Turkey; the Awakening of Turkey; the Turkish Revolution of 1908Knight, E. F. (Edward Frederick)
History
Turkey; the Awakening of Turkey; the Turkish Revolution of 1908
Knight, E. F. (Edward Frederick)
Eastern question (Balkan); Turkey -- History -- 1878-1909; Turkey -- Politics and government -- 1878-1909
The Committee justified its treatment of Kiamil Pasha and its other
arbitrary acts by pleading the necessity of protecting the nation
against the strong reactionary forces which certainly do exist, despite
the assertions of the organs of the Liberal Union, which have ever
ridiculed the possibility of a reactionary movement, and have accused
the Committee of having invented this bogey as an excuse for its own
despotic methods. Kiamil Pasha had ever been the friend of the English,
and his removal from the Grand Vizierate produced—to the great regret
of the Young Turks—a somewhat bad impression in England, the country
above all others whose friendship is valued by patriotic Turks. Those
who had held that the Committee was an illegal institution and ought
to be dissolved became alienated for a while from the men who had been
the saviours of Turkey; and it is a great pity that this was so, for
at that critical time the Young Turks, who never before had trod the
tortuous ways of politics, and were apt to fall into the traps that
were cunningly laid for them, were much in need of the sympathetic help
and advice from those whose experience and knowledge qualified them to
offer these. The result is, I think, that the Young Turk side of the
question has not been understood in England.
The Young Turk party, as represented by the Committee of Union and
Progress, is now but one of several parties in Turkey professing
Liberal principles. In Parliament the Committee’s nominees form the
large majority; but the rival parties, though they may be numerically
small and were regarded as insignificant when I was in the country,
have displayed great energy in winning supporters outside the Chamber,
and are no longer a negligible quantity. Though diametrically
opposed to each other in their principles, they appear to be united
in their hatred and jealousy of the Young Turk party, without whose
self-sacrificing struggle for freedom they would never have had an
opportunity of existing at all. The Young Turks, as I have explained,
desired Ottoman unity, perhaps an impossible but certainly a noble
ideal, and it was a disappointment to them that, so soon as Parliament
met, the Deputies who were not partisans of the Committee divided
themselves into distinct nationalist groups, some of them impracticably
socialistic in their aims, others separatist at heart.
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