When it comes to casus belli, Russia had been gradually (and already under Alexander the First) liquidating the freedoms guaranteed for Congress Poland at the Congress of Vienna:
Not exactly the case. You are talking about the document “Principles of the Constitution of Polish Kingdom” written by Adam Czartotizsky and, indeed, published in Vienna. But this was not a mandatory document guaranteed by anybody, just the intentions, not a Constitution, which made it clear in a preamble that it is not a right inherent to the Polish people but a
favor granted to them by the All-Russian Tsar. It also stipulated that the new kingdom will be a hereditary appanage of the House of Romanov and that the foreign policy of the kingdom should remain in the Russian hands. Almost immediately after the new kingdom was established Prince Adam was relieved of all authority and replaced by Novosiltsev. Well, not to mention that the “independent” state heavily relied upon the regular subsidies from Russia.
An item about the hereditary rights made rebellion illegal and the same applies to any communications with the foreign countries so the rebels could not at the same time both defend the constitution and violate it. OTOH, if the rights are granted as a favor, then their only guarantor is a grantor. So while removal of some rights was a bad thing, these actions still could be considered legal: at least for a whole decade nobody rebelled over their violation.
Austria had absolutely no say on the issue.
in 1819 the freedom of press was abolished, in 1821 the freedom of assembly was abolished etc. So Austria could simply use the fact that Russia doesn't respect the things she was supposed to respect according to the Congress of Vienna.
It could not because there were no
international guarantees of any type and this was an issue between NI and his Polish subjects.
And if Prussia (worried about the "prussian Poles" being inspired to make their own rebellion) supported the Russians by declaring war on Austria, then this would be a blatant undermining of Austria's authority.
Not sure how Prussia by joining its Russian ally in the case of Austrian aggression against RE will be undermining Austrian anything. Vienna did not make Austria an international overseeing authority of any kind. But this is all quite irrelevant by a simple reason of Austria in OTL 1831 simply would not risk such a war.
After all, Austria was the one who got the position of the leader of the German Confederation, so the prussian declaration of war on Austria would be a violation of the german aspect of the Congress of Vienna.
Prussia acting in concert with its ally as a reaction of the Austrian attack on that ally would not be violating anything. But this argument is irrelevant because Austria would not risk such an attack. Never did in OTL except when was forced to do this by Nappy.
Um... who said here that the austro-polish troops would be in St.Petersburg/Moscow or in Berlin?
This was a joke. Do you know what the smileys are about?
The point, which you are missing is that for Austria to have any legitimate claim to the Polish throne (referencing to mentioned Metternich’s wish to put Austrian archduke on it), Nicholas must abdicate and for that he must suffer an absolutely smashing defeat. If there are some other reasons for him to do this, please bring them up.
Once again, who exactly said here that the french troops would go to Poland?
I’m sorry but you clearly did not understand what the post is about: I’m trying to analyze
systematically possible scenarios for the victorious uprising and commenting on plausibility of each of the possible combinations. “Systematically” means that you have to bring pretty much all possible scenarios and analyze plausibility of each of them. If you agree that the French participation is unlikely, you are just confirming what I said on this specific item.
Indeed, which is why I wrote that the cadets who started the uprising, should have been replaced with someone who knows how to fully use the advantages Poland had, such as the ability to quickly act before Russia can react.
OK, fine, so let’s assume for the argument sake that there is somebody with the brains in charge and the whole thing is started as you want. The problem, as I already pointed out, was in a plain fact that Kingdom did not have advantages allowing to win against the RE. The opponent had more troops, even more reserves, it had its own armaments production and a loss was not a politically acceptable option.
As I said, I’m quite willing to see a scenario by which the uprising can win so why don’t you present some so that we can have a meaningful discussion of its plausibility?