In connection with the latest events in the world, first of all, the sharply intensified foreign policy expansionist activity of Ankara, references to the ideas of Pan-Turkism, whose influence are very clearly visible in the aspirations and actions of the leaders there, began to be encountered more and more often.
Speaking about this ideology, which, as you might guess, is based on the concept of uniting all peoples with Turkic roots into a single whole, one cannot fail to mention that absolutely the same aspirations overwhelmed at one time representatives of a completely different ethnocultural community - Slavic. This movement was called Pan-Slavism.
Tellingly, both ideologies took shape at the turn of the XNUMXth and XNUMXth centuries, that is, during the confrontation between the Ottoman Empire, the flagship of the Pan-Turkist movement, and the Slavic peoples. It is impossible not to note another point: both movements, despite the apparent similarity, carried in themselves much more differences than coincidences.
The Pan-Slavists were mostly harmless subjects who labored in the cultural and educational field and did not call the Slavs to any violent actions in the name of the "all-Slavic brotherhood" and the creation of a single superpower. Which, however, did not in the least interfere with the fact that the ideas proclaimed by them sometimes became a spark thrown into a powder keg.
So, held in Prague in 1848, the "First All-Slavic Congress" was marked at first by the adoption of declarations, manifestos and other calls for "national liberation and unification", as well as rather innocent symbols like the approval of the "all-Slavic" colors of the flag (the very ones that make up the banner today of our Motherland) and the anthem. The case ended, however, with an armed uprising, which, ironically, was suppressed by the united troops of the Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires.
The ideas of Pan-Slavism also led to the battle those who fought for the freedom of the peoples of the Balkans against the Ottoman yoke. This, perhaps, was the highest point in the development of this ideology, after which an era of its gradual extinction began. In the future, the "brothers-Slavs" more and more often waged wars among themselves or found themselves on opposite sides of the front line in world conflicts. However, let's not get ahead of ourselves.
With Pan-Turkism, the situation was somewhat different. If the Slavic unifying ideas in no way contradicted the religious concepts of a “united Orthodox world,” the movement for the unification of all Turkic peoples was to a large extent a counterbalance to the centuries-old desire of many leaders of the East to merge into a single whole of all countries professing Islam.
It was because of this that those who tried to build a secular state on the ruins of the Ottoman Empire seized hold of him. They declared dreams of "non-violent" reunification of all Turkic tribes and ethnic groups. True, without fail under the leadership of "Turkish democracy" and with the subsequent "assimilation", that is, universal otrachivanie. It is because of this that this trend caused extremely harsh assessments in the Soviet Union and was mentioned exclusively with the definitions of "reactionary", "conquest" and almost fascist.
It is understandable: no one in Moscow was going to give the republics of Central Asia to the Pan-Turkist gentlemen, which, according to the doctrine they announced, fell into the orbit of the new community they dreamed of creating. Moreover, such ideas do not and did not meet with the slightest understanding in all countries where there are significant Turkic minorities and communities: from India and China to Bulgaria and Greece. Again, for quite understandable reasons and motives.
At the same time, it should be admitted that at the present moment the pan-Turkists are doing much better than their colleagues from the Slavic camp. Since 2009, the Turkic Council has existed; international kurultais and summits are regularly held. We are even talking about the possibility of creating a Turkic Commonwealth of States, which, however, still refers more to the field of projects and plans than to reality.
In fact, it turned out that the adherents of both all-Turkic and all-Slavic unity, for some reason, invariably turned out to be a loser, as soon as the Anglo-Saxon gentlemen entered the stage. They often, without any manifestos and declarations, rebuilt the world at their own discretion and sought to satisfy their ambitions. At the same time, both Slavic and Turkic peoples, against their own will, became obedient instruments in their hands.
In the two world wars inspired and unleashed by the Anglo-Saxons, Bulgaria fought against Russia. And how much blood was shed in the battles where the Slavs fought with each other - and you can't measure it! No less skillfully, the same British pitted (and are pitting to this day) between themselves and the Turkic peoples, as well as the countries inhabited by them. The Anglo-Saxons achieved particular success in playing off the Slavs and representatives of the Turkic ethnic groups. There is nothing to say about the Russian-Turkish wars, behind a good half of which British ears were sticking out. The same strategy was applied in the destruction of Yugoslavia, which was a classic Pan-Slavic state.
What kind of Pan-Slavism can we talk about today, when the Serbs, at the shout of the European Union, are running headlong from the exercises with an extremely symbolic name? Unity? With whom? With the Poles (who, by the way, were disgusted with the ideas of Pan-Slavism from the outset, since they were categorically not combined with their Russophobia)? With Czechs demolishing monuments to liberators? Or with the Bulgarians? Yes, for us Ukrainians are already “non-brothers” ... However, it is unlikely that anyone will allow Erdogan's pan-Turkism to spread further than Azerbaijan, and even there it is accepted in rather limited forms and scales.
Alas, the British Commonwealth of Nations, which includes almost all the former colonies and dominions of London, as well as the bonds that bind Great Britain and the United States, today look much more solid and weighty than all inter-Slavic or pan-Turkist associations. The Anglo-Saxons continue to hold the world by the throat with their iron hand - when with a velvet glove, and when without one.
Can those who dream of a Slavic or Turkic community ever become a worthy counterbalance to this force? In theory, this is perhaps possible. But for a start, it is necessary to end the strife between those and others, and at the same time each of the camps to overcome its own disunity. It is worth remembering that the only real rival of the Western (in fact, the Anglo-Saxon world) was the Soviet Union, which successfully united both Slavic and Turkic peoples.