Treaty of Sèvres (1920); World War, 1914-1918 -- Territorial questions -- Turkey; World War, 1914-1918 -- Turkey
At any rate, instead of maintaining the negotiations on a sound basis,
and dealing squarely with the difficulties of the Turkish question,
which would have made it possible to reach a better and more permanent
solution, the Allies seemed to wish to break off the debates, or
at least to postpone the discussion, in order to manœuvre and gain
time. Perhaps they did it on purpose, or the negotiations came to an
untimely end because, among the men who had assumed the charge of
European affairs, some meant to intervene in them all the more eagerly
because they did not know anything about them. They were not aware
or had forgotten that in dealing with Eastern affairs or in pursuing
negotiations with people of ancient civilisation, a great deal of
delicacy, discretion, and shrewdness is required at the same time,
and that generally diplomatists must expect plenty of haggling and
procrastination, must avoid clashing with the adversary, and be able
repeatedly to drop and resume a discussion smoothly, sometimes after
long delays.
Somebody then quoted the words of the well-known French traveller
Chardin in regard to Chevalier Quirini who, about 1671, carried on
negotiations in Constantinople with the Vizier Ahmed Küprüli on behalf
of the Republic of Venice:
“I heard M. Quirini say, when I had the honour of calling upon
him, that the policy of the Turks far excelled that of the
Europeans; that it was not restrained by maxims and regulations,
but was wholly founded on, and regulated by, discernment. This
policy, depending on no art or principles, was almost beyond
anybody’s reach. So he candidly confessed that the vizier’s conduct
was an utter mystery to him, and he was unable to fathom its
discrimination, depth, secrecy, shrewdness, and artfulness.”
It is noteworthy that the same vizier was also able to cope
successively with three ambassadors of Louis XIV.
The direction taken from the outset by the deliberations of the
Conference, and the standpoint it took to settle the Turkish question,
showed it was about to give up the traditional policy of the French
kings in the East, which had been started by Francis I, and the last
representatives of which had been the Marquis de Villeneuve, Louis XV’s
ambassador, and the Comte de Bonneval.
As early as the end of the eighteenth century Voltaire, though he
extolled Turkish tolerance throughout his “Essai sur la tolérance,”
and wrote that “two hundred thousand Greeks lived in security
in Constantinople,” advocated quite a different policy in his
“Correspondance,” and took sides with the Russians against the Turks.
After confessing that “he had no turn for politics,” and stating in
“Candide” that he only cared for the happiness of peoples, he wrote to
Frederick II:
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account