Ottoman Empire stays neutral in WWI

What if the Ottoman Empire pretty much remained neutral, throughout WWI, although they made the Allies pay a high price for all the convoys using the Dardanelles heading for the Russian Black Sea ports. So they basically sat back, watched the world go to hell, & filled their treasury vaults with Allied gold...

How is WWI altered as a result of there being no Allied assaults upon Ottoman territory?

Likewise how is the Ottoman Empire effected without the strains of warfare being placed upon it?

And looking slightly elsewhere, how is the history of Russia effected by getting much needed supplies, & presumably lots of it, with a lot less effort than the OTL?

Anything else?
 

~The Doctor~

The Ottomans survive longer than OTL, but there's some sort of Democratic revolution in the 20s/30s.

WWI in general? The War only lasts until, say, September 1918, due to the amount of manpower now available to the Allies.
 

Rockingham

Banned
Russia survives the war and invades the OE a year or so after it.

Their was a reason the Ottomans sided with the CP's; if they did anything else they would be screwed by Russia sooner or later(probably sooner;)).
 
Russia survives the war and invades the OE a year or so after it.

Their was a reason the Ottomans sided with the CP's; if they did anything else they would be screwed by Russia sooner or later(probably sooner;)).

Invasion? Unlikely. Entente would be strongly against any single-sided actions against the OM and Russia will be not in the best shape after WWI anyway. The most likely outcome - dissolution of the Empire due the separatism in 20es - early 30-es. When this occurs the Great Powers will divide the empire including these new states in their spheres of influence as colonies or client states.

Russia gets Armenia (the whole historic Armenia) and possibly Kurdistan, Greece gets the Aegean coast and islands, Constantinople is ruled by the League of Nations, Britain gets Palestine, Iraq, Jordan etc, France gets Syria.
 
Invasion? Unlikely. Entente would be strongly against any single-sided actions against the OM and Russia will be not in the best shape after WWI anyway. The most likely outcome - dissolution of the Empire due the separatism in 20es - early 30-es. When this occurs the Great Powers will divide the empire including these new states in their spheres of influence as colonies or client states.

Russia gets Armenia (the whole historic Armenia) and possibly Kurdistan, Greece gets the Aegean coast and islands, Constantinople is ruled by the League of Nations, Britain gets Palestine, Iraq, Jordan etc, France gets Syria.

ASB. There would be no way OE would dissolute by themselves without WW1. The only minority problems for the empire at that time were only the Armenians.
 
ASB. There would be no way OE would dissolute by themselves without WW1. The only minority problems for the empire at that time were only the Armenians.

Ok. You suppose that the OE was already modernized and reformed enough to continue its existence as an empire in XX century, don't you?

The fact is the country was plagued by various problems by the start of WWI and foreigners were actively involved in its internal affairs. They certainly needed to continue deep kemalist-like reformist policy to be at least competitive on the world stage.

I don't have much knowledge about the Turkish internal politics of this time so I cannot judge whether this was possible or not.
 
Ok. You suppose that the OE was already modernized and reformed enough to continue its existence as an empire in XX century, don't you?

That's the truth. OE at that time was even more democratic than Austria-Hungary. They even managed to occupied Caucasus and Yemen from Russia and British respectively during the WW1.

The fact is the country was plagued by various problems by the start of WWI and foreigners were actively involved in its internal affairs. They certainly needed to continue deep kemalist-like reformist policy to be at least competitive on the world stage.

One problem and another. Such thing like a deep-kemalist-like reforms actually would be the worst thing that would happen to a survived, politically free Turkey. There were actually better choices at that time. To stay out from WW1 was quite one of them.

I don't have much knowledge about the Turkish internal politics of this time so I cannot judge whether this was possible or not.

You would leuvvv to meet Keenir then. ;) OR you can now start to search for better sources about Ottoman Empire, for your own good.

I hope Abdul Hadi Pasha would come back soon. It's been too long already...
 
Last edited:
Yes it has. :(

*channels summoning energy*

Ottoman Empire.
Airships.
Ottoman Empire.
Airships.
Ottoman Empire.
Airships.
Ottoman Empire.
Airships.
Ottoman Empire.

Oooh... I like that Idea...
Airships and the OE...sweet...

And yes they would most definitely survive the 20's and probably be a major force once the oil is discovered and developed. They could use the time to subdue the restless interior of the Arabian peninsula instead. Partner with Anglo French commercial interests in the postwar intead and they are probably set. This is probably a d*mned good outcome for the ME and gulf in general.

Mind you there is the pesky depression era to consider and the authoritarian politics of that era. One would assume though that the OE could weather that, Arab nationalism not having a chance to establish itself in the postwar of WWI. Asuming with a Tsarist Russia surviving then no WWII. Or are they the fascists of this TL, egad in partnership with dare I think it, Nazi Germany....ouch, that will hurt?
 
That's the truth. OE at that time was even more democratic than Austria-Hungary.

You'll note that the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed within the same decade (and was headed towards very rough times should the war not have happened).

A more apt comparison to make would be between, say, Britain, France, or other actually democratic countries.
 
You'll note that the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed within the same decade (and was headed towards very rough times should the war not have happened).

A more apt comparison to make would be between, say, Britain, France, or other actually democratic countries.

Well, Britain, France, and the others at that time actually WERE more democratic than Austria-Hungary.:rolleyes: You got my point ?

Maybe you were right I was wrong using A-H as the comparison to the OE. OE was way a lot more stable than A-H. Even their Arabs and Kurdish population were loyal to the empire before they lost the war, such a terrifying truth that is....

One more bad news! Many of the popular features and images about Ottoman Empire are not just actually wrong, but some even also completely contradicting those of what actually happened.
 
Oooh... I like that Idea...
Airships and the OE...sweet...
Asuming with a Tsarist Russia surviving then no WWII. Or are they the fascists of this TL, egad in partnership with dare I think it, Nazi Germany....ouch, that will hurt?

The Nazis haven't a chance to gain a power in Germany without strong communistic movement in Germany. Without USSR and the Third Internationale German communists would be weaklier and they would ally with social-democrats. Again, there is no Red Bavarian Republic and the revolution attempts, no evil "jewish bolsheviks" to hate. This makes the Nazis victory virtually impossible. Another crowd of marginals no more. Workers support their traditional political forces.

But in other hand I believe that the Treaty of Versailles made the WWII inevitable sooner or later in any reality where this treaty exist because of its numerous faults and over excessive suppression of Germany as Great Power, the country that indeed remained major industrial power with numerous and capable population.
 
Last edited:
You, my friend, have never of the Tanzimat then, right?

Thanks for the link. I heard about the Tanzimat. Hmm. But that process was going not too smoothly and fast. At least they lost Balkans.

You see, the political reforms are just one side of the problem. To survive the empire also had to overcame its economical backwardness, improve infrastructure to tie various parts of the empire together, advance its industry.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the link. I heard about the Tanzimat. Hmm. But that process was going not too smoothly and fast. At least they lost Balkans.


You see, the political reforms are just one side of the problem. To survive the empire also had to overcame its economical backwardness, improve infrastructure to tie various parts of the empire together, advance its industry.

In the end they almost made it though....

The lost of Balkans was quite inevitable, given that it was till at 19th century, when the storm of nationalism was still very heavy, plus that they were not ready for that for they had been from the period of internal peace for like what, more than a century? But since some years before the dawn of WW1, the process of modernization in OE had been gone smoothly and was rather getting more rapid from time to time. So about the other things you mentioned, without WW1 or without the lost in WW1, it was only a matter of waiting for a bit....

And don't forget, that link is from Wikipedia, which contains lots and lots of inaccurate informations about Ottoman Empire. :rolleyes: ;)
 
Top