Two war years in Constantinople : $b sketches of German and Young Turkish ethics and politicsStürmer, Harry
History
Two war years in Constantinople : $b sketches of German and Young Turkish ethics and politics
Stürmer, Harry
World War, 1914-1918 -- Turkey
Would the terrible bloodshed in the present war, the complete economic
exhaustion entailed, and the risk of a doubtful outcome of the fight
for existence or non-existence not have been far outweighed by the
prospect, in the case of a friendly agreement with Russia, of seeing
the orthodox cross again planted on the Hagia Sophia, an international
régime established in Constantinople--with certain Russian privileges
and the satisfaction of certain Russian moral demands, it is true,
but otherwise nothing to disturb Turkish life in Stamboul or in any
way prejudice Turkish prestige? Even the prospect of having to raze
the forts on the Straits to the ground in order to give free access
from the Mediterranean, or the necessity of having to inaugurate a
more humane and beneficent policy in Armenia, perhaps with European
supervision over the carrying out of the reforms would surely have
been preferable to the present state of affairs. These would all
have ensured for Turkey a long period of peace, capital wealth and
intellectual and social improvement, perhaps at the expense of a
momentary hurt to her feelings,--but these had been far more severely
wounded already, as, for example, when she had to look on helplessly
while bit after bit of her Empire was torn from her. It would have
been impossible for Russia to get more than this from Turkey had she
remained neutral. Her sovereignty and territorial integrity would have
been completely guaranteed.
But Turkey thought she had to stake all, her whole existence, on
one card, and she staked on the wrong one, as is recognised now by
thousands of intelligent Turks. Believers in the war policy followed
by the Government make themselves hoarse maintaining that if Russia
had not gradually overpowered a neutral Turkey to win Constantinople
completely, at any rate the Entente would have finally forced her to
join their side; in either case, therefore, war was inevitable. They
point to Salonika, and, in face of all reason, maintain that the
Entente Powers would in all probability have treated Turkey exactly
as they treated Greece. They forget that their geographical position
is entirely different, and would have a very different effect on
military tactics. If Turkey had remained a sympathetic neutral, so
would Bulgaria; or else the whole of the Balkan States, from Roumania
and Bulgaria to Greece, would have joined the Entente right at the
beginning. In either case there would have been no necessity at all for
Turkey to join, for what military obligations had she to fulfil? The
Entente would certainly never have driven Turkey to fight, simply to
get the benefit of the Turkish soldiers available; there is no truth
whatever in the statements circulated about unscrupulous compulsion
with this end in view.
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