WI: The Ottoman Government sides with Mustafa Kemal

[GameBawesome]

In OTL, the Ottoman Government sides with the European powers, during the War of Turkish Independence, against the Grand National Assembly. The Turks won, and the Ottoman Sultanate and Caliphate were abolished by Mustafa Kemal.

But what if, instead of siding with the Europeans, the Ottoman Government breaks the Treaty of Sèvres, and the Ottoman Monarchy sides with the Turks, to fight against the occupying European powers?

 

[Guardonion]

If they didn't immediately get deposed in favor of a more cooperative Sultan you mean?

The Sultanate was indeed abolished after the War of Independence, but the Caliphate was abolished and the House of Osman exiled later when the Caliph started to undermine the Republic. So if the Ottoman Dynasty actually accepts their role as figurehead monarchs and let the Republic do as they wanted without interference, we might have still had an Ottoman 'Empire' today. If they didn't though, you can expect the royal family to be at the mercy of the ruling CHP, who would do everything in their power to have a monarch who agrees with their agenda on the throne.

 

[Germaniac]

Well for one thing Osman Fuad will most definitely be a leading military figure during the war of independence. He was a close friend of Kemals and a talented officer.

 

[GameBawesome]

If the Ottoman Imperial Government, including the Ottoman Dynasty sided with the Grand National Assembly, and fought against the occupying Europeans, could the Monarchy, even the Caliphate survive to the modern day?

 

[Sarthak]

If the Ottoman Imperial Government, including the Ottoman Dynasty sided with the Grand National Assembly, and fought against the occupying Europeans, could the Monarchy, even the Caliphate survive to the modern day?

Yes it could actually. Would be interesting

 

[A Piece of History]

In OTL, the Ottoman Government sides with the European powers, during the War of Turkish Independence, against the Grand National Assembly. The Turks won, and the Ottoman Sultanate and Caliphate were abolished by Mustafa Kemal.

But what if, instead of siding with the Europeans, the Ottoman Government breaks the Treaty of Sèvres, and the Ottoman Monarchy sides with the Turks, to fight against the occupying European powers?

Contrary to what people think, Kemal actually kept the position of caliph around after the Grand National Assembly won the Turkish War of Independence, but only because the Caliph was still widely respected by the people. Abulmejid was even elected to the position by the Grand National Assembly., but Kemal could barely tolerate him.

After the GNA elected Abulmejid to the position, Kemal refused to permit him the traditional Ottoman ceremony in which his role would be conferred, saying...

"The Caliph has no power or position except as a nominal figurehead",

So at the bare minimum, the Calph was only worthwhile as a constitutional monarch. When Abulmejid declared that he desired an increase to his allowance, Kemal was even clearer.

"Your office, the Caliphate, is nothing more than a historic relic. It has no justification for existence. It is a piece of impertinence that you should dare write to any of my secretaries!"

The legal position of Sultan was officially abolished in 1923, but the position of Caliph was retained until 1924, when two Indian brothers representing the Indian-based Khalifat movement started a campaign to preserve the Ottoman caliphate. When this happened, Ataturk finally took the chance and abolished the position of Caliph, officially ending the transition of Turkey from the Ottoman Empire to the Republic of Turkey.

So, in this timeline where the Sultan sides with the GNA, I expect this same tenuous relationship to remain and I severely doubt Kemal would be in the mood to shuffle out Abulmejid for a compliant puppet, since as I just said, he could barely tolerate the Caliphate as it stood. At best, the Caliph would be kept under house arrest and only allowed outside if he agreed to toe the Republic's line.

If the Ottoman Imperial Government, including the Ottoman Dynasty sided with the Grand National Assembly, and fought against the occupying Europeans, could the Monarchy, even the Caliphate survive to the modern day?

I don't think so. Some people don't understand what the position of Caliph embodies. The word 'caliphate' means 'successor', meaning that they are the successors of the Prophet Mohammad in leading the Islamic faith, or at least, a faction of that faith. If the caliph is effectively a hostage of the Republican government and cannot exert influence over the Islamic community in a particular country, then it brings shame to the title, which was once held by Mohammad's family. Such shame would not be tolerated by the Islamic community of Turkey.

In my opinion, the position of Caliph would be abolished in August 1944, after the death of Abulmejid II.

 

[Sarthak]

Contrary to what people think, Kemal actually kept the position of caliph around after the Grand National Assembly won the Turkish War of Independence, but only because the Caliph was still widely respected by the people. Abulmejid was even elected to the position by the Grand National Assembly., but Kemal could barely tolerate him.

After the GNA elected Abulmejid to the position, Kemal refused to permit him the traditional Ottoman ceremony in which his role would be conferred, saying...



So at the bare minimum, the Calph was only worthwhile as a constitutional monarch. When Abulmejid declared that he desired an increase to his allowance, Kemal was even clearer.



The legal position of Sultan was officially abolished in 1923, but the position of Caliph was retained until 1924, when two Indian brothers representing the Indian-based Khalifat movement started a campaign to preserve the Ottoman caliphate. When this happened, Ataturk finally took the chance and abolished the position of Caliph, officially ending the transition of Turkey from the Ottoman Empire to the Republic of Turkey.

So, in this timeline where the Sultan sides with the GNA, I expect this same tenuous relationship to remain and I severely doubt Kemal would be in the mood to shuffle out Abulmejid for a compliant puppet, since as I just said, he could barely tolerate the Caliphate as it stood. At best, the Caliph would be kept under house arrest and only allowed outside if he agreed to toe the Republic's line.



I don't think so. Some people don't understand what the position of Caliph embodies. The word 'caliphate' means 'successor', meaning that they are the successors of the Prophet Mohammad in leading the Islamic faith, or at least, a faction of that faith. If the caliph is effectively a hostage of the Republican government and cannot exert influence over the Islamic community in a particular country, then it brings shame to the title, which was once held by Mohammad's family. Such shame would not be tolerated by the Islamic community of Turkey.

In my opinion, the position of Caliph would be abolished in August 1944, after the death of Abulmejid II.

No exactly. The next in line Osman Fuad was very very popular and he would have been the successor and Osman II. Most likely the caliphate dies after his death in 1973

 

[A Piece of History]

No exactly. The next in line Osman Fuad was very very popular and he would have been the successor and Osman II. Most likely the caliphate dies after his death in 1973

But would he want the position, though? The Sultanate is gone and Turkey has transitioned into a democracy. He wouldn't be able to do much of anything aside from making speeches at mosques.

Also, I doubt the caliphate would die even with Fuad's death. He had a nephew named Ali Vasib, but he would've been very old when he becomes Caliph Ali I. According to Wikipedia, the House of Osman has had dozens of pretenders claim to be the Sultan.

Ottoman dynasty - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Sarthak]

But would he want the position, though? The Sultanate is gone and Turkey has transitioned into a democracy. He wouldn't be able to do much of anything aside from making speeches at mosques.

Also, I doubt the caliphate would die even with Fuad's death. He had a nephew named Ali Vasib, but he would've been very old when he becomes Caliph Ali I. According to Wikipedia, the House of Osman has had dozens of pretenders claim to be the Sultan.

Ottoman dynasty - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He was largely content with his ceremonial role in the Constitutional Era, don't see why he wouldn't as Sultan?
Also, even half a century after republicanism was introduced in Turkey, his death was widely looked upon as a sad event; with the Caliphate and Sultanate surviving, he would be even more popular than OTL. He was also a war hero in the Italo-Turkish War and the Balkan Wars which gave far more legitimacy to be the leader of the state than any other contemporary Sultan. Sort of like the 'War King' kinda romanticism.
Also the man was very democratic in ideals. He was good friends with Ataturk for a reason; unlike many other members of the House of Osman, he respected the decision and had left Turkey peacefully stating that he would return only when the people wanted him to; and indeed he only returned to Turkey after the ban was lifted. The other members of the dynasty repeatedly tried to rescind the ban; however he did not; he did so only once, even that for a temporary basis for a business proposal.
He would have been a very democratic sultan; and he was largely okay with it.

 

[A Piece of History]

He was largely content with his ceremonial role in the Constitutional Era, don't see why he wouldn't as Sultan?
Also, even half a century after republicanism was introduced in Turkey, his death was widely looked upon as a sad event; with the Caliphate and Sultanate surviving, he would be even more popular than OTL. He was also a war hero in the Italo-Turkish War and the Balkan Wars which gave far more legitimacy to be the leader of the state than any other contemporary Sultan. Sort of like the 'War King' kinda romanticism.
Also the man was very democratic in ideals. He was good friends with Ataturk for a reason; unlike many other members of the House of Osman, he respected the decision and had left Turkey peacefully stating that he would return only when the people wanted him to; and indeed he only returned to Turkey after the ban was lifted. The other members of the dynasty repeatedly tried to rescind the ban; however he did not; he did so only once, even that for a temporary basis for a business proposal.
He would have been a very democratic sultan; and he was largely okay with it.

Okay, that sounds really interesting. But here's my question. Would the Turkey you describe be as susceptible to military interference as in OTL? In OTL's 1960, three members of the Turkish government were executed, including the Prime Minister in a successful coup.

 

[Sarthak]

Okay, that sounds really interesting. But here's my question. Would the Turkey you describe be as susceptible to military interference as in OTL? In OTL's 1960, three members of the Turkish government were executed, including the Prime Minister in a successful coup.

That I cannot say; though the Ottoman State tended to have better control of the military than the Turkish State; so I guess it would certainly be better than OTL, I do not know to what level.