orthodox Church. Thus, the most
important reason for the rise of nationalist ideology in the Balkans is due to modernisation in society,
economy and polity. When modernisation started in the Balkans, religious and ethnic factors became more
visible.

The Local Turkish Chiefs or Pashas were also an important element in the emergence of Balkan
nationalism. Due to the vast nature of the Ottoman state, there was invariably a struggle between these
powerful local officers and the central government at Istanbul. It was in this conflict that these governors
often chose to foster Balkan nationalism to serve as a tool. Muhammad Ali in Egypt and Ali Pasha in
Greece were such powerful governors.

The most important element in Balkan nationalism was however the role of the Great Powers, in the
‘Eastern Question’ concerned with the disposal of the Balkans after the decline of the Ottoman Empire.
Russia began to lay claims to the Balkans for strategic reasons, on religious and racial grounds. As a part
of the racial argument, Russia encouraged Pan-Slavism in the Balkans. Austria-Hungary was deeply
concerned with the question of nationalism in this region primarily because it was a multi-ethnic region
where Balkan nationalities often overlapped with ethnic identities. Britain in fear of Russia’s advance
towards Constantinople supported the Turks against Russia. The French too had ambitions in the region
and followed a pro-Turkish policy. The background of the Balkan wars was also the result of the Russian
and Ottoman wars of 1877 and 1878. Moreover, the 1978 act of Congress of Berlin generated numerous
struggles and pressures in the Balkan region because the standards of nationalism were not adopted
according to the new borders.

Balkan was the mid- point of the battles between the Ottoman and the Habsberg empire. These fights
played an important role to clarify their territories. Every crisis in the Balkans had resulted in new states
being carved out, after which the intellectuals would come in and start the process of ‘nationalisation’.
Nation-building in this context comprised of the ethnic element, where Greek hegemony was sought to be
overthrown in favour of the local language. There was also a desire to break free from the religious
hegemony of the Greek Orthodox Church, in favour of an autonomous national Church.

Serbia
The Serbs were Slavs who had been conquered in the 14th century by the Turks at the Battle of Kosovo
(1389). The capital, Belgrade was dominated by the Local Provincial Governors or Pashas, who in 1804
revolted against Turkish rule. Their outrage was directed against the Knez or Christian nobility who were
loyal to the Turks. The Christian nobles decided to appeal to Russia for help when help from the Ottomans
was not forthcoming. This is where religion as a factor entered Russian rhetoric in the Balkans. Between
1815 and 1830 under Russian pressure, the Pashas were replaced by the Christian notables. In 1878
following a Russo-Turkish war, Serbia was declared an independent state at the Congress of Berlin. For
Serbia however this was not the realisation of her nationalism and she sought to unite all Slavs into a
Yugo-Slav union with Russian help.

Greece
Ali Pasha the Turkish governor had been engaged in a struggle with the centre and the Greek war of
independence began when the Turks moved in to crush Ali Pasha. The movement against the Turks
however was not united and was crushed by the end of the 1920s. During this time, the Greek cause had
become central in the Romantic movement and a crusade for the Greek war built up all over Europe. This
was due to Philhellenism in the west which had led to a perception of the Greek civilization as the
ancestral European civilization. Governments of the various Great Powers therefore had public opinion
behind them in their unilateral intervention and in 1830 the Greek state was carved out. This Greek state
however contained few Greeks and a majority of Greeks lived outside Greece.

Romania
Romania was formed out of the two historical provinces of Moldavia and Walachia. The region was
inhabited largely by Romanian-speaking impoverished peasantry, who were under the native landowning
class of Boyars. Above them were the Greek princes who governed these territories on behalf of the Turks
at Constantinople. In the Greek war of independence, the Greek princes were overthrown. In 1826, under
Russian pressure, they were replaced by the Boyars under Ottoman rule. For 20 years, 1829 onwards,
Romania was ruled as a Russian protectorate in the name of the Turks. This led to increasing anti-Russian
feelings in Romania.

New leaders and intellectuals began to argue for linguistic commonality with France, since the Romanian
language was of Latin and not Slav stock. Napoleon III thus fostered nationalism, though for his own
interests. At the Congress of Berlin in 1878, Romania was declared independent.

Bulgaria
Bulgaria had been conquered at the end of the 14th century by the Turks. Nationalism in Bulgaria began
firstly as a linguistic revival, sponsored by the intellectuals, and as a call for an autonomous Bulgarian
Church. The mid-1870s saw a religion sponsored uprising suppressed by the Turks. At the Congress of
San Stefano, Russia created the Bulgarian nation. Seeing that Bulgaria was becoming a puppet state of
Russia, the Great Powers decided to intervene and following the Russo-Turkish war, at the Congress of
Berlin (1878) Bulgaria was created as an autonomous state. In 1912, Bulgaria became fully independent.

Montenegro also emerged at the Congress of Berlin in 1878.

On the eve of the First World War, the Balkans were politically and economically one of the most unstable
regions of Europe. It consisted of a number of small and highly aggressive states constantly fighting
against each other. By the early 20th century, this region was also witnessing the highest population growth
in Europe increasing pressure on land. In the early part of the 20th century, a series of Balkan wars
(1912-1913 and 1913) were fought. The conflict began with the Italian invasion of Libya, which
encouraged the Balkans to attack the Turks directly. The Turks were defeated by the League of Balkans in
1912-13. Following this conflict, a new state, Albania was carved out and Turkish rule was finally wiped
out of Europe except a small strip of land around Constantinople.
Link between Balkan Nationalism and the First World War

While the Balkan question was an old one, in the 20th century the condition had become more volatile.
Austria had begun to feel threatened by the very existence of Serbia. Bosnia, which had been conquered
by the Turks in the 15th century, was at the core of the Austrian-Serbian rivalry as both of them desired to
control Bosnia. In 1878 at the Congress of Berlin, Bosnia was placed under Austrian rule. Austria began
to fear the impact of the Young Turk movement in predominantly Muslim Bosnia, and feared that if
Bosnia modernised, it would break out of Austrian control. In 1908 therefore, Austria annexed Bosnia.
Russia and Serbia immediately protested. However Germany threatened Russia with the prospect of a
European war if she decided to intervene, forcing Russia to step down. At the same time in Serbia,
terrorist groups began to emerge with the aim of liberating Bosnia. This forms the background to the
assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand at Sarajevo.

New imperialism, the alliance system, militarism and Balkan nationalism had created an atmosphere of
tension and rivalries in Europe. They created the broad conditions that precipitated war. The Balkan crisis
need not have precipitated in war as long as there was a restraining hand in Europe. Austrian aggression
and German encouragement added a new element to the old conflict. The immediate origins of the war lay
not so much in Austrian as in German policy. Its roots lay in the post-Bismarck period in which a new
policy aiming at becoming the most powerful world power (weltpolitik) emerged. Germany’s tremendous
economic growth was also a big factor in this. The new German foreign policy used the Dual Alliance to
push for intervention in the Balkans by the Austrians.

However, Balkan nationalism was certainly not the only factor responsible in providing for the
inevitability of war. If Balkan nationalism had been the only underlying cause of war and the short-term
spark responsible for the outbreak of war, then the extent of its responsibility would be full and
conclusive. Instead, a variety of factors contribute to the deeper causes of war.