Turkey not allied to Germany in WWI

[unsunghero]

I had the idea for this earlier on this afternoon, while listening to a Fritz Chrysler (sp?) concert on CBC Radio 2, as the host read some of his personal memoirs in which he related playing for Sultan Abdul Hamid II.

Anyway. In 1914, Britain does not steal the two dreadnought battleships their yards had built for Turkey and which Turkey had already paid for in full. With the outbreak of hostilities between Germany/Austria and Britain/Russia/France, there is some question of exactly when Turkish crews will be transported to England to crew the new vessels and sail them to Turkish waters. Goebben and Breslau sail for Constantinople and despite the best efforts of cabinet ministers and the German ambassadors, Turkey will not sign on with the Germans, as it is not in their best interests. They promise to keep the straights closed, but inform the German government that both ships will be interned for the duration of hostilities.

1915/1916 the Entente pressure Turkey to open the straights so as to get supplies to the Russians. By 1918 the Ottoman Empire decides to jump into action since it is quite clear Austria/Bulgaria are finished, and perhaps Germany. The German military advisors are arrested and taken into captivity, and the Ottoman Empire invades Bulgaria in concert with the Thessalonica army. In a matter of weeks the Bulgars are broken and sue for peace.

Fast forward to the general armistice and peace treaty in France, and instead of Turkey being dismembered like a...well, a turkey, they get Bulgaria's Aegean coast (central thrace) and 'occupation rights' over Rumelia which they had hoped to annex outright, but were stopped by the Russians, who survive in this timeline. Since independence has not proved to be too kind to Albania, the Powers decide that Turkey should reassume ownership in order to bring stability.

Anyone care to flesh this out? What might happen with the empire when Germany decides to start throwing its weight around again? What would things be like in the 1950s onwards? By the way - sorry it this has been done before: I was too lazy to go through all the old posts and see if this was already posted. Lastly, can anyone tell me if the Young Turks initiated any Western reforms a la Mustafa Kemal, or were those all his idea?

 

[Constantinople]

The Arab parts of the EMpire I cant speak for, but a Armenian Genocide, and Greek expulsion thingy is unlikey to happen. They wont be collapsing and will be on the same side as greece.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

The Ottomans would be given Western Thrace (the Bulgarian Aegean coastline), but that's it. By this point the Muslim population of East Rumelia has been massacred or driven out and the Powers would never let the Ottomans have it. There might be some adjustments to the border, though. Italy would have to return the Dodecanese, and Britain might return full administration of Cyprus, which serves no purpose anymore due to the occupation of Egypt, which BTW would remain legally a part of the Ottoman Empire (the Ottoman influence in Egypt was greater than is generally realized).

The Arab portion of the empire would remain. The Arabs were seriously outnumbered, did not have a real nationalist movement, and were dependent upon the Ottomans to protect them against colonization, as the war proved.

Ataturk did not come up with a single one of his reforms, except abolition of the monarchy (which was a huge mistake), all of which actually predated the Young Turks.

The war would as historically produce the excuse to abolish the Capitulations, which would greatly stimulate the economy, and staying neutral throught almost the entire war would have been an economic super-bonanza. Also, instead of having only a few months after the Balkan Wars to rebuild the army, they would have had four years, which would have allowed them to field a force several times more powerful than what was available in 1914. Also, the Baghdad RR would have been complete, greatly facilitating Ottoman control over its empire, as well as extension of the Hijaz RR to Mecca and Jidda.

The Armenians would have remained untouched, as there is no chance they would have rebelled, and the Greeks would not have invaded, so the Greek population of Anatolia and Thrace would remain.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

I had the idea for this earlier on this afternoon, while listening to a Fritz Chrysler (sp?) concert on CBC Radio 2, as the host read some of his personal memoirs in which he related playing for Sultan Abdul Hamid II.

Tell me more about this.

 

[Karlos]

If the allies are able to supply the russians through Turkey, would it still be a soviet revolution? This could have enormous consequences for world history.

 

[csa945]

One implication of this would be that there would be no disastrous invasion of Gallipoli, and thus Winston Churchill would not resign as Lord of the Admiralty (or at least not over that). Granted he probably would have retired later on at some point, I would think. But would he have still become PM? (Just asking; I don't know how much time he spent in Parliament before becoming PM). Also, would not having a failed invasion of Gallipoli affect how D-Day in World War II played out? IIRC, Churchill learned from the mistakes of the failed invasion of Turkey and was able to make sure such a debacle didn't occur the second time around.

 

[csa945]

Before WWI, Egypt was technically and legally part of the Ottoman Empire, but a de facto part of the British Empire wasn't it?

Would the Ottomans push for greater control of Egypt, trying to push the British out?

Likewise with Libya from Italy.

Maybe the Ottomans would join the Axis in WWII if they don't get everything they want after WWI.

 

[csa945]

would it still be a soviet revolution?

I believe that this indicates there was not revolution:

the Russians, who survive in this timeline.

 

[zoomar]

If the Ottoman Empire either remained neutral or was an Allied state in WW1, is it possible they would have participated extensively in the allied interventions in Russian 1918-1921? Could this have led to the Turks wresting Turkmenistan and other Moslem central asian republics from Russian/Soviet control and helping the British by creating an even wider buffer between Russia and India/Persia?

 

[Max Sinister]

If Turkey stays neutral in WWI, the Allies might win faster - not only because the weight of the Central powers becomes even lower, but because Russia gets more supplies. After the war, they could still try to dismember Turkey sooner or later - Russia wanted Constantinople, we all know it. If they're not stopped by Britain & France, then there's nobody who could do.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

If Turkey stays neutral in WWI, the Allies might win faster - not only because the weight of the Central powers becomes even lower, but because Russia gets more supplies. After the war, they could still try to dismember Turkey sooner or later - Russia wanted Constantinople, we all know it. If they're not stopped by Britain & France, then there's nobody who could do.

Disagree. If the Ottomans stay neutral, the war will end much sooner, but Russia will still be exhausted, and the Ottomans will have this period to build up. The Russians would lose if they tried to seize Constantinople. How would they even get there?

More likely, once the direction of the war is clear, they will jump in, so there will be no excuse for anyone to attack them, and once again, they will be fresh and comparatively far more powerful than they were historically. If the Baghdad RR had been completed before the war, just this factor would have doubled Ottoman military potential.

 

[LDoc]

Why would it end much sooner? The Russians still have a terrible transportation system, corruption is rife throughout, so is favoritism, their troops are poor conscripts. Even if the allies send supplies, much of which is needed on their own front lines, it would take far to long ro the supplies to actualy be organized and transported. Russia had one of the worst rail systems in all of Europe and their ports are falling apart, I doubt even a third of the supplies will reach the right troops. Hell most of the Russians wouldn't even be able to deploy the weapons effectively. All the while the Russians are being demoralized by defeate. Could this delay Russias collapse? sure by a month or two. Could it stop Russias collapse? Not unless magic powers come in those supplies. And the Germans are still going to help Lenin get to Russia and rile up his revolution. The only change in this I see (at least int he short term) is the delay of the Ottoman Empires collapse.

 

[unsunghero]

Tell me more about this.

I'm afraid I can't really; the host for the music program at Glenn Gould in Toronto never actually told the audience what the name of his published memoirs is (dumb!). Anyway, I have the impression that it was a private event - Fritz Chrysler was in Constantinople, and the Austrian ambassador invited him to play for the Sultan at the palace (the Sublime Porte?). Abdul Hamid was apparently not too impressed with Bach, so Chrsyler played as he said 'something with a lot of fireworks but not very memorable,' which was thoroughly enjoyed. The Sultan gave him a bag of gold coins to show his appreciation.

I think another war with Italy is possible - both Libya and the dodecanese islands are a good flash point. Italy only won against Turkey because the balkan powers (Serbia, Romania, Greece) jumped into the fray, and Turkey wanted to settle things with Italy since there was a greater danger closer to home. I agree Britain would probably offer Cyprus back in order to sweeten the deal; the Greeks would undoubtedly remember their proper place in the food chain with a rejeuvenated Ottoman Empire right next door - maybe it would serve to kill the 'Megali Idea.'

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Why would it end much sooner? The Russians still have a terrible transportation system, corruption is rife throughout, so is favoritism, their troops are poor conscripts. Even if the allies send supplies, much of which is needed on their own front lines, it would take far to long ro the supplies to actualy be organized and transported. Russia had one of the worst rail systems in all of Europe and their ports are falling apart, I doubt even a third of the supplies will reach the right troops. Hell most of the Russians wouldn't even be able to deploy the weapons effectively. All the while the Russians are being demoralized by defeate. Could this delay Russias collapse? sure by a month or two. Could it stop Russias collapse? Not unless magic powers come in those supplies. And the Germans are still going to help Lenin get to Russia and rile up his revolution. The only change in this I see (at least int he short term) is the delay of the Ottoman Empires collapse.

It would end sooner for several reasons:

1. The ability to supply Russia throught the Straits is a huge advantage. Also, 90% of Russia's exports pass though here, leading to a healthier economy and happier people. Russia had fine rail transport from Black Sea ports, and it does not take that long to ship things there.

2. No Ottoman entry means no Bulgarian entry, so Serbia and Rumania are not totally screwed.

3. No Ottoman entry means 2 million Entente troops are not tied down facing them and can be used elsewhere.

You are alone in your opinion that Russian troops are poor. The Russian soldier was capable of enduring privation that would level Germans or British.

If the Ottomans had stayed out or joined the Entente, they would still be with us today. You are operating off of unsipportable stereotypes.

 

[Thande]

If British troops can live on 'toothpaste, and a damn good thrashing every day', what on earth can the Russians live on?

 

[LDoc]

The Russian economy is in shambles because half the time they weren't opperating. In 1912, there were 2032 strikes, and in the first half of 1914 there were over 3000 strikes, and two-thirds of them were associated with political demands. If we are assuming that Russia enters the war than you can expect that on July 27, 1914 the government suspended the ability to convert rubles into gold and gave the treasury permission to print paper money without any regard to the amount of gold that was in the vaults in order to repay loans and pay for the war. As a result, the amount of paper money in Russia increased by around 600%. In July of 1914, the ruble was backed 98% by gold in the vaults. By the second half of 1916, with over 7,972 million rubles in circulation, prices had risen by over 398%. This is going to drive the peasants in the field to hord their food and they did in OTL and make the peasant in the city starve. As for supplies the Russians had the fifth largest industrial power in the world, but as a result of the war effort, 78% of the machine-construction business was given to army requirements. The production of agricultural tools dropped by 80% compared with figures prior the war. Most of the Russians manufactured exports are going to the army anyways, and those that are produced are needed for internal use. No matter what exports are going to fall drasticly, simply because of a lack of product. Foreign investment, which fueled the previouse Russian economic growth, is going to shy away because of the drastic cost of the war on their home front.

Next you mention the 2 million troops freed up. Those vary well could make a difference in the western front, but I don't see them finnishing the war quicker, they might push the Germans slightly farther back before the Americans arrive.

The Russian soldier was poorly trained and led by incompentant generals. They are backed up with one of the worst logistical systems in the world. Even if the soldiers were the best in Europe they are led by idiots. Simply because of this the Russians are going to be outclassed.

Do you honestly believe that the ottoman emprie could last as it was in 1914 until the present day? Please its only a matter of time before Arab nationalism gets backing from a European power wanting to carve up the turks. After the war the Ottomans are going to be picked apart by the Europeans.

Here are my sources:
Florinsky, Michael T. The End of the Russian Empire. Hew Haven: Yale University Press, 1931.

Microsoft. Microsoft Encarta 97 Encyclopedia. Redmond: Microsoft, 1996.

Pipes, Richard. The Russian Revolution. New York: Vintage Books, 1991.

Pipes, Richard. Three "Whys" of the Russian Revolution. Toronto: Vintage Canada, 1995.

Service, Robert. The Russian Revolution 1900 - 1927. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press International, Inc., 1986.

Wolfson, Robert. Years of Change. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1978.

Wood, Alan. The Origins of the Russian Revolution 1861 - 1917. London: Methuen, 1987.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

I'm afraid I can't really; the host for the music program at Glenn Gould in Toronto never actually told the audience what the name of his published memoirs is (dumb!). Anyway, I have the impression that it was a private event - Fritz Chrysler was in Constantinople, and the Austrian ambassador invited him to play for the Sultan at the palace (the Sublime Porte?). Abdul Hamid was apparently not too impressed with Bach, so Chrsyler played as he said 'something with a lot of fireworks but not very memorable,' which was thoroughly enjoyed. The Sultan gave him a bag of gold coins to show his appreciation.

I think another war with Italy is possible - both Libya and the dodecanese islands are a good flash point. Italy only won against Turkey because the balkan powers (Serbia, Romania, Greece) jumped into the fray, and Turkey wanted to settle things with Italy since there was a greater danger closer to home. I agree Britain would probably offer Cyprus back in order to sweeten the deal; the Greeks would undoubtedly remember their proper place in the food chain with a rejeuvenated Ottoman Empire right next door - maybe it would serve to kill the 'Megali Idea.'

The Sublime Porte is the government offices where the Grand Vizier works, and is located near Topkapi in the old city. Abdul Hamid lived in Yildiz Palace, in the hills some ways up the Bosphorus.

I doubt a war with Italy would happen - and the peace settlement required Italy to vacate the Dodecanese in exchange for the Ottomans giving up Libya. They had not evacuated the islands before WWI started, and as a result they ended up keeping them. If the Ottomans stayed out, they would have had to give them up.

As far as Cyprus goes, all revenue in excess of the cost of running the island was already being forwarded to the Ottomans, who were also still in charge of many aspects of administration, so it doesn't seem unlikely that the island would be fully returned in exchange for Ottoman entry.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Yes, I do think the Ottoman Empire would last until the present. The Turks greatly outnumbered the Arabs, there was negligible Arab nationalism by WWI, and the Ottoman Empire was not Turkish in any case. By way of example, the Grand Vizier during WWI was Arab, as were many of the Ottoman commanders.

You are wrong. Russia had many very competent generals, and certainly faced no more incompetence than any other army in the war. And Russia was not unique in a large proportion of industrial production going to the military. Your underestimation of Russia is bizarre.

It's not just a matter of 2 million additional troops - you also don't have to worry about Bulgaria, so the Serbs are still in play. 2 million Entente troops up Austria's butt through Serbia = big trouble for the Central Powers.

The Russian economy is in shambles because half the time they weren't opperating. In 1912, there were 2032 strikes, and in the first half of 1914 there were over 3000 strikes, and two-thirds of them were associated with political demands. If we are assuming that Russia enters the war than you can expect that on July 27, 1914 the government suspended the ability to convert rubles into gold and gave the treasury permission to print paper money without any regard to the amount of gold that was in the vaults in order to repay loans and pay for the war. As a result, the amount of paper money in Russia increased by around 600%. In July of 1914, the ruble was backed 98% by gold in the vaults. By the second half of 1916, with over 7,972 million rubles in circulation, prices had risen by over 398%. This is going to drive the peasants in the field to hord their food and they did in OTL and make the peasant in the city starve. As for supplies the Russians had the fifth largest industrial power in the world, but as a result of the war effort, 78% of the machine-construction business was given to army requirements. The production of agricultural tools dropped by 80% compared with figures prior the war. Most of the Russians manufactured exports are going to the army anyways, and those that are produced are needed for internal use. No matter what exports are going to fall drasticly, simply because of a lack of product. Foreign investment, which fueled the previouse Russian economic growth, is going to shy away because of the drastic cost of the war on their home front.

Next you mention the 2 million troops freed up. Those vary well could make a difference in the western front, but I don't see them finnishing the war quicker, they might push the Germans slightly farther back before the Americans arrive.

The Russian soldier was poorly trained and led by incompentant generals. They are backed up with one of the worst logistical systems in the world. Even if the soldiers were the best in Europe they are led by idiots. Simply because of this the Russians are going to be outclassed.

Do you honestly believe that the ottoman emprie could last as it was in 1914 until the present day? Please its only a matter of time before Arab nationalism gets backing from a European power wanting to carve up the turks. After the war the Ottomans are going to be picked apart by the Europeans.

Here are my sources:
Florinsky, Michael T. The End of the Russian Empire. Hew Haven: Yale University Press, 1931.

Microsoft. Microsoft Encarta 97 Encyclopedia. Redmond: Microsoft, 1996.

Pipes, Richard. The Russian Revolution. New York: Vintage Books, 1991.

Pipes, Richard. Three "Whys" of the Russian Revolution. Toronto: Vintage Canada, 1995.

Service, Robert. The Russian Revolution 1900 - 1927. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press International, Inc., 1986.

Wolfson, Robert. Years of Change. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1978.

Wood, Alan. The Origins of the Russian Revolution 1861 - 1917. London: Methuen, 1987.

 

[Grey Wolf]

Hmmm, I was going to stay away from this but hey, its a slow night

Didn't the Ottomans continue to supply forces in Cyrenaica ? Was this against the treaty or somehow within its limits ?

I'm fed up with reading "Russia is crap" posts. I think my standpoint is well enough known, so don't see the point in repeating myself

Grey Wolf

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Hmmm, I was going to stay away from this but hey, its a slow night

Didn't the Ottomans continue to supply forces in Cyrenaica ? Was this against the treaty or somehow within its limits ?

I'm fed up with reading "Russia is crap" posts. I think my standpoint is well enough known, so don't see the point in repeating myself

Grey Wolf

Yeah, me too.

But anyway, the Ottomans resumed support of forces in Cyrenaica once Italy was in the war, and since the Italians had failed to live up to their treaty obligation...