Best case scenario for the Ottoman Empire post 1900?

The question I’m asking you all about today is that of one involving the best possible fate for the Ottoman Empire and all of its dependencies post 1900.


You can either halt the collapse of the Ottoman Empire for a time or prevent its collapse entirely

Any pod after 1900 is fair game
 

kernals12

Banned
That's easy, no World War I. Then once they discover oil in the 20s, Turkey will go from "The Sick Man of Europe" to "The World's Gas Station".
 
That's easy, no World War I. Then once they discover oil in the 20s, Turkey will go from "The Sick Man of Europe" to "The World's Gas Station".

This alone won't turn it into success story, I'm afraid. Oil riches would increase separatist tendencies and I doubt the Ottoman Empire would be any better than, say, present day Saudi Arabia or Russia in turning the riches to long lasting prosperity. Meanwhile, many players would be interested in supporting separatism in order to carve their own influence sphere. So, Ottoman Disease instead of Dutch Disease, I would be afraid.
 

kernals12

Banned
This alone won't turn it into success story, I'm afraid. Oil riches would increase separatist tendencies and I doubt the Ottoman Empire would be any better than, say, present day Saudi Arabia or Russia in turning the riches to long lasting prosperity. Meanwhile, many players would be interested in supporting separatism in order to carve their own influence sphere. So, Ottoman Disease instead of Dutch Disease, I would be afraid.
Saudi Arabia is of course a terrible country, but the oil has provided it with 80 years of wealth and influence.
 

kernals12

Banned
Saudi Arabia doesn't have lots of ethnic minorities clamoring for independence though.
Were there major independence movements in Mesopotamia?
And since the Persian gulf was almost completely uninhabited, they can populate it with Turks and it would be a loyal Ulster.
 

Germaniac

Donor
Best case scenario?

The Young Turk revolution maintains it's democratic zeal and is able to get the ethnic groups of the empire to buy into the "Ottoman" identity alongside their ethnic one.

Then oil comes and it's debt and budget issues disappear, which have been a constant factor in Ottoman destabilization.
 
The question I’m asking you all about today is that of one involving the best possible fate for the Ottoman Empire and all of its dependencies post 1900.


You can either halt the collapse of the Ottoman Empire for a time or prevent its collapse entirely

Any pod after 1900 is fair game

No Balkan Wars. This one really alters WW1. It also avoids even more refugees from the Balkans and the resulting deaths because of it. Or avoid it participating in WW1.
 
Since this is post 1900’s you wont be able head off the rise of nationalism so I think the empire itself is doomed. The best bet for the Ottomans would be to retain the Turkish lands and let the other large ethnic groups have “independent” nations under Ottoman domination or an Ottoman commonwealth like the British version. If the Ottoman Sultan becomes a figurehead but retains the title of Caliph then perhaps this could help Ottoman Turkey become the dominant force in the Middle East.
 
Last edited:
At this point of Post-1900, t will be difficult to retain non-Turkish lands at this point in the age of nationalism. If so, the Ottomans should avoid WW1.
 
From 1914
No WW1.
Ottomans wipe out the Greek Fleet in the short 1915 'Aegean War' taking back the Aegean Islands and boosting confidence in the new CUP leadership and the state. This also forestalls an Anglo-Greek Alliance and the Balkans settle into a Greek/Serb and Bulgarian/Turk split. Italy hands back the Dodecanese Islands as per the Treaty of Ouchy. The French, British and Germans continue to shepherd Turkish finances and resist Russian pressure to interfere. As per Japanese models, Turkish industry continues to expand and German investment in the Tigris and Euphrates River basin sees wheat production expand. Oil discoveries in the late 1910's and early 1920's are brought online and begin to feed Europe's needs through existing infrastructure in Romania. Increased revenue brings social and educational reforms and stability to the Empire. Holy cities are internationalised and pilgrims bring in much tourist revenue and significant international trade from Europe to Asia and Africa passes through the rail links to Basra and Aden.
 

Deleted member 94680

Were there major independence movements in Mesopotamia?
And since the Persian gulf was almost completely uninhabited, they can populate it with Turks and it would be a loyal Ulster.

Because that was a paragon of peace and stability towards the parent state, wasn’t it?

But seriously, the Ottomans tried to populate the Persian Gulf and any such populations were always seen as “outsiders” and never trusted by the indigenous Arab populations. Increasing the numbers likely makes the Arabs less loyal rather than stabilising the region for Constantinople.
 
This alone won't turn it into success story, I'm afraid. Oil riches would increase separatist tendencies and I doubt the Ottoman Empire would be any better than, say, present day Saudi Arabia or Russia in turning the riches to long lasting prosperity. Meanwhile, many players would be interested in supporting separatism in order to carve their own influence sphere. So, Ottoman Disease instead of Dutch Disease, I would be afraid.
Saudi Arabia owns its region and can get away with genocide, hell the self declared guardians of international morality and human rights will even gladly support them in it. Russia is a genuine great power that influences global events to its own benefits and and is secure in its own territory. Both are benefits that the OE had lost by 1914, both outcomes would be quite acceptable for the OE afterwards. It's also reasonable to expect it to become a nuclear power, among the second or third group of nations to achieve it.
 
Since this is post 1900’s you wont be able head off the rise of nationalism so I think the empire itself is doomed. The best bet for the Ottomans would be to retain the Turkish lands and let the other large ethnic groups have “independent” nations under Ottoman domination or an Ottoman commonwealth like the British version. If the Ottoman Sultan becomes a figurehead but retains the title of Caliph then perhaps this could help Ottoman Turkey become the dominant force in the Middle East.
Arab nationalism didn't exist as a political force vack then and it's birth wasn't natural. Heck otl Arab revolt was basically designed by the british, against an all really collapsing empire and not in the name of the "arab motherland" but in name of the Hashemites bide to the title of Caliph, so replace a weak dynasty with a new one, the Hashemites could be kurds and it wouldn't matter. Nationalism in not a inevitable occurrence nor does it make separatism successful. They could create a common sunni ottoman identity among the sunni arab majority. Just like Iran next door, only 52% of the population speaks farsi as their mother lenguage but 90% og the population is shia, so they have a common identity, the only separatism they suffer is sunni kurdish one. In a similar scenario the only problematic regions for the ottoman identity would be the shia southern irak and north yemen, not only because the locals but also because both regions are vulnerable to british influence but as long as the british are in good terms with the OE that risk is small. I think the biggest problem is actually turkish nationalism that could create a problems where before there was none, alienating ethnic minorities. I think that giving co oficiality to arab lenguage and keeping ottoman turkish as oficial would be necessary. Also remember that the levant, Hejaz and irak don't have any historical memory of independence, in many centuries those regions have only being provinces of biggers empires and not centers of power. Also arab nationalism could easily become just egyptian expansionism so it just becomes a question about if you want to be ruled from Cairo or Istanbul, and as show by Alsacia Lorena people are most likely to keep loyal the State they were part of since centuries before modern nationalism compared to the new conqueror, regardless of lenguage.
 
Sultan Mehmed accepts Herzl's offer of the Zionists paying off Ottoman debts in exchange for the governorship of Jerusalem Province. Down the line this results in much Jewish emigration to the empire as a whole - especially by economic migrants who proceed to show up in Palestine but then head for Salonika, Damascus, Beirut, Baghdad, etc.

Ottomans win the Balkan War and the Italo-Turkish War. They annex back East Rumelia and the Montenegrin coast. They proceed to join the entente, promised a reclamation of Bosnia, Kuwait, and Kars. Unfair treaties will also be renegotiated and the Ottomans can simply absolve themselves of debts they owe to the CPs (and nationalist their assets).

Rump Bulgaria ends up partitioned between Serbia and the Ottomans along the Iskar River. Maybe Romania gets Silistra, maybe not.

The Ottomans support the Sheikh Khazal rebellion. Khuzestan becomes an Ottoman client state, with the Ottoman state-owned oil company.

During the Great Depression the Russians break out into Civil War. The Ottomans establish clients: Crimea (under the Ghirays?), Circassia (Abkhazia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia), Armenia, Azerbaijan, North Caucasua (Chechnya-Ingushetia-North Ossetia), and Dagestan. Envar Pasha leads an expedition into Central Asia, but the effect of this is the Russians deciding to expel the Uzbeks and Turkmens after their Civil War ends. Plus for the Ottomans: More Turks to stick places (Libya, gulf coast, upper mesopotamia, transjordan, Bulgaria, Macedonia, etc).

Later, in exchange for recognizing their independence and authority over Sudan, the Egyptians cede Sinai to the Ottomans.


The Ottoman Empire today is ~350 million people, controls 25% of global oil output, has a decentish GDP per capita (somewhere between Poland and Taiwan I think), and is keeping a lid on things.
 
Last edited:

Germaniac

Donor
Sultan Mehmed accepts Herzl's offer of the Zionists paying off Ottoman debts in exchange for the governorship of Jerusalem Province. Down the line this results in much Jewish emigration to the empire as a whole - especially by economic migrants who proceed to show up in Palestine but then head for Salonika, Damascus, Beirut, Baghdad, etc.

Paying off the debt was never a real possibility. I've never really understood this line of thinking since the Ottoman debt was held by the Public Debt Administration, led by bondholders, so I guess "Jewish Banking" interests buy up the stakes in the OPDA? Anyway, Herzl may have made the offer, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the idea got farther than private conversations.

Jewish immigration on the other hand was a very real possibility. It's really just a matter of being able to convince the zionists to settle all over the empire and not just in Palestine. The Ottomans were very cautious about allowing settlements in Palestine, but were open to and optimistic about the possibility of immigration (as long as #'s in Palestine stayed tightly regulated). This official position in OTL led to break downs in talks, otherwise a very influx of Jews from primarily the Russian Empire will settle throughout the Empire.

The Ottomans support the Sheikh Khazal rebellion. Khuzestan becomes an Ottoman client state, with the Ottoman state-owned oil company.

During the Great Depression the Russians break out into Civil War. The Ottomans establish clients: Crimea (under the Ghirays?), Circassia (Abkhazia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia), Armenia, Azerbaijan, North Caucasua (Chechnya-Ingushetia-North Ossetia), and Dagestan. Envar Pasha leads an expedition into Central Asia, but the effect of this is the Russians deciding to expel the Uzbeks and Turkmens after their Civil War ends. Plus for the Ottomans: More Turks to stick places (Libya, gulf coast, upper mesopotamia, transjordan, Bulgaria, Macedonia, etc).

Later, in exchange for recognizing their independence and authority over Sudan, the Egyptians cede Sinai to the Ottomans.


The Ottoman Empire today is ~350 million people, controls 25% of global oil output, has a decentish GDP per capita (somewhere between Poland and Taiwan I think), and is keeping a lid on things.

The British are just going to let the Ottomans seize their Oil companies? If and when oil is pumping out of the middle east, it will be British and American companies running it. The Ottomans will get a cut (maybe even ownership stake) but they wont be in a position to nationalize their industry for awhile. The British are going to have something to say about a power grab in Persia. Also Enver Pasha has to go, Hitler prototype with delusions of grandeur. Better off he wanders into Central Asia and is never seen again.
 

Deleted member 94680

.. the Zionists paying off Ottoman debts in exchange for the governorship of Jerusalem Province. Down the line this results in much Jewish emigration to the empire as a whole ...

Ottomans win the Balkan War and the Italo-Turkish War. They annex back East Rumelia and the Montenegrin coast.

It’s a nice sketch of a TL and all, but how does the one follow the other?

Zionist money equals a victory in two wars against one of their neighbouring Great Powers and every bordering European nation? Also, once they’ve won these two wars, they overturn a Great Power enforced Treaty and take strategically important land from a European Christian nation. All of this means they join the Entente with nary a whisper of opposition, as opposed to making an enemy of every Christian nation in Europe and marking themselves out as a revanchist, reactionary, trouble maker?

I’m not so sure on that one.
 
It’s a nice sketch of a TL and all, but how does the one follow the other?

Zionist money equals a victory in two wars against one of their neighbouring Great Powers and every bordering European nation? Also, once they’ve won these two wars, they overturn a Great Power enforced Treaty and take strategically important land from a European Christian nation. All of this means they join the Entente with nary a whisper of opposition, as opposed to making an enemy of every Christian nation in Europe and marking themselves out as a revanchist, reactionary, trouble maker?

I’m not so sure on that one.

They're unrelated. Zionist money is just so the Ottomans have less debt.

Eastern Rumelia was only formally annexed by Bulgaria in 1908. The Ottomans are taking land in a defensive conflict that nobody else in Europe was really pushing for.


If the British were willing to sell the Ottomans dreadnoughts, I don't see why accepting them into the Entente is that big a difference.
 
Just how sick was the 'Sick man of Europe?'. Despite 1914 appearances, economic collapse was a long way off. The Ottoman Empire outlasted the A-H, Russian and German Empires, finally being abolished in November 1922. The various minorities within the Ottoman Empire typically wanted autonomy and not independence. Even beyond the empire, Egypt and Cyprus were still paying tribute to the Sultan in 1914.

In 1914, the Ottoman Empire comprised about 15m Turks, 10m Arabs, 1.7m Greeks and 1.1m Armenians. This multi-ethnic empire's population of 28 million was a religious mix of 80% Muslim to 20% non-Muslim. Three quarters of the population lived in the Anatolian core. The GDP of the empire was about £ 233m pounds. National debt stood at £140m pounds or about 60% GDP (half held by the French) but this can't have been too much risk as bond rates were at 0.78% and this is a tenth of the rates on Greek bonds.

Turkey's problem was the inefficiency of its tax collection. However, the Young Turk regime would have little problem in squeezing the non-Muslim population through the Jizya (non-Muslim tax) to raise revenue and encourage them to leave. Ottoman taxes were only raising half per capita the amount that the Greeks and Serbs and other Balkan countries were able to manage.

Prior to the war, it was widely recognised that the Ottomans needed to reform and needed a period of peace to enact the necessary reforms. However, external pressures included the Russians arming both the Armenians and the Kurds where by they were attacking eachother and developing a pretext for the Russians to move in and 'protect' the Christians. The Arabs were also beginning to court English and French aid to ensure a greater say in Ottoman politics, something the CUP were trying to soothe with pan-Islamic policies. The German Ambassador to the Porte was advising no external adventures, no entangling alliances and no joining the Central Powers nor the Entente.

The Turkish Lira had an exchange rate close to the British Pound, 1.1:1 (£ 1 bought 0.9 TL). Tax revenue for 1913-14 was 29.4 million lira amounting to about 12% of GDP. Western Turkey had only 60 businesses of over 100 staff, 60 over 100 staff and two thirds of collected tax was from the agricultural sector. Tax collection was inefficient and collected about half the rates per capita of the Balkan powers. There was also considerable waste. In 1910, the Sultan was drawing £ 7m annually but £ 4m of this was for his estate. This should have been about £ 500,000 so £ 3.5m was frittered away on bribes, graft, palaces, favors, guards and secret police. The Empire's literacy rate was 7% for the Latin alphabet but 40% for the Arabic alphabet placing the Ottoman Empire on par with Spain or Italy.

Turks were forbidden to levee consumption taxes due the terms of the Capitulations (treaties) with foreign powers. France, Britain and Germany blocked a Russian request for a seat on the Ottoman Public Debt Administration (OPDA), the vehicle for collecting taxes in Turkey to pay down debt owed to western Europeans. Russia's goal was to be able to apply economic pressure to the Porte which the three other powers objected to. The OPDA was also a mechanism to bring in foreign investment such as railway building projects like the Berlin Baghdad railway.

Although it was a great detriment to the sovereignty of the Empire, which had surrendered its rights over revenues and accepted unconditional control to foreigners, the establishment of the OPDA proved to be successful in the sense that it restored the Ottoman creditworthiness. From 1886 to 1914, the government could secure another 23 loans, totaling £150 million at an average rate of issue of over 85 percent.

Despite the fact that the Ottoman state managed to generate a budget surplus and to orderly pay its outstanding debt in the last two decades of the 19th century, rising military expenditures, especially after 1908, began to create serious problems again. Deficits appeared again and they had to be financed through further borrowing.

The 1914-15 budged was forecast at 34m lira. Of this, 6m was for the Army of 36 Infantry Divisions, 2m lira for the Gendarmerie and 1.3m lira for the 8000 man Navy. There was only 20m lira in the treasury and the extra 14m was to be added to debt. Efforts to abrogate this debt after the war was declared was what prompted the resignation of the Finance Minister in November 1914. 10m-11m lira was the long term trend in Ottoman defense spending and at about 4.7% of GDP, this is quite high. The Army drew 13.3m lira in 1910 as reforms and reequipping were underway. Defense spending peaked at 24m lira at the end of the Balkan wars and 10% of GDP when the defense burden was at about 45% of government spending but this is typical for countries at war. However, this is including significant expenditure for ship building with orders for 2 Battleships, 2 Cruisers and a number of destroyers and submarines. In April, the Ottomans had secured a French loan for £36m that had cleared short term loans and stabilised the financial situation however the bulk of the loan was not due until later in 1914.

What killed the Sick Man?
The war cost 6 times more than expected at about 3m lira per month. Part of the terms for the August 1914 Turko-German Alliance was a 5m lira loan (100m gold marks) at 6% interest from the Germans which was supplied in October 1914. Even this wasn't enough for the Turks to declare war and Souchon took it apon himself to provoke the Russians, with tacit approval of the War Minister, by having the navy attack the Russians at the end of the month to cement the alliance. The economic measures being imposed saw the resignation of the Finance Minister on November 2nd 1914. A further 80m gold marks were supplied in April 1915 by which stage the Turks had also run up 150m gold marks in credit with German arms manufacturers. In addition to money printing (qualitative easing) and 50m lira worth of requisitions, the Ottomans also borrowed a total of 235m lira from Germany (about 4 billion gold marks). The resilience of Turks was quite impressive. For GB the war doubled prices, France they tripled and Germany quadrupled before collapse. Turkish prices went up 18 fold. By 1918 GDP had declined 40% and the cost of living had risen by 2000% since 1914, impoverishing anyone on a fixed salary. Even if Germany had won the war, Turkey would have been reduced to economic servitude to pay back these massive debts.
 
Just how sick was the 'Sick man of Europe?'. Despite 1914 appearances, economic collapse was a long way off. The Ottoman Empire outlasted the A-H, Russian and German Empires, finally being abolished in November 1922. The various minorities within the Ottoman Empire typically wanted autonomy and not independence. Even beyond the empire, Egypt and Cyprus were still paying tribute to the Sultan in 1914.

In 1914, the Ottoman Empire comprised about 15m Turks, 10m Arabs, 1.7m Greeks and 1.1m Armenians. This multi-ethnic empire's population of 28 million was a religious mix of 80% Muslim to 20% non-Muslim. Three quarters of the population lived in the Anatolian core. The GDP of the empire was about £ 233m pounds. National debt stood at £140m pounds or about 60% GDP (half held by the French) but this can't have been too much risk as bond rates were at 0.78% and this is a tenth of the rates on Greek bonds.

Turkey's problem was the inefficiency of its tax collection. However, the Young Turk regime would have little problem in squeezing the non-Muslim population through the Jizya (non-Muslim tax) to raise revenue and encourage them to leave. Ottoman taxes were only raising half per capita the amount that the Greeks and Serbs and other Balkan countries were able to manage.

Prior to the war, it was widely recognised that the Ottomans needed to reform and needed a period of peace to enact the necessary reforms. However, external pressures included the Russians arming both the Armenians and the Kurds where by they were attacking eachother and developing a pretext for the Russians to move in and 'protect' the Christians. The Arabs were also beginning to court English and French aid to ensure a greater say in Ottoman politics, something the CUP were trying to soothe with pan-Islamic policies. The German Ambassador to the Porte was advising no external adventures, no entangling alliances and no joining the Central Powers nor the Entente.

The Turkish Lira had an exchange rate close to the British Pound, 1.1:1 (£ 1 bought 0.9 TL). Tax revenue for 1913-14 was 29.4 million lira amounting to about 12% of GDP. Western Turkey had only 60 businesses of over 100 staff, 60 over 100 staff and two thirds of collected tax was from the agricultural sector. Tax collection was inefficient and collected about half the rates per capita of the Balkan powers. There was also considerable waste. In 1910, the Sultan was drawing £ 7m annually but £ 4m of this was for his estate. This should have been about £ 500,000 so £ 3.5m was frittered away on bribes, graft, palaces, favors, guards and secret police. The Empire's literacy rate was 7% for the Latin alphabet but 40% for the Arabic alphabet placing the Ottoman Empire on par with Spain or Italy.

Turks were forbidden to levee consumption taxes due the terms of the Capitulations (treaties) with foreign powers. France, Britain and Germany blocked a Russian request for a seat on the Ottoman Public Debt Administration (OPDA), the vehicle for collecting taxes in Turkey to pay down debt owed to western Europeans. Russia's goal was to be able to apply economic pressure to the Porte which the three other powers objected to. The OPDA was also a mechanism to bring in foreign investment such as railway building projects like the Berlin Baghdad railway.

Although it was a great detriment to the sovereignty of the Empire, which had surrendered its rights over revenues and accepted unconditional control to foreigners, the establishment of the OPDA proved to be successful in the sense that it restored the Ottoman creditworthiness. From 1886 to 1914, the government could secure another 23 loans, totaling £150 million at an average rate of issue of over 85 percent.

Despite the fact that the Ottoman state managed to generate a budget surplus and to orderly pay its outstanding debt in the last two decades of the 19th century, rising military expenditures, especially after 1908, began to create serious problems again. Deficits appeared again and they had to be financed through further borrowing.

The 1914-15 budged was forecast at 34m lira. Of this, 6m was for the Army of 36 Infantry Divisions, 2m lira for the Gendarmerie and 1.3m lira for the 8000 man Navy. There was only 20m lira in the treasury and the extra 14m was to be added to debt. Efforts to abrogate this debt after the war was declared was what prompted the resignation of the Finance Minister in November 1914. 10m-11m lira was the long term trend in Ottoman defense spending and at about 4.7% of GDP, this is quite high. The Army drew 13.3m lira in 1910 as reforms and reequipping were underway. Defense spending peaked at 24m lira at the end of the Balkan wars and 10% of GDP when the defense burden was at about 45% of government spending but this is typical for countries at war. However, this is including significant expenditure for ship building with orders for 2 Battleships, 2 Cruisers and a number of destroyers and submarines. In April, the Ottomans had secured a French loan for £36m that had cleared short term loans and stabilised the financial situation however the bulk of the loan was not due until later in 1914.

What killed the Sick Man?
The war cost 6 times more than expected at about 3m lira per month. Part of the terms for the August 1914 Turko-German Alliance was a 5m lira loan (100m gold marks) at 6% interest from the Germans which was supplied in October 1914. Even this wasn't enough for the Turks to declare war and Souchon took it apon himself to provoke the Russians, with tacit approval of the War Minister, by having the navy attack the Russians at the end of the month to cement the alliance. The economic measures being imposed saw the resignation of the Finance Minister on November 2nd 1914. A further 80m gold marks were supplied in April 1915 by which stage the Turks had also run up 150m gold marks in credit with German arms manufacturers. In addition to money printing (qualitative easing) and 50m lira worth of requisitions, the Ottomans also borrowed a total of 235m lira from Germany (about 4 billion gold marks). The resilience of Turks was quite impressive. For GB the war doubled prices, France they tripled and Germany quadrupled before collapse. Turkish prices went up 18 fold. By 1918 GDP had declined 40% and the cost of living had risen by 2000% since 1914, impoverishing anyone on a fixed salary. Even if Germany had won the war, Turkey would have been reduced to economic servitude to pay back these massive debts.
So from what I can read here the best case scenario for them is to stay neutral or join the allies?
 
Top