DBWI: No repercussions for the Armenian Genocide?

As we all know that in response to the unprecedented atrocities committed by the Ottoman Empire towards Armenians, and in fact, any kind of Christians within its borders during the Great War led to the post war enforcement of the extremely severe Sevres Treaty by the League of Nations and establishment of Armenian and Assyrian nations as well as population transferes of Turks from Greek Ionia, Russian Constantinople and French Cilicia into their part of Anatolia.
What if the Ottoman cleanse of their empire doesn't backfire? Could it lead to further atrocities being committed after the Great War without this example being set up?
 
Last edited:

Thomas1195

Banned
The British Liberal Government and especially the radical ideologue Charles Masterman, the new Foreign Secretary, relentlessly pushed for such motion via force, propaganda and political pressures. Worse, they also gained support from President Theodore Roosevelt.

Have them losing the 1918 election and job done. The Tories, otoh, were pro-Turks.


We'd probably not see Turkey go Communist and become part of the "People's Axis" in WW2.
And was crushed by the Allies. It took 50 years for Turkey to reach its pre-war population.
 
If the pro-Turk Tories won the UK khaki election, it would not even gain a single piece of Anatolia.
The Greeks wouldn't have even gotten Adrianople. This probably would have prompted a Greco-Turkish War over Thrace, which would end in a Greek victory as the Turkish army would be in complete chaos following the 1st world war. Therefore Greece would be able to punitively seize more territory in Anatolia.
 
Top