Treaty of Sèvres (1920); World War, 1914-1918 -- Territorial questions -- Turkey; World War, 1914-1918 -- Turkey
In an article entitled “_La Neutralisation des Dardanelles et du
Bosphore_,” which was written at the beginning of the war, M. Miliukov
confirmed the Russian designs on the Black Sea and consequently on
all the part of Europe and Asia Minor contiguous to it. He recalled
that, by the former treaties concluded with Russia before the European
nations had interfered in the Eastern question—those of 1798, 1805,
and 1833—the Porte had granted Russian warships the free passage of
the Straits, though the Black Sea was still closed to the warships of
any other Power, and that when the treaties of 1841, 1856, and 1871
had laid down the principle of the closure of the Straits, Russia had
always preferred this state of things to the opening of the Black Sea
to the warships of all nations. This article throws a light on the
policy pursued by Russia and the propaganda she is still carrying on
in the hope of bringing about the annihilation of the Ottoman Empire.
So the writer recognised that it was the duty of Russia to oppose the
dispossession of Turkey and that, if the Straits passed under Russian
sovereignty, they ought not to be neutralised.
Taking up this question again in an interview with a correspondent of
_Le Temps_ in April, 1917, M. Miliukov stated that the map of Eastern
Europe, as it ought to be drawn up by the Allies, involved “the
liquidation of the Turkish possessions in Europe, the liberation of
the peoples living in Asia Minor, the independence of Arabia, Armenia,
and Syria, and finally, the necessity of recognising Turkey’s right
to the possession of the Straits.” Nobody knows what was to become
of the Turks in such a solution, or rather it is only too plain that
“the liquidation of the Turkish possessions in Europe” meant that
Russia would take possession of the Straits and rule over the Turkish
territories in Asia Minor.
Though both the Conservatives and the Bolshevists in Russia were
plainly drawing nearer to Germany, M. Miliukov, who seemed to forget
the pro-German leaning of Tsardom and the tendency he himself openly
displayed, came to this conclusion:
“The Straits to Russia—that, in my opinion, is the only way out of the
difficulty. The neutralisation of the Straits would always involve
many serious dangers to peace, and Russia would be compelled to keep
up a powerful war fleet in the Black Sea to defend our coasts. It
would give the warships of all countries a free access to our inland
sea, the Black Sea, which might entail untold disasters. Germany wants
the Straits in order to realise her dreams of hegemony, for her motto
is ‘Berlin-Baghdad,’ and we, Russians, want the Straits that our
importation and exportation may be secure from any trammels or threats
whatever. Nobody can entertain any doubt, therefore, as to which Power
is to own the Straits; it must be either Germany or Russia.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account