The Eastern Question spans from 1774 to 1923, and focuses on and around the struggle for control of the Ottoman Empire’s land and possession of the lands once the empire collapsed. The Küçük Kaynarcain Treaty of 1774 ended the Russo-Turkish War, which resulted in the Russians gaining former Ottoman controlled lands. With significant losses France, Britain, and Austria began to realize the Turkish powers no longer carried its former strength; and Russia became a formidable foe, a powerhouse. Despite the Ottoman defeat, Russia relinquished war gained territory back to the Ottomans. It was a power flex on the soon-declining empire; not to mention the victory stoked Russia’s possibility of fulfilling the “historic mission” to secure Constantinople. The term really gains movement and notability in the nineteenth and twentieth century as other European countries take further notice to the lands, the lack of diplomatic response from the Ottomans, and other various geopolitical issues surrounding Russian influence.
The Balkan States were loosely defined during this time, and quickly were swept up in a clash of civilizations; Balkan, Ottoman, Russian, and other European powers had differing attitudes towards the region and its autonomy, or lack thereof. This lack of definition absolutely played a role in the Balkan Wars, the demise of the Ottoman Empire, and lasting ethnic tensions that would spill over into the Balkan Wars of the late twentieth century. By 1923 the Ottoman Empire was no more, and the Laussane Treaty signified the end of a turbulent rule. Turkey relinquished the remains of the Ottoman Empire and (Turkey) was recognized as a sovereign State. In short, the Eastern Question deals with “what ought to be of the Ottoman Empire, then weak and ruined.”
Moving into the Balkan Wars of 1912-1913 the Balkans once again enter a period of instability within the States surrounding territories and the Ottoman Empire. For the purpose of this answer, I’ll combine both the First and Second Wars into one general conflict. (These conflicts are often seen as a precursor to WWI, perhaps someone else can elaborate on this point.) The First Balkan War surround the Ottoman Empire’s inability to deal with nationalism, diversity, and reformation into a modern Empire. Furthermore, the interference of European powers for hundreds of years had led the (Euro. Powers) to further encourage the formation of a united Balkan power.
The First Balkan War was an engagement of Bulgaria, Serbia, and Montenegro with support from Russia on the Balkan side, and Austria-Hungry supporting the Ottoman Empire. (Alongside French financial support and British involvement.)
Again, the issues surrounding the Ottoman Empire’s decline and the Eastern Question plagued the war as the Ottoman Empire was no longer able to control the Balkans. With the Ottomans loss in Çatalca Battle, Ottoman presence west of Istanbul was no more. Eventually, a Turkish coup rallied support in the Ottoman forces to continue the war despite a heavy territory loss for the Ottoman-Turks.
The Second Balkan War surrounded power struggles between the Balkan States rather than the common front against the Ottomans. (Bulgaria vs. Montenegro, Greece, Serbia, Romania, and the Ottomans.) The Second Balkan War saw a decline in Russian interference and the creation of a more modern Balkan States. The war also saw territory gains that concerned Austria-Hungry as they were actively watching the Balkans and the Ottoman’s response. Ottoman desire to retain territory worsened the Balkan States and eventually lead to a powerful Serbian State at the end of the Second Balkan War. These tensions caused by the failed Ottoman reform are direct responses to the longhand Eastern Question, as the Balkans became their own powers rather than continuing to be Ottoman pawns, or even lands within the greater European States. We see these tensions move into WWI, the eventual the creation of Yugoslavia in 1929, (Once the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes) along with other sovereign Balkan State, which ends with the Ottoman Empire dissolving in 1923.
Hopefully, this response allowed connections between the geopolitics of the Eastern Question and the Balkan Wars to make sense. The hundreds of years of European interference and a failing Empire led to the fracturing of civilizations across lands and political spheres. There are further ruminates of the Eastern Question in the later Balkan conflicts of the 1990s and early 2000s. Please let me know if there are any points you’d like to be clarified, or expanded upon!
These sources were accessed on the web, with not all sources having pages on the copies utilized:
Davison, Roderic H. ""Russian Skill and Turkish Imbecility": The Treaty of Kuchuk Kainardji Reconsidered." Slavic Review 35, no. 3 (1976)
KARCIC, FIKRET. "The Eastern Question — A Paradigm for Understanding the Balkan Muslims' History in the 20th Century." Islamic Studies 41, no. 4 (2002)
Huntington, Samuel P. "The Clash of Civilizations?" Foreign Affairs 72, no. 3 (1993)
A.L. Macfie. The Eastern Question, 1774-1923. London and New York: Longman, 1996.
The Eastern Question: An Historical Study in European Diplomacy, J. A. R. Marriott (Oxford and the Clarendon Press) 1917.
Martin Lawrence. Treaties of Peace, 1919–1923. I. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 1924.
Neilson, Keith. Canadian Slavonic Papers / Revue Canadienne Des Slavistes 30, no. 3 (1988)
Erickson, Edward J. The Journal of Military History 65, no. 2 (2001)
Burroughs, Wilbur Greeley. Bulletin of the American Geographical Society 47, no. 10 (1915)
Fisher, Edgar J. "Trends in the Balkan Situation." The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 177 (1935)
Caloyanni, M. A. "The Balkan Union, the Balkan Conferences and the Balkan Pact." Transactions of the Grotius Society 19 (1933)
Caclamanos, Demetrius. "Reminiscences of the Balkan Wars." The Slavonic and East European Review 16, no. 46 (1937)