Treaty of Sèvres (1920); World War, 1914-1918 -- Territorial questions -- Turkey; World War, 1914-1918 -- Turkey
At Tunis, on March 11, after a summons had been posted in one of the
mosques calling upon the Muslim population to protest against the
occupation of Constantinople, a demonstration took place before the
Residency. M. Etienne Flandin received a delegation of native students
asking him that France should oppose the measures England was about
to take. The minister, after stating what reasons might justify the
intervention, evaded the question that was put him by declaring that
such measures were mere guarantees, and stated that even if France
were to take a share in them, the Mussulmans should feel all the more
certain that their religious creed would be respected.
The measures that were being contemplated could not but raise much
anxiety and indignation among the Moslem populations and might have had
disastrous consequences for France in Northern Africa. This was clearly
pointed out by M. Bourgeois, President of the Committee of Foreign
Affairs, in his report read to the Senate when the conditions of the
peace that was going to be enforced on Turkey came under discussion.
“We cannot ignore the deep repercussions which the intended
measures in regard to Turkey may have among the 25 million Moslems
who live under our rule in Northern Africa. Their reverence and
devotion have displayed themselves most strikingly in the course of
the war. Nothing must be done to alter these feelings.”
Indeed, as M. Mouktar-el-Farzuk wrote in an article entitled “France,
Turkey, and Islam,” printed in the _Ikdam_, a newspaper of Algiers, on
May 7, 1920—
“If the French Moslems fought heroically for France and turned
a deaf ear to the seditious proposals of Germany, they still
preserve the deepest sympathy for Turkey, and they would be greatly
distressed if the outcome of the victory in which they have had a
share was the annihilation of the Ottoman Empire.
“That sympathy is generally looked upon in Europe as a
manifestation of the so-called Moslem fanaticism or Pan-Islamism.
Yet it is nothing of the kind. The so-called Moslem fanaticism
is a mere legend whose insanity has been proved by history.
Pan-Islamism, too, only exists in the mind of those who imagined
its existence. The independent Moslem populations, such as the
Persians and the Afghans, are most jealous of their independence,
and do not think in the least of becoming the Sultan’s subjects.
As to those who live under the dominion of a European Power, they
have no wish to rebel against it, and only aim at improving their
material and moral condition, and of preserving their personality
as a race.
“The true reasons of the Moslems’ sympathy for the Ottoman Empire
are historical, religious, and sentimental reasons.”
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