WI the Ottomans don't go to war in 1914

I'm not sure I buy into the whole 'sick man of Europe' thing to the same degree that others might. Without the war, the Ottomans can make some extra cash, and perhaps enact some reforms, and perhaps linger on for a good long time. Not sure that Arab nationalism would be quelled permanently, but it might be placated for a good long time.

Let us say the Russian Revolution still happens - and that the Bolsheviks still take power and win the Civil War.

It's not a guarantee in a timeline like this, but still...fairly likely.

Well, if it does, imagine how this affects British and even French geostrategy in the 1920's and 1930's. If the thought of the Tsar getting his mitts on the Turkish Straits made Victorian policymakers queasy, the prospect of the Bolsheviks getting hold of it will give their postwar successors in Whitehall strokes. Suddenly, the Ottoman Empire looks much more attractive as a counterweight for containment of the Soviets. And that means keeping it as strong as possible.
 

Germaniac

Donor
Let us say the Russian Revolution still happens - and that the Bolsheviks still take power and win the Civil War.

It's not a guarantee in a timeline like this, but still...fairly likely.

Well, if it does, imagine how this affects British and even French geostrategy in the 1920's and 1930's. If the thought of the Tsar getting his mitts on the Turkish Straits made Victorian policymakers queasy, the prospect of the Bolsheviks getting hold of it will give their postwar successors in Whitehall strokes. Suddenly, the Ottoman Empire looks much more attractive as a counterweight for containment of the Soviets. And that means keeping it as strong as possible.

If there is a civil war, i expect the Ottomans would intervene in the Caucasus. By the time the Entente is intervening i expect they will be supportive of ottoman intervention.
 
A neutral, non-belligerent OE would not survive long enough to actually complete any of the begun r ailines of earn a single dime for oil after being torn apart by the winner(s) of such a WW 1... regardless who would win WW 1.

There would still be the London-treaty giving the straits to Russia, there would still be some kind of the Sykes-Picot Agreement troggerted by possiblysome russian requests regarding armenian and kurdish regions ... as well as probably the Balfour-declaration. The Shat-eö-Arab was already before WW 1 a 'contested' area between british and Ottoman interests. In the 'name of the war effort' London would most likely not withstand some ... second thoughts about oil for the RNs ships.
Oh, ... and after Greece having decided to become a 'staging area' for Entente-actions on tze Balkan ... I'm sure some 'greece minority protection' would be ghranted after the war.

Why? If the ottomans are neutral there would be no need for the London agreement or Sykes-Picot. The Russians aren't making any demands regarding Armenia or the Kurdish regions- they turned down an offer to occupy the region in the 1890s. A neutral Ottoman Empire could go back to playing Russia and Britain off against each other after the war.

The French were the most invested in the Ottoman empire, while of the great powers, the Russians were the ones most coveting Ottoman territory - I don't see anyone immediately in the post war period seeking military solutions, more likely the gradual resumption of economic chokeholds on the old man.

As an aside, the Ottomans might close the Dardanelles for national security without declaring war. I would be curious how far the Entente might go to reopen those straights.


The closed the straights almost immediately. Ottoman war plans closed and mine the straights upon any Russian mobilization.


The Russians didn't really covet anything except control over the straits. They would be content to let the Ottomans remain intact if the Ottomans kept the striats open to merchant traffic and closed to foreign warships. They offered the Turks an alliance on that basis before the war. The Russians would ally with the Turks against any Bulgarian attack on the straits as well

After a confrontation with the British fleet in late September, the Ottomans close the straits on September 27- a little late in the game. The Ottomans are divided. Better diplomacy and/or better wartime performance can keep them neutral
 

BooNZ

Banned
The Russians didn't really covet anything except control over the straits. They would be content to let the Ottomans remain intact if the Ottomans kept the striats open to merchant traffic and closed to foreign warships. They offered the Turks an alliance on that basis before the war. The Russians would ally with the Turks against any Bulgarian attack on the straits as well
To put things in perspective, control of the straights included Constantinople and Russia threatened war at the mere thought of German influence in the defence thereof. So you don't covert the neighbour's missus per se, you just want to shag her senseless?

Notwithstandng the above, what you say is entirely logical (control of the straights in the hands of an independent third party), but such logic was not reflective of Russian policy for over a hundred years...
 
I would think the MASSIVE debt they have just incurred in the war and the British Trade Unions would have something to say... and if the economy comes to a screeching halt I think they are going to be sorry they didn't have any public support.

By the way the Entente DID try to carve up what remained (AFTER 10 years of near constant warfare) of the Empire AND STILL LOST. There will be no will to fight a fully engaged and prepared Ottoman Empire following the Great War. To do so would be suicide for whatever government is in power in London. You really think the commonwealth nations and Great Britain are going to be able to pull together an army of OVER a million men to carve up the Middle East for colonial aspirations. That is absurd.

The Entente tried to carve up the Ottoman Empire and succeeded, look at Iraq, Syria, Arabia, etc. In Anatolia, the Turks retook much of their land not because they were stronger or better than the Entente but because Italy, France, and Britain did not care to fight. Only Greece resisted the Ottomans and it lost in a close run war.

For the Allies, Ottoman neutrality is certainly a net plus, though perhaps not quite as much as some might think.

1) Forces diverted to fighting the Turks in OTL are obviously affected, making more free for other assignments which could hurt Germany or Austria more directly. But the threat of Ottoman belligerency alone will require *some* forces to be left behind on her frontiers. The Russians are not going to leave the Caucasus undefended, for example.

2) Do the still-neutral Turks keep the Straits open to civilian shipping -er, sorry, reopen the Straits once the war settles in? If they do, this is a major help to the Russians, even if the Turks delay it for "inspections" or whatever.

3) The Constantinople and Sykes-Picot secret agreements all post-date Ottoman belligerency by several months. Entente powers might continue to hanker for Turkish turf, but it is going to be much harder to justify, especially domestically. Postwar publics will be war-weary, and wondering at the fairness of an armed carve-up of a Turkish power that did the Entente a major solid by staying neutral throughout the war despite desperate German efforts to conscript them.

4) The Armenian Genocide almost certainly doesn't happen - well, at least not during the war.

5) There will still be Arab revolts, but not the Arab Revolt. T.E. Lawrence probably dies of mustard gas in Flanders.

6) The Empire has a fair chance of staying intact for another generation, but the internal contradictions aren't going away, and may only be intensified if the Young Turks ramp up an aggressive Turkification program throughout the Empire. The irony will be that the only thing keeping nominal (theoretical) Ottoman sovereignty over Egypt will be British occupation, as London will be keen to avoid any open break with the Turks. Eventually, of course, the Egyptians will go their own way.

4) The Turks had already begun killing the Greeks before the war begun and reports of the killings had already emerged.
 

Germaniac

Donor
The Entente tried to carve up the Ottoman Empire and succeeded, look at Iraq, Syria, Arabia, etc. In Anatolia, the Turks retook much of their land not because they were stronger or better than the Entente but because Italy, France, and Britain did not care to fight. Only Greece resisted the Ottomans and it lost in a close run war.

After 4 years of difficult war. Thats exactly what i am trying to say. An Entente that has just fought the Great War is not going to decide to fight the Ottomans after the war.
 

Germaniac

Donor
4) The Turks had already begun killing the Greeks before the war begun and reports of the killings had already emerged.

Im not saying forced deportations and violence didnt happen, but it was violence on all sides... the treatment of Turks, Albanians, and Jews in former Rumelia was equally bad as pre-ww1 Ottoman population policies. Once the war kicked off the Ottomans ramped up the extremism to genocidal levels
 

BlondieBC

Banned
The Russians didn't really covet anything except control over the straits. They would be content to let the Ottomans remain intact if the Ottomans kept the striats open to merchant traffic and closed to foreign warships. They offered the Turks an alliance on that basis before the war. The Russians would ally with the Turks against any Bulgarian attack on the straits as well

After a confrontation with the British fleet in late September, the Ottomans close the straits on September 27- a little late in the game. The Ottomans are divided. Better diplomacy and/or better wartime performance can keep them neutral

Been while since I looked at the dates, but assuming it was September 27th the straights were closed, it was because that was how it was written in the mobilization plans. If this matches the timing of some British action, it is coincidence.

As to the Russians getting merchant traffic, since the plans were for no merchant traffic, it doesn't help the Russians much. The main Ottoman enemy that is a Great Power is Russia. Russia is the last nation on Earth the Ottomans want to help.
 
Been while since I looked at the dates, but assuming it was September 27th the straights were closed, it was because that was how it was written in the mobilization plans. If this matches the timing of some British action, it is coincidence.

As to the Russians getting merchant traffic, since the plans were for no merchant traffic, it doesn't help the Russians much. The main Ottoman enemy that is a Great Power is Russia. Russia is the last nation on Earth the Ottomans want to help.

The Turks and Russians say some very sophisticated diplomatic games. The Turkish regimes is also full of intrigue. They were very divided on the idea of war

There isn't as much innate hostility of the Turks to the Russians. Sure the Russians want the straits but they also don't want anyone else to have them either. A weak Ottoman Empire friendly to Russia worked just fine. The Ottomans liked it as allying with Russia meant the Russians wouldn't attack

Alexander III and Nicholas often backed the Turks. The Armenia crisis in the 1890's and Bulgaria threatening Constantinople during the Balkan Wars are two examples

The territory the Ottomans wanted back the most was in British hands.

The Ottomans are vulnerable to Entente Naval action and or a strike from Greece or Bulgaria. They are dragging their feet as much as possible
 

BlondieBC

Banned
The Turks and Russians say some very sophisticated diplomatic games. The Turkish regimes is also full of intrigue. They were very divided on the idea of war

There isn't as much innate hostility of the Turks to the Russians. Sure the Russians want the straits but they also don't want anyone else to have them either. A weak Ottoman Empire friendly to Russia worked just fine. The Ottomans liked it as allying with Russia meant the Russians wouldn't attack

Alexander III and Nicholas often backed the Turks. The Armenia crisis in the 1890's and Bulgaria threatening Constantinople during the Balkan Wars are two examples

The territory the Ottomans wanted back the most was in British hands.

The Ottomans are vulnerable to Entente Naval action and or a strike from Greece or Bulgaria. They are dragging their feet as much as possible

None of that changes the Ottoman War Plans which are executed by default.
 
Neither the Ottomans, nor the Greeks, nor the Bulgars, nor the Serbs had clean hands "before the war begun".

100%, I completely agree. I'm just saying that there is an alternative excuse besides the Armenian Genocide should the Armenian Genocide not occur.

After 4 years of difficult war. Thats exactly what i am trying to say. An Entente that has just fought the Great War is not going to decide to fight the Ottomans after the war.

To be specific that is not exactly what you said. You said that the Entente tried to carve up the Ottoman Empire and lost. The Entente tried to carve up the Ottoman Empire and for the most part succeeded (Cyprus, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Transjordan, Arabia, and Lebanon). The Entente also tried to carve up Anatolia and then decided to not bother fighting for it with the expecting of Greece. Furthermore based on your use of capitalisation you make it sound like the Entente suffered a severe defeat when Greece lost in a close war.

Im not saying forced deportations and violence didnt happen, but it was violence on all sides... the treatment of Turks, Albanians, and Jews in former Rumelia was equally bad as pre-ww1 Ottoman population policies. Once the war kicked off the Ottomans ramped up the extremism to genocidal levels

See my reply to Boonz.
 
None of that changes the Ottoman War Plans which are executed by default.
Mobilization would continue but closing the straits is not part of the prepared mobilization. That is an active war measure

Shipping was allowed until the end of September two months after mobilization ordered.

The Ottomans are vulnerable and are divided on what to do. There is no automatic anything other than mobilization

The Germans almost gave up hope on them several times before they get the Turks in the war in November

It's just wrong to assume that Turkish fears of Russia are the only or even main consideration
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Mobilization would continue but closing the straits is not part of the prepared mobilization. That is an active war measure

Shipping was allowed until the end of September two months after mobilization ordered.

The Ottomans are vulnerable and are divided on what to do. There is no automatic anything other than mobilization

The Germans almost gave up hope on them several times before they get the Turks in the war in November

It's just wrong to assume that Turkish fears of Russia are the only or even main consideration

I looked up the actual mobilization plans for the war. The Ottomans close the straights in the plans. Do you have a cite where the Ottoman war plans say different?
 
I looked up the actual mobilization plans for the war. The Ottomans close the straights in the plans. Do you have a cite where the Ottoman war plans say different?

Well, I can't prove the negative and you don't cite a source for me to verify. I'm sure the Ottomans have a lot of mobilization plans as they faced many threats , but did they really have a mobilization plan that called for closing the straits on M60 and 30 days before they begin active military operations? Because that's what they did OTL

The Turks are playing everyone off against each other to get the best terms. The scheme was working and the DOW stupid
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Well, I can't prove the negative and you don't cite a source for me to verify. I'm sure the Ottomans have a lot of mobilization plans as they faced many threats , but did they really have a mobilization plan that called for closing the straits on M60 and 30 days before they begin active military operations? Because that's what they did OTL

The Turks are playing everyone off against each other to get the best terms. The scheme was working and the DOW stupid

Don't have sources handy, but based on my research supporting Wiking ATL, yes they did have plans for closing the straights on a certain day. As an interesting side note, the mobilization was not finished when the Germans brought the Ottomans into the war, and this caused issues in Eastern Turkey since one of the need corp had not yet arrived. The whole mobilization plan took over 90 days to implement, then the Ottomans would decide if to go to war. Off all the Great Powers, the Ottomans had the only defensive mobilization plan where mobilization did not automatically mean war. A lot of this is from Ottoman infrastructure being so bad, for example, if you wanted an extra army in Eastern Turkey, they might well have to march most of the way there. And part of it is geography. A lot of Ottomans borders is high mountains, desert or other low value land.

You can look at the partial ATL I wrote. I might have put the source there or enough information for the source to be found.
 
Top