Military Review

100 years ago the Ottoman Empire launched a war against Russia

47

100 years ago, 29-30 in October 1914, the Ottoman Empire launched a war against Russia. The German-Turkish fleet under the command of Rear Admiral Souchon, without declaring war, attacked the Russian Black Sea shores. The enemy attacked Sevastopol and the Russian fleet stationed there, shelled Novorossiysk, Feodosia and Odessa, mined the Kerch Strait. It was a provocation with the aim of calling the Russian government to war. 2 November 1914, the Russian Empire declared war on Turkey.

The position of the Ottoman Empire on the eve of the First World War

The “sick man” of Europe has long been in a severe crisis. It was especially difficult for Turkey at the beginning of the 20th century. It seemed that only one strong blow was needed to destroy the Ottoman Empire, rotten through and through.

At the end of the 19th century, the process of turning the Ottoman Empire into a semi-colony of the great Western powers was completed. Turkey was one of the most backward agrarian countries, whose economy and finances were controlled by the West. Large land tenure was combined with small-scale land use. The peasantry bore almost the entire burden of the tax burden, giving borrowers and usurers up to 30-40% of the crop. In some places even primitive corvee remained. At the same time, agriculture was under the control of Western capital. Things reached the point that Istanbul and a number of other major coastal cities received grain and flour from abroad. Foreign capital had a monopoly on the production and export of Turkish tobacco, controlling entire rural areas. Foreign capital acted as an organizer and master of production, and was interested in the semi-feudal dependence of the peasantry, extremely cheap labor.

The industry under the rule of the sultans Abdul-Hamid II (1876 - 1909) and Mehmed V (1909 - 1918), despite the immense natural wealth of the empire, was in a miserable condition. The mining industry was seized by foreign companies, mainly British and French, which received concessions for the development of mineral resources. Due to the privileges of the concessions and the extremely cheap labor force, foreign entrepreneurs received huge profits that did not fall into the Turkish treasury. There were almost no steel-making and engineering industries in Turkey. At the beginning of the century, 3 million pounds of ore were mined in the Ottoman Empire, but around 100 thousand pounds remained for local consumption. The rest was exported and processed at foreign enterprises. Metals returned in the form of finished goods. So, at the end of the 19th century there were only 5 foundry and iron workshops and the entire 6 sawmills throughout the entire Turkish Empire. In fact, Turkey was an agrarian, raw semi-colony of the West.

In the empire there were several dozen small enterprises in the food, cloth, cotton, carpet, etc. industries. In addition, there were several military enterprises in Istanbul. Most of the enterprises were concentrated in the capital and several large coastal cities. The remaining areas of the empire actually had no industry, dispensing with medieval artisan workshops. At the same time, almost all of any significant enterprises were in the hands of foreign capital or the comprador bourgeoisie. At the beginning of the 20th century, only about 15% of industry was in the hands of the national bourgeoisie. There was also a significant share of the foreign bourgeoisie (Jews, Greeks, Armenians, etc.), which, to avoid corruption and national pressure, devastating taxes and duties, took the citizenship of a foreign power. As a result, most of the capital was not delayed in Turkey, the income derived from the country's natural wealth, the brutal exploitation of the working population went to the West, or into the pockets of a small group of comprador bourgeoisie.

Back in 1881, the Ottoman Public Debt Administration was established, which, with the help of its own administrative apparatus, received government taxes and duties in various parts of the empire to service the Ottoman state debt. The "Administration" included representatives from Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Bank and local major lenders Porta. In 1908, its number increased to 10 thousand people. The whole occupation administration, sucking all the juice out of the country. Moreover, this unit was listed in the Turkish service, the contents of the treasury. Later, foreigners received revenues from the tobacco and salt monopolies, the collection of alcohol and stamp duty, the right to collect state tax in a number of regions and cities, etc. In fact, foreigners began to fully control the finances of the empire. Foreign banks controlled the finances of Turkey. The case went to the establishment of a financial international institution that would replace the Ottoman financial institution. This process was stopped only by the war and the collapse of the empire.

Western capital completely satisfied the internal disintegration of the Ottoman Empire, in which dignitaries, major feudal lords, and the highest Muslim clergy ruled. The dominance of the court camarilla, the corruption of bureaucrats, and the unrestrained arbitrariness of officials, including the clergy, determined the inner situation of the empire. A feature of the bureaucratic apparatus, including officers, was an extremely low level of education and culture. So, in the 1898 year, even among the ministers there was not a single person with a higher education. Everywhere there was a treasury, arbitrariness and corruption. All officials, from high dignitaries to small local managers used their position to enrich themselves. In educational institutions there was severe censorship and oppression of the clergy, who suppressed education, science and culture.

At the same time, the stability of the empire undermined the national liberation struggle. The authorities responded with brutal terror, inciting national and religious hatred. The ideology was based on Pan-Islamism and Pan-Turkism. The uprisings literally drowned in blood. To maintain the integrity of the empire, an enormous intelligence, gendarmerie and police apparatus was formed. A thousand-strong army of scammers was formed. To suppress the uprisings, they used irregular cavalry (Hamidia - "owned by Hamid"), which attracted Kurds and Karapakhs. Wild horsemen were terrifying in many parts of the empire, especially in the east. So, in 1894-1896. a terrible massacre of Armenians was organized in Western Armenia. This slaughter shook the whole world. About 300 thousand people were brutally murdered. Hundreds of cities and villages were devastated by the Sultan's army, irregular formations, police and religious fanatics.

Armenians made up a significant part of the empire's population and during the wars with Russia favored the Russians, especially in Western Armenia, where people hoped to join the Russian Empire. Since the 1880-s, Istanbul began to pursue a policy of genocide. If before the massacre occurred on a case by case basis, now the genocide has become a state policy.

Sultan Abdul-Hamid II not only used the policy of "divide and rule", inciting religious fanatics to Christians, but also adopted the aggressive ideology of pan-Islamism. In the Ottoman Empire, ideologues multiplied, explaining the need to unite all Muslims and Turks under the auspices of the Caliph, who was the Ottoman sultan. This ideology has become one of the prerequisites for the participation of Turkey in the First World War.

At the same time, the increasing influence of foreign powers on Turkey continued. Traditionally, a strong influence on Istanbul was in England and France. However, at the beginning of the 20th century, the German Empire began to supplant them, which gradually put control of the Turkish armed forces under its control. The Turkish government considered that the Germans represent the “lesser evil” and tried to use Germany to strengthen the army and economy, to weaken the influence of other foreigners. Germany needed the resources of the Ottoman Empire and an ally to put pressure on Britain and Russia. Through the Turkish territory it was possible to go to the Suez Canal and the Persian Gulf.

The Armenian question, the struggle in Macedonia and Thrace, the uprising of the Cretan Greeks was a bargaining chip in a big game. These events were usually used by great powers to increase their influence on Porto. In essence, Ports policy was defined in European capitals. So, in the 1897, the Turkish-Greek war began, which arose because of the uprising of the Greeks in Crete. The Ottomans were able to defeat the Greeks, but the great powers forced Porto to sign such a treaty, which led to the loss of Crete. In Crete, autonomy was declared under the “patronage of Europe” and a “peacekeeping contingent” landed. Most of the Muslims were forced to leave the island. Crete joined Greece after the second Balkan war, at the end of the 1913 year.

100 years ago the Ottoman Empire launched a war against Russia

Sultan of the Ottoman Empire Abdul-Hamid II

Sultan Mehmed V

Young Turkish Revolution

The loss of economic and political independence, the chain of defeats in foreign policy and the loss of territories, the cultural influence of the West on the educated part of Ottoman society led to the emergence of a wave of protest. Bourgeois-liberal ideas led to the emergence of the political movement of the Young Turks, who succeeded the “new Ottomans.”

Despite the fact that the sultan and his henchmen brutally crushed any manifestation of free-thinking and resistance, having organized a real espionage mania in the country, when people were seized by the slightest manifestation of discontent, the political movement gradually matured into a revolution. The core of the movement was the officers, the most educated part of the population and having the opportunity to get acquainted with European culture and the achievements of advanced thought. The movement also included representatives of the multi-ethnic intelligentsia and students of military and civilian schools.

So, back in 1889, the cadet of the military medical school Ibrahim Temo created a secret group whose goal was to save the homeland from tyranny. This cell has established contacts with like-minded people in other educational institutions in Istanbul. Emerged revolutionary cells and abroad. In France, such a group was led by the son of a prominent official, Ahmed Riza Bey. In 1892, a group in the military medical school was opened. But they didn’t take it seriously, the students even got the opportunity to continue their studies.

In 1894, a leaflet was issued on behalf of the Ottoman Society for Unity and Progress. They called for a joint struggle of all the peoples of the empire with despotism. The movement increased its influence in the army and naval among officials and cadets of military schools. The authorities took this more seriously and responded with repression. Many were exiled, others fled abroad. However, the ittihadists' cells (from the word "ittihad" - "unity") continued their subversive work. A Central Committee was established. The charter of the movement aimed at ensuring justice, equality and freedom, the country's progress and liberation from foreign bondage. The most important task was to restore the constitutional order in the country.

In Europe, pamphlets were printed and distributed around Turkey that branded the bloody regime of Abdul-Hamid II. Sultan was called "mean" and "insane" and even "follower of the devil." In emigration began to publish dozens of newspapers in Turkish, which cursed the regime of "snake and scorpion." The most significant newspapers were published in Paris, London, Geneva and Cairo. Brochures and leaflets that were secretly distributed throughout the Ottoman Empire were also admitted. Ittihadists believed that constitutional reforms would save the country from disintegration and division between the great powers. They hoped that through reforms it was possible to save the dying Ottoman Empire, to renew it. The movement was not united, it was torn apart by contradictions and disputes over the future of the country. The peculiarity of the movement was its multinational composition, among the revolutionaries were Turks, Albanians, Greeks, Armenians, Jews, Arabs, Kurds, etc. In general, revolutionaries were united only by hatred of the sultan.

The first congress in Paris was held only in 1902 year. But he did not lead to unity. So, there were two main groups. The Society of Progress and Unity, Ahmed Riza, advocated the unity of the empire, the preservation of the Ottoman dynasty, the unity of all the peoples of Turkey and against interference in the affairs of foreign countries. The Society of Personal Initiatives and Decentralization, headed by Prince Sabaheddin, argued that foreign powers could intervene and advocated a significant decentralization of administrative control and the granting of greater powers to local authorities.

Internal splits and unsuccessful conspiracies uncovered by the authorities, new waves of links led to a decline in the movement. A new rise occurred against the background of the revolution in Russia 1905-1907. The leaders of the Young Turks called for "taking an example from the magnificent ideas of the Russian revolution." Sultan, on the other hand, strengthened censorship in order to stop the appearance of reports about the actions of revolutionaries in Russia. Especially Abdul-Hamid feared rebellion in the navy. At this time, many officers joined the Young Turk movement. Authorities responded with mass arrests; more than 200 people were arrested, including 5 generals.

In 1906-1907 in the army and navy there were several speeches against the authorities. Speeches against the authorities occurred in a number of major cities. The government even made concessions in a number of places. So, in Erzerum, some taxes were abolished. A revolutionary situation began to take shape in the country. The authorities were able to bring down the revolutionary wave in Anatolia, but in the capital the ranks of the revolutionaries only got stronger. In 1906, a new secret Ottoman Freedom Society was established in Thessaloniki, which gained significant influence among army officers. In 1907, it merged with the Society for Progress and Unity. The new movement was called the Ottoman society of progress and unity. It had two centers: the outer - in Paris and the inner - in Thessaloniki. The committee in Thessaloniki actively promoted and recruited new members in army units located in European Turkey. At the same time, a rapprochement with national parties and groups - the Armenian national-bourgeois parties and groups, the Macedonian liberation movement.

In December 1907, the second Young Turks Congress took place in Paris. A general program was formed. Turkey was silent about the future state system of Turkey, but said about the establishment of the constitution and the convening of parliament. The revolution began with Macedonia. Landlessness and land shortages, a huge tax burden, the arbitrariness and corruption of the Turkish administration, religious and national contradictions made this area a constant focus of national and anti-feudal speeches. The port drowned them in blood, but it became increasingly difficult to do, and the pressure of the great powers kept growing. The inability of Istanbul to resolve the Macedonian issue forced Russia and England to decide on the introduction of troops into the region to “maintain order”.

The Young Turks decided that this was an opportune time for an uprising to establish a constitution in the country and prevent foreign interference in the affairs of the country. The Paris Center recommended expanding recruitment among the military and youth, creating secret shock groups. The propaganda of the Young Turks in Thessaloniki, among the soldiers, junior and middle officers, was especially successful. Salary delays intensified general discontent in the military.

In the spring of 1908, a wave of riots swept through the military units. In the summer, the Sultan made changes in the command of the troops stationed in Macedonia, and ordered the arrests to begin at the Salonik garrison. However, this only intensified discontent. The revolutionary movement embraced almost all the officers. The military did not hesitate to express their discontent, saying that the government leads the country to death and foreign occupation. Local officials also joined the officers. In early July, the 1908 began an uprising. The first was the squad Niyazi Bey. Soon he was joined by detachments from other garrisons. Niyazi-Bey sent a letter to the Sultan, demanding an end to the repressions, the restoration of the 1876 constitution of the year, and the convening of parliament.

The Sultan tried to move the parts loyal to him against the center of the uprising, but their composition was propagated by the Young Turks. The head of the punitive expedition was killed. The non-Turkish population of Macedonia began to join the rebels. Macedonian and Albanian nationalist organizations supported the rebels. Army units one after another joined the rebels. The performance turned into a mass uprising. Sultan tried to throw against the rebels from Anatolia. However, all the battalions arriving in Thessaloniki refused to join against the European troops and the rebels. The rebels were supported by thousands of armed Albanians.

The authorities were forced to show flexibility. An amnesty was announced to arrested young Turks. Urgent money was found for the payment of salaries to the soldiers. But it was impossible to stop the revolution. In many cities of Macedonia, the Young Turks proclaimed the restoration of the 1876 constitution of the year. On July 23, the Young Turks in Edirne (Adrianople) promised to move the 2 Army Corps to the capital. The Sultan and the government accepted the demands of the revolutionaries. July 24 issued a decree of the Sultan to restore the constitution. The decree promised to convene a parliament. Rallies in support of the constitution swept through the cities of the Ottoman Empire. Political prisoners were freed from prisons everywhere. In Thessaloniki, Istanbul and other cities for several days, there were huge demonstrations. Muslims fraternized with Christians. It seemed that the spring of freedom had come.

July 25 Sultan issued a decree on the amnesty of all revolutionaries. About 80 thousand people were amnestied - prisoners and immigrants. However, the joy did not last long. It soon became clear that the Sultan was not going to give in, and the Young Turks were not democrats at all. Attempts by peasants in the Anatolia were suppressed by the local Young Turk committees with the help of gendarmerie. When the Albanians began to demand autonomy, the Young Turks threatened their former allies with artillery. The Young Turks, with the help of the army, suppressed the actions of workers and railway workers in Istanbul, Izmir, Izmit and other cities. It turned out that the Young Turks, in fact, continue the former imperial course. It was a top coup, not a radical revolution, radically changing the political and socio-economic image of the country.


Proclamation of the restoration of the constitution at the rally

To be continued ...
Author:
47 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. MIV999
    MIV999 1 November 2014 08: 05
    +23
    Oh, this east ... "Thin" matter ... There were always misunderstandings with them ... and there will still be so many of them - Mom, do not worry request ...
    Turkey is our eternal Not an ally ... But sometimes Not an enemy ...
    For example, now we go there regularly and with pleasure we go to rest bully ... Okay...
    We assume that we are training wink ... in case of a march soldier )))
    1. Federal
      Federal 1 November 2014 08: 15
      +2
      Damn, as capaciously said, there’s nothing even to add! soldier
      Quote: MIV999
      Oh, this east ... "A delicate" matter ... There were always misunderstandings with them ... and there will be so many more - mom, do not cry request ...
      Turkey is our eternal Not an ally ... But sometimes Not an enemy ...
      For example, now we go there regularly and with pleasure we go to rest bully ... Okay ...
      We assume that we are training wink ... in case of a soldier march)))
    2. Siberian
      Siberian 1 November 2014 09: 02
      +2
      In fact, it is said simply and accurately.
    3. Pervusha Isaev
      Pervusha Isaev 1 November 2014 12: 04
      +7
      looking down from the future to the past, interesting observations can be made. The Ataman-Ottoman Empire, after a turning point in its history of the 1826 SUPPRESSION OF THE YANICHAR RIOT, from a strong and respected power slipped into the role of a secondary semi-colony. Why did this happen? The Janissaries is the STANDING RIDGE OF ATAMANIA HAS BEEN REFRIGERATED by European intrigues. And here is the MOST INTERESTING Turkey lost ALL African and Asian lands in the 19th century, and these were not small territories. ALL WESTERN COAST OF AFRICA, Middle East, Iraq. ALL of these lands became colonies of France and England, but these countries essentially CUT the Turkish Empire became the BEST FRIENDS of Turkey and this continues until now. The same can be said about Japan. This is how it is necessary to conduct FOREIGN POLICY, it is necessary not only to crush and humiliate the enemy, but also to make him his own if not friend, but FOREVER deprive him of independence in foreign policy ...
      1. xan
        xan 1 November 2014 20: 09
        +6
        once in St. Petersburg he was driving a peasant to a car, he turned out to be a Turkish civil engineer, who spoke Russian with an oriental accent. He admitted that he considers Russia a historical enemy of Turkey. He believes that it was the rivalry with Russia that led to the decline of the Ottoman Empire. Among the Turkish nationalists, the Ottoman Empire is popular, and everyone remembers the role of our country there.
        In short, the Poles take two.
      2. Selevc
        Selevc 2 November 2014 14: 16
        +1
        Quote: Pervusha Isaev
        The Ataman-Ottoman Empire, after a turning point in its history of the 1826 SUPPRESSION OF THE YANICHAR RIOT, from a strong and respected power slipped into the role of a secondary semi-colony.

        The Turks in the 20th century had another turning point - this was a defeat in the 1st World War and the rise to power of AtaTurk ... Turkey in the 20th century changed beyond recognition - from a huge motley Asian empire to a cohesive modern republic ... Reforms changed the very foundations of the state - up to the introduction of the Latin alphabet, the transition to the Gregorian calendar and the destruction of many feudal remnants of the past and, by the way, the separation of religion from the state. .. The popularity and power of Ataturk in the Turkic environment is colossal - it can only be compared with the popularity of Lenin in the Soviet era ...
        And as a result of these reforms, Turkey at the beginning of the 21st century is an economically rapidly developing state, gaining influence in the region, having a strong army and navy, and by the way has adopted clear positive social laws for the population that apply to absolutely all citizens ...
        What surprised me most in Turkey was that for the Turks, the historical enemies No. 1 were not Russian (although there were many wars with Russia), but the Greeks. They even have a holiday - Victory Day in the war of independence against the Greek invaders ...
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. siberalt
      siberalt 2 November 2014 15: 33
      0
      Yes, it will be for you. Why did we have to share the strait with the Turks? This makes everyone worse. It is all and short-lived. The Anglo - Saxons need it. That is why they are playing us off on the same one now. To seal us in a Black Sea "bottle" and deprive us of sales markets. Now the land to the Crimea was blocked. All their "Wishlist" are of the same order
  2. shurup
    shurup 1 November 2014 08: 06
    +7
    It is more correct to say that Germany deliberately provoked Turkey to enter the war, simply putting it before the fact of the beginning of the database.
    But let's wait for the continuation of the article.
    1. avt
      avt 1 November 2014 09: 26
      +4
      Quote: shurup
      It is more correct to say that Germany deliberately provoked Turkey to enter the war, simply putting it before the fact of the beginning of the database.

      Such a tangle of snakes was in the fight for Turkey - Mama do not cry! After all, it was not from an oak tree that Goeben and a friend collapsed into the Turkish fleet with crews! After all, negotiations were underway between Turkey and Russia and Turkey was the initiator of entering the war on the side of the Entente with the granting of privileges to Russia on the passage through the England in its colonial understanding of events, and the provision of guarantees of non-interference in the territories that Turkey considered to be a zone of its interests, including Bulgaria, which was not very friendly at that time with respect to Russia. So at the event of those years, such a detective series can be shot - you will download. everything turned up - the Angles confiscated the battleship that the Turks had built, with the money collected by the way by subscription - voluntary contributions, the Germans immediately rushed in advance and compensated with "Goeben" and this, like a shadow, leaked through the great grand fleet in the Mediterranean into the Black Sea and practically its Hermenian crew headed by the newly formed "Turkish" admiral, he put the Sultan before the fact of the beginning of hostilities th! Well, neither give nor take as those dignitaries who, before the outbreak of the war, explained to Nika # 2 that partial mobilization for political purposes cannot be canceled. Why? Because you can't.
    2. Alex
      Alex 1 November 2014 20: 18
      +2
      Quote: shurup
      It is more correct to say that Germany deliberately provoked Turkey to enter the war, simply putting it before the fact of the beginning of the database.

      It is said that when Turkish naval minister Cemal found out about the "Sevastopol wake-up call", he yelled in fury: "Damned pig Sushon did it all the same!"
  3. TECHNOLOGY
    TECHNOLOGY 1 November 2014 08: 29
    0
    Turkey is not only the history of the development of civilizations. At present, they will not be "whipping boys". A sufficiently powerful and combat-ready army. There is no translation about it. Who understands will throw off.
    1. Yuri Sev Caucasus
      Yuri Sev Caucasus 2 November 2014 10: 00
      +2
      In the south-east of Ukraine, this would have already become scrap metal. For the war with the Kurds will go, but with Syria there will not be enough losses will be irreparable.
      1. SSR
        SSR 2 November 2014 18: 23
        +1
        Quote: Yuri Sev Caucasus
        In the south-east of Ukraine, this would have already become scrap metal. For the war with the Kurds will go, but with Syria there will not be enough losses will be irreparable.

        Today, the Syrian army is equipped worse than the Turkish army, but this did not stop the Syrians from putting a Turkish elite officer special forces with all its super dupers a year ago

        February 28, 2013
        ANKARA, 27 February. In Syria, Turkey’s special forces detachment suffered irreparable losses - the elite officer detachment Combat Search and Rescue "(CSR). According to some reports, the unit of so-called Kelbeti (ghosts) was almost completely destroyed.
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. UralMan
    UralMan 1 November 2014 08: 42
    +1
    Excuse me THIS is a lesson to eliminate universal historical illiteracy?
    Or show us - look around enemies!
    So in this, I think there’s no need to tell us.
    That would be good - to teach a lesson on the topic HOW TO LIVE IN THE WORLD
    And the less we will touch on topics of military confrontations between nations in the future, and talk more about the peaceful building of relations.
    I think everyone will benefit.
    Look around, only strife and war, and if there is a theme of creation, then again it is presented with political motivation. What else can we not do?
  6. kelevra
    kelevra 1 November 2014 08: 44
    +1
    To understand the eternal wars with Turkey well, you need to study history well. All the rulers of Turkey were servants of Great Britain. One of our geopolitical adversaries is Great Britain, he always tried to destroy us, his most important adversary, with the hands of a third party, Turkey. This has always been the case with other countries. , the British always swept us at the Swedes, then the Pole, then the French. The only one, Turkey occupies a special place, because there was a risk of losing their territories and keeping already repelled in previous wars!
    1. Rastas
      Rastas 1 November 2014 11: 12
      -4
      The fact that Turkey led an anti-Russian policy is to blame for Russia itself, in which Turkey has for centuries been portrayed as the fiend of hell. At the same time, they forget that freedom of religion was guaranteed in Turkey, many Slavs served in the army of the Sultan, half of the population of Istanbul at that time were Greeks, in whose hands almost all trade in the western regions of Turkey was in their hands. The Russian philosopher Leontyev warned as early as 1875: "The existence of a united Turkey ... is beneficial both to us and to most of our co-religionists in the Balkans." A simple geopolitical analysis allows us to see that, in the event of a conflict between Russia and Germany and Austria-Hungary, Turkey, while it possessed large possessions in Europe, could be the most valuable land ally of Russia. In other words, if Russia had not expelled Turkey from Europe, then World War I might not have begun at all. Or it would have begun in a different geopolitical combination, much more favorable for Russia.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 1 November 2014 21: 06
        +2
        Quote: Rastas
        The fact that Turkey conducted an anti-Russian policy is to blame for Russia itself

        You draw such a conclusion through the prism of history written in the West.
        1. Cristall
          Cristall 2 November 2014 12: 52
          -2
          Quote: Setrac
          You draw such a conclusion through the prism of history written in the West.

          why? I would not say. For example, is there a desire to master the straits? There is. It is vitally important (whoever owns the straits owns the World Cup) is a necessary business. But this is Turkish land (you don’t need to go into history and draw the Byzantium-Russia parallels)
          means the seizure of Turkish land for the interests of Russia-unfair. But RI never ceased to be "interested" in the straits. Considering it fair to whip up the religious overtones of the "justice" of the struggle (cross on St. Sofia)
          in general, what I want to say ... To give their actions in politics (pure pragmatism and grandmothers) "justice" they use different ways of legalizing this justice. This is religion, this is drawing the image of the enemy and so on. Reducing the crowd to simple truths IS THE ENEMY.
          1. Pervusha Isaev
            Pervusha Isaev 2 November 2014 13: 14
            +1
            Quote: Cristall
            For example, is there a desire to master the straits?

            there may be a desire, but there has never been a war over the straits, moreover, England had the desire to capture the straits in World War I, but Turkey and England were friends ...
    2. Alex
      Alex 1 November 2014 20: 21
      +2
      Quote: kelevra
      All rulers of Turkey were servants of Great Britain. One of our geopolitical adversaries, Great Britain, has always tried to destroy us, his most important adversary, with the hands of a third party, Turkey.
      Yes, and when they were independent, they did not very much favor us. That would not say anything worse.
  7. Turkir
    Turkir 1 November 2014 09: 30
    +1
    Turkish government. Clickable.
  8. Prager
    Prager 1 November 2014 09: 40
    +6
    always beat the Turks, what did they hope for, the might of Germany, or that the Russians would flee only when they saw the Turkish banners in the distance?
    1. smile
      smile 1 November 2014 10: 38
      +10
      Prager
      Yes, we beat them. But the war with the Turks was never easy. They have always been a serious enemy. Indeed, at one time, not in a store, they bought a huge empire from Africa to Europe. They won it in a fierce fight with strong opponents. It is not for nothing that Europe trembled for several centuries at the mere mention of the word "Ottomans". And even the fact that Turkey was weak by WW1 does not mean that it was easy to beat. Weakness did not prevent the Turks from knocking out the teeth of the Entente troops with a bang when attempting to capture the Straits, despite all the technical superiority of the Entente.
      1. Ascetic
        Ascetic 1 November 2014 11: 01
        +3
        Quote: smile
        They have always been a serious adversary. Indeed, at one time, not in a store, they bought a huge empire from Africa to Europe.


        The Ottoman Empire itself on the eve of the war was torn by numerous contradictions and social problems. The main reason for these problems seems to be that the Young Turks, instead of the doctrine of Ottomanism calling for unity and brotherhood of all peoples of the empire, gradually adopted extremely reactionary concepts of pan-Turkism and pan-Islamism. Moreover, the ideas of Europeanization of Turkey were very strong. This path led to a further crisis and subsequently to the collapse of the Empire. In the military-strategic plan, the need for war already on the FOUR front led to a logical defeat.
        1. Rastas
          Rastas 1 November 2014 11: 18
          +4
          After the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–1878 The Balkan Peninsula was covered by a network of independent nation-states. This was a triumph of traditional Russian politics in the "eastern issue", but it turned into its fiasco. None of the states liberated by Russia in their foreign policy was guided entirely by Russia. All of them maneuvered between different world centers of power, pursuing their own benefits and constantly quarreling among themselves.
          The new kingdoms already in 1885 entered the struggle for the redistribution of the imperial inheritance (Bulgarian-Serbian war). In the years 1912-1913. two Balkan wars broke out in a row. During the first, Turkey was almost deprived of its last possessions in Europe. During the second, the former allies attacked Bulgaria. Russia, which supported the anti-Turkish coalition, was not able to be an arbiter for its quarreling members.
        2. smile
          smile 1 November 2014 13: 29
          +3
          Ascetic
          Here I agree. The Ottoman Empire, in many respects, weakened for "internal" reasons, aggravated by the fact that they overstrained, carrying out external expansion - well, this is true for any empire. And I wrote such a comment because it has become fashionable here - ugh, some kind of Turks, but we always beat them in one fell swoop ... such moods, of course, are better than - fseproslalislifse, but you can run into them great. :)))
      2. Alex
        Alex 1 November 2014 20: 33
        +4
        Quote: smile
        They have always been a serious opponent. Indeed, at one time, not in a store, they bought a huge empire from Africa to Europe. They won it in a fierce fight with strong opponents. It is not for nothing that Europe trembled for several centuries at the mere mention of the word "Ottomans".

        It is, of course, yes, but they rather amassed an empire on the wreckage of the Arab Caliphate, which had previously crushed all more or less serious opponents. Who stayed there in Africa? Nobody. In Asia? Also, mainly local opponents. Europe at that time was generally more at war with cats and pigs, and the Inquisition had fun with fires with witches. And the "Ottomans" were taken mainly by the huge size of the army, the fanaticism of the soldiers (and why should such a life be protected, this is not a European knight-baron, he has something to lose) and the fact that the general technical level of the armies of that time was so low that even Turkey could afford it. It was later, when the era of armor and steam (and not bronze and scimitar) came, it became clear that madrasah is not a general education school, that a scientist should not only know the Koran and deal with astrology, that agriculture is good, but industry is also needed ... We understood this at the time of the first Romanovs, but all the "gazavats" shouted and hoped for the help of clever Europeans. So they jumped to the complete collapse of the country. If it weren't for Kemal, we wouldn't even hear about a country like Turkey today (well, perhaps, in a history textbook, somewhere after Alexander the Great and the Roman Empire).
        1. andrew42
          andrew42 3 November 2014 17: 44
          0
          Well said. Neither subtract nor add. An interesting historical parallel - the Ottoman Empire, having crushed Byzantium in the 15th century, itself repeated the same scenario by contacting Western European "friends". And Kemal is really great, pulled Turkey out of history's toilet at the last moment. True, the Turkish leadership has recently been taking on all that Ataturk's turn. Again "friends" with Europe (NATO), and again raving about Pan-Turkism (European seed for the direction against Russia). Turkey has always been interested in Europe only in terms of how to grab a piece of the Ottoman Empire, and how to redirect the military activity of the angry Ottomans against Russia and its supporting peoples (Greece, Bulgaria of the 19th century, Armenia, and so on). With the exception of Turkey being kicked out of the Balkans and the Northern Black Sea region (Russia's historical sphere of influence), the rest of the Turks' troubles are due to their European "friends" replacing each other in the role of a promise.
      3. Cristall
        Cristall 2 November 2014 12: 58
        +1
        Quote: smile
        Yes, we beat them. But the war with the Turks was never easy

        You can’t throw hats in vain. Turks are a very serious rival at all times. And it’s not always that they were beaten.
        The same Rod is the same Silistria .. the same Osman Pasha .. Pleven ..
        For various reasons, but the Turks can very well defeat everyone. This is a serious opponent at all times ... they really conquered this territory and settled for a reason. They fought all my life ..
        Underestimation (we always beat them) and do not welcome hats ... With the Japanese hats "helped"
    2. Rastas
      Rastas 1 November 2014 11: 14
      0
      Turkish rulers were afraid of the war and tried their best to avoid it. They were afraid of Russia, which for more than two centuries invariably beat Turkey. July 20 (August 2) 1914 Minister of War and Actual Ruler of Turkey Enver Pasha through the Russian Ambassador in Istanbul M.N. Girsa sent to Petersburg a formal proposal of a military alliance! Naturally, subject to guaranteeing the possession of Constantinople and the Bosphorus and Dardanelles over Turkey. But the Russian government did not want to give these guarantees! This was a refusal, clearly showing the true intentions of the ruling circles of Russia in relation to Turkey. It is not surprising that within two days the German-Turkish military alliance was concluded. Enver Pasha simply had no other opportunity to ensure Turkey’s security.
      1. Turkir
        Turkir 2 November 2014 13: 33
        0
        After the defeat of Germany and the victory of the Young Turks, it is interesting to trace the transformation of Enver Bey, this "de facto" ruler of Turkey, and his inglorious end.
        All his throwing, including moving to Germany, then to Moscow and gaining a post in Turkestan ... from the hands of the Bolsheviks, treason and coup in Turkestan, characterizes him as a political adventurer, and not a major political figure, as fans want him to see pan-Turkism.
    3. Rastas
      Rastas 1 November 2014 11: 16
      +1
      The most ardent inspirers of the capture of the Straits were liberal circles. The leader of the largest party of the liberal opposition — the constitutional democratic (cadets) —P.N. Milyukov, who was even nicknamed "Milyukov-Dardanelles." He argued that without ownership of the Straits, the Russian economy would suffocate. The whole subsequent XX century showed that Russia can quite successfully develop without the Straits, that “we do not need the Turkish coast” at all. The possession of the Straits was necessary to increase profits from the export of grain and other types of raw materials, that is, a comprador layer of the Russian bourgeoisie.
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 1 November 2014 12: 34
        +4
        Quote: Rastas
        The most ardent inspirers of the capture of the Straits were liberal circles. The leader of the largest party of the liberal opposition — the constitutional democratic (cadets) —P.N. Milyukov, who was even nicknamed "Milyukov-Dardanelles." He argued that without ownership of the Straits, the Russian economy would suffocate. The whole subsequent XX century showed that Russia can quite successfully develop without the Straits, that “we do not need the Turkish coast” at all. The possession of the Straits was necessary to increase profits from the export of grain and other types of raw materials, that is, a comprador layer of the Russian bourgeoisie.

        In fact, if not for the revolution of 17 years, the straits would most likely have been captured by the Russian Empire, because the operation at that time was already developed by the General Staff ...
        1. smile
          smile 1 November 2014 13: 36
          +1
          PSih2097
          Even before the start of WWII, France and Britain agreed that Russia should in any case be weakened and, preferably, divided, and that the straits should not fall into Russia's hands under any circumstances. We would not have been given, too Russia at that time became dependent on its allies.
          1. Alex
            Alex 1 November 2014 20: 43
            +2
            Quote: smile
            straits should not fall into the hands of Russia under any circumstances. We would not have been given, too Russia at that time became dependent on its allies.

            Right About the same after the Russo-Turkish war of 1877-78, when Russia itself liberated all the Balkans, Europe explained who was the master. Yes, and hinted about the Crimean War.
  9. AlexA
    AlexA 1 November 2014 10: 04
    +4
    By the way, colleagues, does the situation in the Turkish economy (foreign jurisdiction of almost the entire industry, outflow of capital abroad, borrowing) resemble the current situation in Russia?
    1. smile
      smile 1 November 2014 10: 41
      0
      AlexA
      :))) There is such a thing. But, in my opinion, more, after all, resembles the nineties. Now the situation is still clearly different, and it is recovering, although not as fast as we would like.
  10. rakiuzo
    rakiuzo 1 November 2014 10: 39
    -8
    About Armenians - a lie! In the context of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, Armenians were also in parliament and at high posts (I recall that some padishahs took Armenian wives). Natsionalism, which has shown its litso since the mid-19th century in the Balkans, increased the appetite of the Armenians. Plus, Russia stimulated the process of the Armenian uprising. During the First World War, the Armenians began their riots, and Talat Pasha had to send them to peaceful territories, as Stalin repeated his move during the Second World War. Both people died here and there, but to call it genotside is impudence! Why did the economics of the Ottoman Empire suffer so much in those times? Yes, because of the Russians! They attacked Sinop, and the Ottomans, in order to take revenge, agreed with the British and we all remember what happened in Crimea. And the English are cunning - they demanded that the Turks pay for them for everything. During the Crimean War, the Turks took debt from the West for the first time, and never managed to cope with these debams due to high protesents until the end of the First World War. Only in Lausanne in 1923 did the Turks persuade the West to pay not banknotes but banknotes. The Turks entered the war because of Enver Pasha - the son-in-law of the padishah. Enver Pasha lived in Berlin and was delighted with the German culture. He took the wrong step and the empire ended up in war. Because of him, in the Sarıkamış battle, tens of thousands of unprepared soldiers died or froze in the Caucasus. After the war, he could not resist against Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and left for Central Asia to organize the Turkish peoples against Russia; in Tajikistan, he was at a loss in the battle with the Russians. .... I will wait for the continuation of the article.
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 1 November 2014 12: 36
      +1
      and the Russian language is included in the Windows that prevents, and the Russian alphabet for Claudia is often sold in any computer. store ...
      1. rakiuzo
        rakiuzo 3 November 2014 12: 55
        0
        Eto uzhe davno obsuzhdeno na etom sajte s moderatoramy i adminamy. Mne legche pisat 'na latynitse i budu pisat' na latynitse!
    2. Setrac
      Setrac 1 November 2014 21: 12
      +2
      Quote: rakiuzo
      rakiuzo

      Oh, those "evil" Armenians. I bet you are Azerbaijani.
      1. rakiuzo
        rakiuzo 3 November 2014 08: 04
        -1
        Ja Turok i gotov sporit '!
    3. Turkir
      Turkir 2 November 2014 14: 01
      -1
      Moscow in this fight chose Mustafa Kemal.
      Chicherin believed that the popularity of Enver Pasha’s pan-Turkic ideas would help the Soviet government in Turkestan in the fight against Basmachism, where he was sent in November 1921.

      A biography of Enver Pasha can be found on Wikipedia. It is available to everyone.
      "After the war he could not hold out against Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and left for Central Asia.
      "
      He left for Central Asia FROM MOSCOW, and he received the post of head of Turkestan, FROM Bolsheviks. Didn't you know that?
      You DO NOT WANT to mention this, because it is NOT TO YOUR BENEFIT.
      Fascinated by German culture?
      Enver Bey was "fascinated" by the German army, this bearer of GERMAN CULTURE. It's not funny anymore.
      It is a pity that commentators from Russia miss perversions of historical facts.
      1. rakiuzo
        rakiuzo 3 November 2014 08: 19
        -2
        Ja prochital i russkuju versiju i turetskuju versiju biografii Envera-Pashi. Oni otlichajutsja. Ja hochu, chtoby chitateli sajta znali i turetskuju versiju. On byl pan-turkistom. Ja ne otritsaju, chto on otpravlen bol'shevikamy v Turkistan i chto s togo? On tam protiv krasnoj armii ob'edinil basmachej i voevalsja s krasnymi da i pogib. My v Turtsii ego ne ochen 'to ljubim, chto on imepriju zagonjal v vojnu, chto v Sarıkamişe iz-za nego pogibli soldaty, on vo vremja vojny s grekamy vstupal protiv Mustafa Kemal Atatjurka i td
  11. pinecone
    pinecone 1 November 2014 10: 49
    +3
    Quote: avt
    But how interesting it all turned out - the Angles confiscated the battleship that the Turks had built, with the money collected by the way by subscription - voluntary contributions, the Germans immediately rushed in advance and compensated with "Goeben" and this, like a shadow, leaked through the great grand fleet in the Mediterranean into the Black Sea and practically his Hermenian crew, headed by the newly formed "Turkish" admiral, confronted the Sultan with the fact of the beginning of hostilities! Well, neither give nor take as those dignitaries who, before the outbreak of the war, explained to Niki # 2 that partial mobilization for political purposes cannot be canceled. Why? Because you can't.


    In fact, the Turks ordered and fully paid for the construction of 2 battleships at British shipyards- Sultan Osman и Decision. In July 1914 the ships passed sea trials and prepared for acceptance by Turkish crews who arrived in England. At the initiative of Churchill, who was then the Minister of the Sea, both battleships were requisitioned and transferred to the British Navy, and the money received for them was counted towards paying off Turkish debts.
    1. avt
      avt 1 November 2014 11: 38
      0
      Quote: pinecone
      In fact, the Turks ordered and fully paid for the construction of 2 battleships at the British shipyards - Sultan Osman and Reshadie.

      hi Right! I forgot about the second.
    2. Turkir
      Turkir 2 November 2014 14: 08
      0
      flot
  12. Vivat
    Vivat 1 November 2014 12: 37
    +3
    Thank you for the article. It was interesting to read.
  13. tanit
    tanit 1 November 2014 13: 10
    +1
    Muslim Turkey missed Iraqi Muslim Kurds to help Syrian Muslim Kurds, who are slaughtered under the banner of Islam. One hundred years ago - who could have imagined this?
    It remains to establish a military alliance with the Kurdish Workers' Party, and there, to Kurdistan, is one step.
    1. Ramadan
      Ramadan 1 November 2014 13: 30
      +1
      Yes, even 20-25 years ago, it was hard to imagine. The world has seriously changed.
    2. andrew42
      andrew42 3 November 2014 17: 50
      0
      So Erdogan essentially had no choice, otherwise Turkey would soon repeat the fate of Syria. However, it is not over yet, Erdogan may still make a mistake, still deciding to warm his hands in the Syrian crisis. The United States would be very happy if Turkey climbs into the Iraqi-Syrian cauldron to drag chestnuts from the fire to the table of the US oligarchs. Warmed up "that you are Turks, where is your pan-Turkism" - it works, and there is no guarantee that the Turks will not buy it.
  14. lwxx
    lwxx 1 November 2014 14: 18
    +1
    [b] [b] At the beginning of the century, 3 million pounds of ore were mined in the Ottoman Empire, but about 100 thousand pounds remained for local consumption. The rest was exported and processed at foreign enterprises. Metals returned as finished goods[/B]Some kind of de javu. But in general, the Turks are serious opponents and hat-calling appeals are inappropriate.
  15. ruslan207
    ruslan207 1 November 2014 16: 51
    +2
    It is a pity that the Bolsheviks saved Turkey
    1. Yuri Sev Caucasus
      Yuri Sev Caucasus 2 November 2014 10: 10
      0
      and gave them the Kara region
  16. Ima tsoh
    Ima tsoh 1 November 2014 19: 25
    +2
    A country that was created on foreign lands with the destruction of indigenous peoples and in history did not have its own stable position, sooner or later what did and will get.
    1. Setrac
      Setrac 1 November 2014 21: 14
      0
      Quote: Ima tsoh
      A country that was created on foreign lands

      This is a lie of Western historians.
      Quote: Ima tsoh
      with the annihilation of indigenous peoples and in history, it did not have its own stable position, sooner or later what it did and will receive.

      In that case, when will the USA get what it deserves?
    2. andrew42
      andrew42 3 November 2014 18: 00
      +1
      Well, why so categorically. That the Seljuks, that the Ottomans acted no worse and no better than other peoples. They migrated to Asia Minor by all (!) The people, fled from some, expelled others. Yes, they crushed Byzantium, no words. Orthodox from this is bitter. Nevertheless, the Turks found their homeland in Asia Minor. Were conquerors - yes. There was a shame on the extermination of Armenians, yes. But what excuse me to do with them? - Now the Turks live in their own country, do not expel them from there? And most importantly, where? Everyone has the right to a homeland. It is promised to tear out two eyes to the one who forgets the past, but one eye to the one who remembers it. Like it or not, but Turkey is a country with a great culture. All the troubles come from the desire of others and hatred of the culture of a neighbor. There is no need to multiply this - this is always used by a backstage director, for whom both the aggressor and the victim are just pawns.
  17. xent
    xent 1 November 2014 21: 55
    +2
    Quote: rakiuzo
    About Armenians - a lie! In the context of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century, Armenians were also in parliament and at high posts (I recall that some padishahs took Armenian wives). Natsionalism, which has shown its litso since the mid-19th century in the Balkans, increased the appetite of the Armenians. Plus, Russia stimulated the process of the Armenian uprising. During the First World War, the Armenians began their riots, and Talat Pasha had to send them to peaceful territories, as Stalin repeated his move during the Second World War. Both people died here and there, but to call it genotside is impudence!

    Facts remain facts ... After the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-78. an agreement was concluded in San Stefano. Article 16 stated that the Turkish authorities had to carry out reforms in the Armenian lands and the guarantor of this would be the Russian troops, who would remain there to ensure the implementation of reforms. However, the Western powers did not accept the clauses of this treaty, and soon a new treaty was signed in Berlin where the 16th article was changed to 61. And according to article 61, the Western powers became the guarantor of reforms for the Armenians and, accordingly, Russian troops were not supposed to remain in the Armenian autonomy ... Well, after that, of course, it is understandable that the massacre of Armenians began instead of reforms. As the article says, at the end of the 19th century, about 300 Armenians were killed, they were killed systematically for being a Gyavuri (a non-believer) and for being sympathetic to Russia. After the Young Turkish revolution in 000, there was a massacre of Armenians in the city of Adana, where about 1909 Armenians were killed. Well, in 30, when everything that is called the Armenian genocide began. The Armenians were not deported to peaceful territories. As written in the Taliat telegram. "the place of deportation is nowhere". Later, in the Turkish parliament, he will say "The Armenian question does not exist, since there are no more Armenians in Turkey."
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. siberalt
      siberalt 5 November 2014 01: 00
      0
      Do not judge by my profile picture. I didn’t have Armenians in my family. But, it is considered to be the genocide of Armenians in 1915. But there is a completely different story. hi
      1. xent
        xent 6 November 2014 22: 48
        0
        On April 24, 1915, the memory date of the victims of the genocide was announced, since on that day the entire Armenian elite was arrested. But the extermination of Armenians began long before that. For example, in 1914, all Armenians who served in the Turkish army were unarmed, and after they were shot ...
  18. SveTok
    SveTok 2 November 2014 08: 38
    0
    Russia’s Turkey is not a competitor and in the future it may become not an enemy, but a worthy neighbor of Russia.
  19. andrew42
    andrew42 3 November 2014 18: 03
    0
    Yes, I would very much like Turkey to become an independent and non-aligned state.