Military Review

Turkish "neutrality", or Hitler's non-warring ally

28
If anyone showed an example of skillful maneuvering and the finest diplomacy in World War II, it was Turkey. As is known, in the 1941 year, Turkey declared its neutrality and strictly followed it throughout the war, although it was under tremendous pressure from both the Axis countries and the anti-Hitler coalition. In any case, Turkish historians say so. However, this is only the official version, strongly diverging from reality.


Turkish "neutrality", or Hitler's non-warring ally

MG 08 machine guns on the minaret of Ai Sophia in Istanbul, September 1941. Photo from ru.wikipedia.org

But the reality was quite different - during the 1941-1944 years. Turkey actually stood on the side of Hitler, although the Turkish soldiers did not shoot a single shot at the side of the Soviet soldiers. Or rather, they did it, and not just one, but all of this was classified as “border incident”, which looked like sheer trifles against the background of the bloody battles of the Soviet-German front. In any case, both sides - Soviet and Turkish - did not react to border incidents and they did not cause far-reaching consequences.

Although for the period 1942-1944. skirmishes at the border were not so rare and often resulted in the death of Soviet border guards. But Stalin preferred not to aggravate relations, since he perfectly understood that if Turkey entered the war on the side of the Axis countries, the position of the USSR from the unenviable could instantly turn into hopeless. This was especially true in 1941-1942.

Turkey did not force the events, remembering well how the participation in the First World War on the side of Germany ended for it. The Turks did not rush headlong to rush into another world massacre, preferring to watch the fight from afar and, of course, to extract the maximum benefit for themselves.

Relations between the USSR and Turkey before the war were fairly even and stable, in 1935 a treaty of friendship and cooperation was extended for another ten-year term, and with Germany, Turkey signed a non-aggression treaty of 18 in June of 1941. Two months later, after the start of the Great Patriotic War, the USSR declared that it would continue to comply with the provisions of the Montreux Convention governing the rules of navigation in the Bosphorus and Dardanelles. And also has no aggressive plans against Turkey and welcomes its neutrality.

All this allowed Turkey to refuse to participate in a world war on completely legal grounds. But it was impossible to do this for two reasons. Firstly, Turkey owned a tormenting area that was strategically important for the warring parties, and, secondly, the Turkish government was going to remain neutral only until a certain moment. What it, in fact, did not hide, at the end of 1941 of the year, approved the law on conscription for senior recruits, which is usually done on the eve of a major war.

In the autumn of 1941, Turkey transferred divisions to the border with the USSR 24, which forced Stalin to strengthen the Transcaucasian Military District 25 with divisions. Which were clearly not superfluous on the Soviet-German front, given the state of affairs at that time.

Since the beginning of 1942, the intentions of Turkey were no longer in doubt among the Soviet leadership, and in April of that year they were transferred to Transcaucasia. tank corps, six aviation regiments, two divisions, and on May 1, the Transcaucasian Front was officially approved.

In fact, the war against Turkey was to start from day to day, since 5 in May 1942, the troops received a directive on readiness to launch a preemptive attack on Turkish territory. However, the matter did not go as far as fighting, although the delay by Turkey of significant forces of the Red Army noticeably helped the Wehrmacht. After all, if the 45 and 46 armies were not in the South Caucasus, but participated in the battles with Paulus's 6 army, it is not yet known what kind of "successes" the Germans would have achieved in the summer campaign of 1942.

But much more damage to the USSR was caused by the cooperation of Turkey with Hitler in the economic sphere, especially the actual opening of the Torrential Zone for the ships of the Axis countries. Formally, the Germans and Italians kept propriety: when the passage of the straits, military sailors dressed in civilian clothes, the weapons from the ships were removed or disguised, and it seemed there was nothing to complain about. Formally, the Montreux Convention was observed, but at the same time not only German and Italian merchant ships, but also combat ships, freely floated through the straits.

And soon it came to the point that the Turkish navy began to escort transports with cargoes for the Axis countries in the Black Sea. Practically, partnership with Germany allowed Turkey to earn good money on supplies to Hitler not only products, tobacco, cotton, iron, copper, etc., but also strategic raw materials. For example, chromium. The Bosphorus and the Dardanelles became the most important communication of the Axis countries fighting against the USSR, who felt in the Pouring Zone, if not like at home, then definitely like visiting close friends.

But rare Soviet ships fleet walked through the Straits in fact, as if to be shot. Which, however, was not far from the truth. In November 1941, four Soviet ships - an icebreaker and three tankers - it was decided to transfer from the Black Sea to the Pacific Ocean in view of their futility and so that they would not become victims of German dive bombers. All four ships were civilian vessels and had no weapons.

The Turks freely let them through, but as soon as the ships left the Dardanelles, the tanker Varlaam Avanesov got a torpedo from the German submarine U652, which is a coincidence! - It turned out to be exactly in the path of the Soviet ships.

Whether German intelligence quickly worked, or “neutral” Turks shared information with partners, but the fact remains that “Barlaam Avanesov” still lies at the bottom of the Aegean Sea 14 kilometers from the island of Lesbos. The icebreaker "Anastas Mikoyan" was more fortunate, and he was able to escape from the pursuit of Italian boats near the island of Rhodes. The icebreaker was saved only by the fact that the boats were armed with small-caliber anti-aircraft guns, which were quite problematic to sink the icebreaker.

If the German and Italian ships ran through the Straits, as if through their entrance yard, carrying any cargo, the ships of the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition could not bring not only weapons or raw materials into the Black Sea, but even products. Then the Turks immediately turned into angry Cerberus and, referring to their neutrality, forbade Allied ships to go to the Black Sea ports of the USSR. So we had to carry cargo in the USSR not through the Straits, but through far Iran.

The pendulum swung back in the spring of 1944, when it became clear that Germany was losing the war. At first, the Turks reluctantly, but nevertheless yielded to the pressure of England and stopped supplying German industry with chrome, and then began to more closely control the passage of German ships through the Straits.

And then an incredible thing happened: in June 1944, the Turks suddenly “discovered” that not unarmed German ships, but military men, were trying to get through the Bosphorus. The conducted inspection revealed hidden in the holds weapon and ammunition. And a miracle happened - the Germans Turks banally "turned" back to Varna. It is not known what phrases Hitler released to the address of the Turkish President Ismet Inonu, but they were all certainly not parliamentary.

After the Belgrade offensive operation, when it became clear that the German presence in the Balkans was over, Turkey behaved like a typical scavenger, who sensed that yesterday's friend and partner would soon give up the ghost. President Inonu broke off all relations with Germany, and on February 23 of 1945, the belligerent spirit of the Sultans of Mehmet II and Suleiman the Magnificent clearly descended on him - Inonu suddenly took over and declared war on Germany. And along the way - what could it be to waste time on trifles, fight like that! - The war was declared and Japan.

Of course, not a single Turkish soldier took part in it until the end of the war, and a declaration of war on Germany and Japan was an empty formality that allowed Hitler’s partner Turkey, to commit a cheat, and stick to the victor countries. Avoiding serious problems along the way.

There is no doubt that after Stalin had dealt with Germany, he would have a weighty reason to ask the Turks a number of serious questions that could end, for example, with the Istanbul offensive operation and with the Soviet landing force on both sides of the Dardanelles.

Against the background of the victorious, colossal combat experience of the Red Army, the Turkish army did not even look like a whipping boy, but as a harmless boxing bag. Therefore, it would be finished in a matter of days. But after February 23, Stalin could no longer take a war to an “ally” in the anti-Hitler coalition. Although, do it a couple of months earlier, neither England nor the United States would strongly protest, especially since Churchill, at the Tehran Conference, did not object to the transfer of the Strait Zone of the USSR.

One can only guess how many vessels, both commercial and military, of the Axis countries passed through the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles in 1941-1944, how much raw materials Turkey supplied to Germany and how much it extended the existence of the Third Reich. Also, one never knows what price the Red Army paid for the Turkish-German partnership, but there is no doubt that the Soviet soldiers paid for it with their lives.

Virtually the entire war, Turkey was Hitler’s non-military ally, regularly fulfilling all his wishes and supplying them with what is possible. And if, for example, Sweden can also be blamed for supplying iron ore to Germany, then Turkey can be reproached not so much for trading cooperation with the Nazis, as in providing them with the Torrential Zone - the most important global communication. Which in wartime has always acquired and will acquire strategic importance.

The Second World War and the Turkish "neutrality" once again proved what was well known since the Byzantine times: without owning the Straight Zone, no country in the Black Sea-Mediterranean region can claim to be a great one.

This fully applies to Russia, which collapsed in 1917, largely due to the fact that the Russian tsars did not take control of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles in the 19th century, and in World War I, it was badly planned - if you can call it that. landing operation in the Bosphorus.

In our time, the problem of the torrential zone has not become less urgent and it is possible that Russia will face this problem more than once. One can only hope that it will not have such fatal consequences as in 1917.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.km.ru/science-tech/2016/04/12/istoriya-vtoroi-mirovoi-voiny/774934-turetskii-neitralitet-ili-nevoyuyushchi
28 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. EvgNik
    EvgNik April 16 2016 05: 17
    +8
    It would be nice at the first opportunity to correct the mistakes of the past.
    1. novobranets
      novobranets April 16 2016 06: 33
      +12
      Quote: EvgNik
      to fix the mistakes of the past.

      Or show the Turks an account for past, present, and future filth. And the fact that they themselves will not calm down is not even a question.
    2. DanSabaka
      DanSabaka April 16 2016 08: 35
      +9
      Yes, Nicholas II oversaw the opportunity to turn Istanbul back into Orthodox Constantinople .... It's a pity .... Now, oh, how would "Russian straits" not interfere with the Turkish ones ....
      1. the most important
        the most important April 16 2016 09: 37
        +4
        Quote: DanSabaka
        Yes, Nicholas II oversaw the opportunity to turn Istanbul back into Orthodox Constantinople .... It's a pity .... Now, oh, how would "Russian straits" not interfere with the Turkish ones ....

        And now this opportunity is opening. It is necessary to help the Kurds gain independence at the expense of Turkey, and in return from the Kurds, to pay for their state, to take the straits. It’s just that it causes great skepticism that the top ones will decide if even Ukraine was pushed away from itself through Minsk -1,2 ....
        1. Alex
          Alex April 16 2016 13: 43
          +5
          Quote: the most important
          And now this opportunity is opening. It is necessary to help the Kurds gain independence at the expense of Turkey, and in return from the Kurds, to pay for their state, to take the straits. It’s just that it causes great skepticism that the top ones will decide if even Ukraine was pushed away from itself through Minsk -1,2 ....

          I'm not talking about the fact that the Kurds are also a cat in a poke: they will not refuse help (any and in any form), but grandmother said in half the response courtesy.
  2. Fat
    Fat April 16 2016 05: 29
    +7
    Turkey has never been a "weak" country militarily. It is worth relying on both our history and the British one. What was the cost of the landing in Gallipoli? ... However, Turkey's neutrality was not given to the USSR and the Allies for nothing. Tolbukhin's talent made it possible to bring the "neutrals" in Iran into "consciousness" in 1941 in 40-60 days. The example, as it turned out, was very indicative. So, what is better herself, herself ... It was so!
    1. Alex
      Alex April 16 2016 13: 45
      +2
      Quote: Thick
      What did the landing in Gallipoli cost?

      Well, here it’s rather not so much the high qualities of the Turkish army, but rather the headlessness of the English naval leadership (and the First Sea Lord W. Churchill).
  3. Armored optimist
    Armored optimist April 16 2016 05: 32
    +14
    This person cannot be blamed for the love of Russia. But he speaks correctly about Crimea and the Bosphorus with the Dardanelles.
    1. novobranets
      novobranets April 16 2016 06: 30
      +6
      I can’t say that I agree to all 100, but Imran is a very intelligent person.
    2. Heimdall47
      Heimdall47 April 16 2016 09: 14
      +4
      Speaks well bearded
  4. Very old
    Very old April 16 2016 06: 36
    +3
    Quote: novobranets
    Quote: EvgNik
    to fix the mistakes of the past.

    Or show the Turks an account for past, present, and future filth. And the fact that they themselves will not calm down is not even a question.
    OPP-L is far from news - the eternal dog of Europe on the Russian borders
  5. EvgNik
    EvgNik April 16 2016 06: 44
    +2
    Quote: Very old
    the eternal dog of Europe on the Russian borders

    A very correct wording is precisely the dog.
  6. parusnik
    parusnik April 16 2016 07: 53
    +5
    And if, for example, Sweden can also be blamed for the supply of iron ore to Germany... Here, not only Sweden and Turkey can be blamed ... Peace helped Hitler, whoever could ...
    1. Amurets
      Amurets April 16 2016 08: 10
      +4
      Quote: parusnik
      And if, for example, Sweden can also be blamed for the supply of iron ore to Germany ... Here, not only Sweden and Turkey can be blamed ... The world helped Hitler, whoever could ...

      Raw materials, materials, technologies! I am silent about this, since international corporations acted here. But the fact that national military units fought on Hitler’s side came as a surprise to me. Here is a link to the study. Jurado Carlos. Foreign volunteers in the Wehrmacht 1941-1945 .http: //video-foto.su/file_storage/80/6d/inostrannye_dobrovoltsy_v_ve
      rmahte_1941-.pdf
      1. poma
        poma April 16 2016 09: 24
        +2
        Jews were in Soviet captivity. Two were awarded iron crosses for the war against the Soviets.
  7. igordok
    igordok April 16 2016 08: 35
    +2
    But after February 23, Stalin could no longer take and declare war on the “ally” of the anti-Hitler coalition. Although he had done it a couple of months earlier, neither England nor the United States would have vigorously protested, all the more so since Churchill had not objected to the transfer of the USSR Strait Zone at the Tehran Conference.

    I doubt it. Small-bones with bones, rather strangers, will fall, if only to leave Russia without straits.
    1. Alex
      Alex April 16 2016 13: 48
      +4
      Quote: igordok
      I doubt it. Small-bones with bones, rather strangers, will fall, if only to leave Russia without straits.

      I agree. Most likely, Churchill again dragged on the old, still from the time of the WWII, song: you will attack Turkey, but now, and we will bring you straits, but then. Maybe one day...
  8. sa-ag
    sa-ag April 16 2016 09: 18
    +3
    Encyclopedia of Contemporary History from April 2016 "... we have good relations with our neighbors, and we consider the same Turkey a friend" (C) :-)
  9. polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch April 16 2016 12: 01
    +1
    Never mind, the time will come and everything will fall into place, as they say: "All sisters have earrings!", Who deserves what, so chatting about business is one thing, but doing business is another. VVP, Lavrov and Shoigu know what to do and in what sequence. The main thing now is to put the "liberals" in their place, in a corner, and to indicate what for them in the current conditions can be "a step to the left, a step to the right, or a jump in place!" As for Turkey, it was so frightened of the invasion of the USSR troops and the "confiscation" of the straits from property that it insistently began asking NATO immediately after the emergence of this military bloc. The Turks were terrified of a strong USSR, and the army was only supported by American aid, which was the cost of the "stationary minesweeper" stationed in the roadstead of Istanbul in the mid-70s (built in the early 20th century). It was after the collapse (betrayal by a clique of thieves of the "liberalists" of the USSR) the Turks began to raise their heads, and it happened that with a flag, you hesitate, you forget to greet the post - silence !!! Yeah, we dismissed our little nearest neighbors, which is naturally our own fault.
  10. vvp2
    vvp2 April 16 2016 12: 23
    -7
    Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
    And the reality was completely different - during 1941-1944. Turkey actually sided with Hitler, although the Turkish soldiers did not fire a single shot towards the Soviet soldiers.

    And Zimbabwe and Djibouti also meanly and brazenly spoke on the side of Hitler, apparently. Because they did not shoot towards the Soviet soldiers.
    Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
    But Stalin preferred not to aggravate relations, since he perfectly understood that if Turkey enters the war on the side of the Axis countries

    Turkey wanted to sneeze to aggravate or not aggravate Dzhugashvili. She had other constraints. In general, the scoops for some reason give a role to the "influence of the USSR in the world" (which in fact did not exist). This is what propaganda, hammered into the head since childhood and practically with a hammer, means.
    Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
    Although for the period 1942-1944. skirmishes on the border were not so rare and often ended in the death of Soviet border guards.

    And you can count the number of Turkish ships sunk by Soviet submariners.
    Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
    Since the beginning of 1942, Turkey’s intentions no longer cast doubt on the Soviet leadership

    Oh, this is the "wise Soviet leadership". Everyone got it, figured out everything. Like a shosephrenic in a mental hospital.
    Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
    especially the actual opening of the Torrential Zone for Axis ships

    Enchanting nonsense.
    Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
    And soon it came to the point that the Turkish navy began to convoy transports with cargoes for the Axis countries in the Black Sea.

    The farther into the forest, the thicker the partisans. But this is already from the field of know-how. Never before had such a version been read. No, everything had to. But so that, like this, military convoys to the allies of Germany did not have to.
    By the way, on the Black Sea there was only one ally of Germany, at war with the USSR, Romania. I strongly doubt that the Turkish military and civilian ships perched in Romania. I have never heard of such "facts" before.
    Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
    But the rare ships of the Soviet fleet went through the Straits in fact, as if to be shot.

    Passion grows stronger. What will happen next?
    Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
    how the tanker Varlaam Avanesov got a torpedo aboard from the German submarine U652, which is a coincidence! - Was exactly on the route of the Soviet ships.

    Who would have thought that German submarines were then in the seas.
    1. vvp2
      vvp2 April 16 2016 12: 24
      -4
      Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
      Then the Turks immediately turned into evil Cerberus and, referring to their neutrality, forbade the Allied ships to go to the Black Sea ports of the USSR. So I had to carry goods to the USSR not through the Straits, but through distant Iran.

      It would be nice for the author to learn geography. And to answer the question, where did the cargo of allies in the USSR go through the Mediterranean Sea? And most importantly, how could they follow there, with such a concentration of Italian and German fleets.
      Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
      perform a cheating trick and cling to the victorious countries

      Well done. And they won in WW2, and did not suffer losses. You need to learn.
      Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
      he would have a good reason to ask the Turks a number of serious questions that could end, for example, with the Istanbul offensive operation and the Soviet landing on both sides of the Dardanelles.

      Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
      but like a harmless boxing bag.

      Milay. Dzhugashvili did not even dare to utter a word without the permission of his "senior comrades". He had neither soldiers nor food for the "Istanbul operation". Dreamer, damn it.
      A punching bag is called a punching bag. Turkey did not look like a pear at all. And Dzhugashvili knew and took into account all these "factors" very well. Unlike the author of this opus.
      Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
      all the more so since Churchill, at the Tehran Conference, had no objection to the transfer of the Strait Zone of the USSR.

      It is very convenient to tell psychiatrists in ward number 6.
      Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
      how much in providing them with the Strait Zone - the most important world communication.

      It’s strange. The author constantly refers to providing the Axis countries with straits for military purposes. But the paradox is that the Axis countries for some reason did not use this. Or Turkey did not provide?
      Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
      without the possession of the Strait Zone, no country in the Black Sea-Mediterranean region can claim the title of great.

      It would be nice to have an economy.
      Quote: Alexander Plekhanov
      which collapsed in 1917, largely due to the fact that the Russian tsars did not take control of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles in the XNUMXth century

      Right after the doctoral thesis. Without shelving the "brilliant discovery".
    2. The comment was deleted.
  11. aleksandrs95
    aleksandrs95 April 16 2016 12: 40
    +2
    It’s just stupid to take the Dardanelles in vain ways, it will be temporary. In such a delicate matter, influential allies with interests coinciding with ours are necessary. peoples of historical memory and gratitude. There is only a politics with constant interests. We can control the Bosphorus only by becoming a serious empire. We do not extend the economic basis by 10%.
    1. Cartalon
      Cartalon April 16 2016 12: 45
      0
      On the one hand, everything was written correctly, and on the other, arrogance is second happiness. bully
      1. Alex
        Alex April 16 2016 13: 58
        +1
        Quote: Cartalon
        audacity second happiness.

        It is, like, yes, but here's what to do next. It is difficult to capture the territory, but it’s real, but to control it is not an easy task. There really is a need for political motivation and an economic situation better than the current one. But on the other hand, there is no place to rush either: The Straits will not go anywhere in the foreseeable future.
    2. vvp2
      vvp2 April 16 2016 12: 52
      -3
      Quote: aleksandrs95
      We can control the Bosphorus only by becoming a serious empire

      There is one "little thing". It is bad for people to live in an empire. Hungry and often cold.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  12. King
    King April 16 2016 13: 18
    +1
    Well, you, it’s they who collected 700,000 troops from Batumi to fight with Adik?
  13. Chisayna
    Chisayna April 16 2016 13: 21
    +2
    Here is a fellow tribesman of the professor and atalefa. They, too, were starving in a scoop. They always lacked milk and sausages. Here and this vvp2, they can’t forget their hungry childhood in a scoop.
  14. Schultz
    Schultz April 16 2016 16: 44
    0
    I would like to know from the author what forces of the German fleet (class, name, tonnage) were passed at the beginning of the Second World War through the straits, because 1941-1943. were the waiting period for the appearance of the Italian (not German) fleet on the Black Sea coast. The Turks could have violated Montreux, but in this case, our forces in North Persia and possibly the Anglicos would have joined the strike of the Transcaucasian Front. For their own "neutrality" Turkey left Ararat and southern Armenia.
    1. Seal
      Seal 14 February 2020 18: 04
      +1
      Quote: Schultz
      I would like to know from the author what forces of the German fleet (class, name, tonnage) were passed at the beginning of the Second World War through the straits,

      It is usually said that the Turks let either a German cruiser, or a German destroyer, or the Zeefalke patrol ship, as well as the Italian cruiser Tarvisio into the Black Sea.
      A little internet search and we find a book about the history of shipwrecks by Joseph N. Gorza, "The Rise of Sunken Ships."
      Per. from English.- L .: Shipbuilding, 1978.-352 p., ill. eleven
      http://vkrymu.net/book.htm
      We read:
      On May 18, 1928, three tugboats: "Seefalke", "Simeon" and "Pontos", which belonged to one German company, began to tow the cruiser.

      So here it is our terrible Seefalk. It turns out that back in 1928 he worked as who he actually was from the moment of construction - a tugboat.
      And what is the terrible military support vessel Tarvisio?
      Again a small search on the Internet and we find the book "Battleships of the type" VITTORIO VENETO "from the series" Warships of the world ".
      http://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/1007020/Titushkin_-_Lineynye_korabli_ti
      pa_Vittorio_Veneto.html
      In this book, there is a mention of two tankers, which studied the effectiveness of underwater protection.
      The most characteristic feature of battleships of this type should be considered the well-known constructive underwater protection of the Pugliès system, which was worked out by Italians from 1921 to 1931 with field tests on specially refitted tankers Brennero and Tarvisio, which gave very encouraging results.

      So, the terrible Tarvisio turned out to be quite a peaceful tanker.
      Yes, during the war, tankers are supplied with fuel by naval vessels, and a machine gun and even a small cannon can be mounted in tow. But neither a tanker nor a tug themselves are warships. Even if during the war they formally belong to the auxiliary fleet (and during wars in almost all countries of the world civilian vessels were usually requisitioned and became military auxiliary) - it is precisely these that are easiest to pass off as peaceful commercial vessels. By the way, after the war, the Turks recognized that the Italians gave them guarantees that Travisio was an exclusively commercial vessel. I don’t know how, after entering the Black Sea, the Travisio tanker fought with our Black Sea Fleet, the possibly evil and terrible Italian tanker across the sea was chasing our battleship “Paris Commune” (it’s “Sevastopol” from 31.05.1943) - stories about this is unknown.
      So, in the bottom line, we have an old, still Kaiser, German tugboat and an Italian tanker not of the first freshness that passed into the Black Sea! That's just it.
  15. Kibl
    Kibl April 16 2016 18: 35
    +2
    Russia throughout its history in the west was spoiled by England and France and from the middle of the 20th century the USA joined them. Well, in the east, of course, Turkey, we can say our main bosom "friend" for all time!
  16. Ima tsoh
    Ima tsoh April 16 2016 19: 09
    +3
    Turks like Turkey will never change their essence as a country with vile politics and dirty actions. And they will never become partners for Russia in the understanding of this word. They are capable of any meanness, it is proved by history. And this must never be forgotten.
  17. dvg1959
    dvg1959 April 16 2016 21: 28
    +1
    One thing is clear - Turkey has always been an adversary of Russia.
    Even during the partnership, Turkey always hatched insidious plans for Russia.
  18. Gray wolf
    Gray wolf April 20 2016 21: 53
    0
    and there are plenty of generals of divan troops
  19. Seal
    Seal 14 February 2020 17: 49
    +1
    In the autumn of 1941, Turkey transferred divisions to the border with the USSR 24, which forced Stalin to strengthen the Transcaucasian Military District 25 with divisions. Which were clearly not superfluous on the Soviet-German front, given the state of affairs at that time.

    Good. But let's see what was a bit BEFORE THIS?

    And a little before that, namely on August 16, 1941, Moscow handed over the note and demanded that the Iranian government immediately expel all German subjects from Iran. A demand was made to deploy British-Soviet forces in Iran. Tehran refused.

    On August 19, the Iranian government canceled military leave, an additional mobilization of 30 thousand reservists was announced, the army number was increased to 200 thousand people.

    21 August 1941 of the Year The Supreme Command of the USSR informs the British side of its readiness to begin the Iranian operation 25 of August. 23 August 1941, Iran announced the start of the expulsion of Reich nationals from its territory. 25 August 1941 of the year Moscow sent Tehran the last note, which states that given the 5 and 6 clauses of the Treaty in effect between Soviet Russia and Iran of 1921 of the year (they provided for the entry of Soviet troops in case of a threat to the southern borders of Soviet Russia) The USSR has the right to send troops to Iran for the purpose of self-defense. On the same day began the introduction of troops. The Iranian Shah asked for help from the United States, but Roosevelt refused, assuring the Shah that the USSR and Britain had no territorial claims against Iran.

    Three armies entered Iran.

    44th under the command of A. Khadeev (two mountain rifle divisions, two mountain cavalry divisions, tank regiment);
    47th under the command of V. Novikov (two mountain infantry divisions, one infantry division, two cavalry divisions, two tank divisions and a number of other formations) from the ZakVO.
    53rd under the command of S. Trofimenko, it was formed in the Central Asian Military District (SAVO) in July 1941. The 53rd Army included a rifle corps, a cavalry corps and two mountain rifle divisions.
    In addition, the Caspian military flotilla took part in the operation (commander - Rear Admiral F. S. Sedelnikov).

    Two state formations were created in the Soviet zone of occupation - the Mehabad Republic (Kurdish) and South Azerbaijan.
    It is understandable that after such an example with a neighbor, Turkey wanted to better cover its own border. In Turkey, there were more than enough Kurds of their own, who would very much like to have a Kurdish republic in Turkey like the Mehabad Republic in Iran.
  20. Seal
    Seal 14 February 2020 17: 54
    +1
    The Turks freely let them through, but as soon as the ships left the Dardanelles, the tanker Varlaam Avanesov got a torpedo from the German submarine U652, which is a coincidence! - It turned out to be exactly in the path of the Soviet ships.
    Sorry, but do you think that the Dardanelles Strait changes its location every day? The tanker was sailing through Istanbul. In which the German embassy worked. With a naval attaché. If a German naval attache from the terrace of a cafe where he drinks Turkish coffee sees a Soviet ship going to through the Bosphorus to the West, then how much time will it take him to calculate when this ship will leave the Dardanelles? I personally need 1 minute.
    And the Dardanelles Strait has not changed at least the last thousand years of its location.
  21. Seal
    Seal 14 February 2020 18: 01
    +1
    But much more damage to the USSR was caused by the cooperation of Turkey with Hitler in the economic sphere, especially the actual opening of the Torrential Zone for the ships of the Axis countries. Formally, the Germans and Italians kept propriety: when the passage of the straits, military sailors dressed in civilian clothes, the weapons from the ships were removed or disguised, and it seemed there was nothing to complain about. Formally, the Montreux Convention was observed, but at the same time not only German and Italian merchant ships, but also combat ships, freely floated through the straits.

    In fact, not a single Italian or German warship, not a single German or Italian submarine passed through the straits during the entire war. It is usually said that the Turks let either a German cruiser, or a German destroyer, or the Zeefalke patrol ship, as well as the Italian cruiser Tarvisio into the Black Sea.
    A little internet search and we find a book about the history of shipwrecks by Joseph N. Gorza, "The Rise of Sunken Ships."
    Per. from English.- L .: Shipbuilding, 1978.-352 p., ill. eleven
    http://vkrymu.net/book.htm
    We read:
    On May 18, 1928, three tugboats: "Seefalke", "Simeon" and "Pontos", which belonged to one German company, began to tow the cruiser.

    So here it is our terrible Seefalk. It turns out that back in 1928 he worked as who he actually was from the moment of construction - a tugboat.
    And what is the terrible military support vessel Tarvisio?
    Again a small search on the Internet and we find the book "Battleships of the type" VITTORIO VENETO "from the series" Warships of the world ".
    http://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/1007020/Titushkin_-_Lineynye_korabli_ti
    pa_Vittorio_Veneto.html
    In this book, there is a mention of two tankers, which studied the effectiveness of underwater protection.
    The most characteristic feature of battleships of this type should be considered the well-known constructive underwater protection of the Pugliès system, which was worked out by Italians from 1921 to 1931 with field tests on specially refitted tankers Brennero and Tarvisio, which gave very encouraging results.

    So, the terrible Tarvisio turned out to be quite a peaceful tanker.
    Yes, during the war, tankers are supplied with fuel by naval vessels, and a machine gun and even a small cannon can be mounted in tow. But neither a tanker nor a tug themselves are warships. Even if during the war they formally belong to the auxiliary fleet (and during wars in almost all countries of the world civilian vessels were usually requisitioned and became military auxiliary) - it is precisely these that are easiest to pass off as peaceful commercial vessels. By the way, after the war, the Turks recognized that the Italians gave them guarantees that Travisio was an exclusively commercial vessel. I don’t know how, after entering the Black Sea, the Travisio tanker fought with our Black Sea Fleet, the possibly evil and terrible Italian tanker across the sea was chasing our battleship “Paris Commune” (it’s “Sevastopol” from 31.05.1943) - stories about this is unknown.
    So what's the bottom line? And in the bottom line, we have an old, still Kaiser, German tugboat and an Italian tanker not of the first freshness that passed into the Black Sea! That's just it.