Of course, everyone's view is going to be different on this question, so take my view into consideration, but do not necessarily brand it as the right answer.
I would say that it would be possible, but highly unlikely.
Both could have become federal republics in much the same way that Switzerland is a federal republic or similar to the European Union structure, i.e. a united government with numerous highly autonomous and distinctive parts. A singular nation-state, a la Germany, would be impossible with so many different ethnic cultures and languages. However, the implementation of such a policy of creating a federal republic would have to come rather early in the timeline of both empires, such as in the 18th century, following a strict policy of increasing liberalization and recognition of ethnic distinctions and historical territories. For example, the recognition of an Austro-Hungarian federation only in 1867 as the result of several Hungarian uprisings against the Austrian Imperial Authorities, was far too late to be anything substantial. Or in the Ottoman Empire, the passage of the minimally effective Edict of Gulhane in 1839 and the Ottoman Reform Edict of 1856, were similarly too little too late.
They would have needed to be forward thinking and innovative long before protests had reached such a fever pitch that tens of thousands of commoners became nationalists arguing for the dismantling of these empires. It would require the Austrians to grant Hungarians autonomy in the mid-1700s, the Rumelians and Romanians in the late-1700s, to support the Polish Liberation movement in opposition to Czarist Russia and Absolutist Prussia, to engage Poles, Croats, Slovenes, Czechs, and Slovaks in the empire and create local administrations that would provide local information in their language. The Ottomans would be required to do the same for Non-Turkish Ottomans, such as Greeks, Serbs, Romanians, Bulgarians, Macedonians, Arabs, Assyrians, Armenians, Kurds, Georgians, Jews, and Lebanese Christians. Both regimes would have to become open quickly to religions other than the official religion, treating them all equal. The Austrian Empire would have to embrace Protestantism, Judaism, and Eastern Orthodoxy as well as Catholicism. The Ottoman Empire would have to embrace the various flavors of Christianity, Judaism, Yazidi, Yarsanism, Druze, Alawite, Alevi, Shiite Islam, Baha'i, and numerous other religions throughout the empire as opposed to exclusively Sunni Islam.
In contrast to this imagined reality, the Austrian Empire and the Ottoman Empire were ultra-conservative states that made little political progress towards liberalization that was not forced on them by the more powerful and liberal Western European States.
i think the hapsburg emire could have became a modern nation because they like chicken and they weren't tolerant.
It unified the nations of Italy and Germany, but split apart the multi-national empires, such as the Ottoman Empire, and the Austro-Hungarian empire.
gunpowder empires
osman 1
A. India had never been unified under one government before.B. India had never been exposed to Islam before.C. India was a much more sophisticated society than those of the Ottoman and Safavid Empires.D. India was more active in trade than either the Ottomans or Safavids.E. The majority of Indian society was non-Muslim.The majority of Indian society was non-Muslim as opposed to Ottoman Territory (predominantly the Middle East and North Africa) which was majority-Muslim and the Safavids ruled over Iran which was almost entirely Muslim.
The Holy Roman Empire is considered to be the first German empire. When the 30 some-odd Germany states were unified by Prussia in 1871, the country that was created is considered the second German Empire.
It unified the nations of Italy and Germany, but split apart the multi-national empires, such as the Ottoman Empire, and the Austro-Hungarian empire.
gunpowder empires
Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs)
Intergovernmental Organizations is one entity that interacts with the multinational forces to ensure unified actions. However, there are a few others out there, but the intergovernmental organization is the largest one.
osman 1
Please specify which empire you are referring to. here have been many dozens of empires through history.
Ottoman rulers believed that Muhammad's successor was his close friend Abu Bakr, whereas Safavid rulers believed that Muhammad's successor was his son-in-law Ali.
A. India had never been unified under one government before.B. India had never been exposed to Islam before.C. India was a much more sophisticated society than those of the Ottoman and Safavid Empires.D. India was more active in trade than either the Ottomans or Safavids.E. The majority of Indian society was non-Muslim.The majority of Indian society was non-Muslim as opposed to Ottoman Territory (predominantly the Middle East and North Africa) which was majority-Muslim and the Safavids ruled over Iran which was almost entirely Muslim.
The United Nations Command (UNC) is the unified command structure for the multinational military forces supporting the Republic of Korea (South Korea or ROK) during and after the Korean War.
It unified the nations of Italy and Germany, but split apart the multi-national empires, such as the Ottoman Empire, and the Austro-Hungarian empire. An example would be WW2 when Hitler convinced all of Germany that they were superior then everyone else and discriminated other ethnic groups. I would say WW2 was disruptive in Europe.
The previous empires in western Asia - the Assyrian and Babylonian Empires were in decline. Persia, by uniting with Media, had superior unified force and was able to capitalise on this decline, taking over western Asia progressively and then central Asia, meeting no unified opposition. They copied their predecessors by leaving/putting in place local administrations, and supervised these through provincial Persian governors. And the king and his council kept overall direction, and the control of internal and external security.
Well there have been few Muslim empires but Salah ad Din Yusuf ibn Ayyub (Saladin) was known for uniting the Muslims under one flag.