PC: British intervention in the Ottoman Empire whilst neutral in WWI?

[Deleted member 94680]

So, in an ATL where Britain stays out of WWI (German respect of Belgium, better pre-war relations with Germany, an earlier Irish imbroglio, etc), what chance is there that London would still try something in the Ottoman Empire?

I would assume a July Crisis that sees Britain “Happily...” nothing “more than spectators” would allow the dreadnoughts to be completed and sent to Constantinople. But I am of the opinion that the confiscation of Sultan Osman I and Reşadiye was not the decisive factor in the Pasha’s decision to join the Central Powers that it was once assumed to be. Does this mean that the Ottomans still go to War as OTL and as such, find themselves in crisis by 1915? How does the delivery of two dreadnoughts to the Sublime Porte affect Greece? Do they immediately join the Entente?

Britain had had interests in the Ottoman sphere for many, many years. Kuwait, the Trucial States, Oman and Bahrain were all under British protection or control by 1914. Oil was already a strategic concern for the British, Churchill having established the government’s controlling share in APOC in 1913 and the Royal Navy was increasingly dependent on oil. The Turkish Petroleum Company had been established in 1912, owing to the belief there was oil in Mesopotamia and APOC had a controlling share in the TPC.

So, with the Arabs under the Hashemites already in contact in one form or another with London, British India “unused” with it’s large reserves of manpower, a belief oil is available and the Turks in trouble by 1915, what likelihood that London tries something along the lines of the Fao Landings OTL?

Would this drag Britain into WWI anyway?

Would the Ottomans cede their Arab territories to keep fighting the Russians (and Greeks?) with no Gallipoli Campaign likely?

Or does Britain sit the whole show out and wait for the post-War world to coalesce before using her untapped power and influence to take what she wants later?

 

[Dorknought]

GB had already updated her war plans and intelligence from the Aqaba crisis in 1906. GB would seek an alliance with the Greeks before moving against the Turks. The US also has skin in the game. They had already intervened by selling warships to Greece. All these moves should dissuade the Turks from joining the war if their leadership was sane.

 

[Deleted member 94680]

GB had already updated her war plans and intelligence from the Aqaba crisis in 1906. GB would seek an alliance with the Greeks before moving against the Turks.

I’d forgotten the Aqaba Incident, it’s a good point. That made their Egyptian border more secure, but obviously (going by OTL) didn’t help with intelligence in the Persian Gulf. As for the Greek alliance, OTL it was tried and the “National Schism” prevented it, what changes here?

The US also has skin in the game. They had already intervened by selling warships to Greece.

Hardly “skin in the game” - Kilkis and Lemnos were obsolete pre-dreadnoughts when sold to Greece and I wouldn’t count it as “intervening”, it was Greece responding to the Turks purchasing Barbaros Hayreddin and Turgut Reis. There was no governmental pressure (as far as I’m aware) it was simply business.

All these moves should dissuade the Turks from joining the war if their leadership was sane.

OTL would suggest otherwise.

 

[Dorknought]

Hardly “skin in the game” - Kilkis and Lemnos were obsolete pre-dreadnoughts when sold to Greece and I wouldn’t count it as “intervening”, it was Greece responding to the Turks purchasing Barbaros Hayreddin and Turgut Reis. There was no governmental pressure (as far as I’m aware) it was simply business.

The US sold the ships after the Turks bought the Rio de Janerio and the Greeks were desperate. Wilson believed he was preventing a Turk pre emptive attack on the Greeks and it probably did.

 

[Dorknought]

As for the Greek alliance, OTL it was tried and the “National Schism” prevented it, what changes here?

The stakes are not so high here and GB had already looked at this pre war. The Greeks may embrace this to stay out alongside GB rather than dragged in as OTL.

 

[NoMommsen]

Dear @Dorknought what 'Greeks' do you talk of ?

... faction of the King ?

at least leaning to the CP though rather trying to stay neutral and keep his country out of war
​

... faction of Venizelos ?

heavily leaning towards Entente (rather Britain) 'keen' (mildly said) with the Megali Idea easp. if backed behind official channels by Britain if the latter might try a proxy war against the OE​

 

[Deleted member 94680]

The US sold the ships after the Turks bought the Rio de Janerio and the Greeks were desperate. Wilson believed he was preventing a Turk pre emptive attack on the Greeks and it probably did.

So a humanitarian arms sale? But as I said previously, there was no government intervention, or even statement to that effect. This is the government of Wilson as well, he was hardly going to be getting involved in some “Mediterranean adventure” on behalf of British imperialism. I find it all unlikely.

The stakes are not so high here and GB had already looked at this pre war. The Greeks may embrace this to stay out alongside GB rather than dragged in as OTL.

Stay out? You’re suggesting that Greece joins in an alliance with Britain who are attacking the Ottoman Empire. How is joining an alliance with a Power at War “staying out”? As for the stakes not being so high, War with the Ottomans is as high as it gets for Athens. They’re a Regional Power going to War with a neighbouring Great Power. It’s incredibly risky, especially if the Ottomans have the Sultan Osman I and Reşadiye under their flag.

 

[NoMommsen]

If the british goverment stays neutral in the beginning - for whatever reason - they will be embroiled in the 'irish affair' as a certain. IMHO.
With Ireland and with it also Britain being on the verge of or in civil war conditions - at least in Ireland but with 'english' participation maybe spreading to the main british isle by means of 'terrorism' - its goverment VERY likely will try not to get involved into any other war-like adventure.
Raising whatever troops (even if indian or other colonial forces) for something alike would be rather unlikely to impossible as not backed by anyone on the british isles.
And so they - or the foreign office - would rather try to calm any other potential threat and esp. further spreading of the war (Greece<->OE, Italy<->A-H ... or France ... or at all).

The 'wisdom' to distract from domestic quarrels by turning into foreign adventure was a lessen still to be learned. ... exacvtly by the Great >War as i.e. tsarist Russia made the experience.

Regarding the Ottoman Empire there would likely meet similar attitudes : don't get drawn into some unpredictable adventures.
And therefore they would very likely try to simply 'ignore' each other.
=> no military conflict between GB and OE

 

[Deleted member 94680]

... snip ...

Interesting analysis. I agree that Home Rule will blow up sooner or later, without an European involvement in August ‘14. This will certainly distract the majority of the British Government and public, for sure.

But, when you say:

... Raising whatever troops (even if Indian or other colonial forces) ...be rather unlikely to impossible as not backed by anyone on the British Isles...

I have to disagree. British India had it’s own Government and Army, it was not directly controlled by London. OTL, the Fao Landing was conducted by Indian troops with no ‘British’ units, apart from Ocean’s Royal Marines, as far as I am aware.

Limited operations (coastal landings, support of Arab insurrection, etc) could easily be an Indian government initiative whilst London and the Regular Army deals with Ireland.