The Republic, political independence, and economic independence

The President's visit to the US proved quite profitable for the US. Turkey will import aircraft and LNG (liquefied natural gas) from this country. It is unclear what economic, financial, or political concessions Turkey has extracted from the US in return for these steps, as well as for lifting certain additional customs duties it had applied to the US. In this scenario, the US will take the lion's share of the bilateral trade, which is aimed to reach 100 billion dollars. These are the financial aspects of the matter. Of course, there are also political and diplomatic dimensions. 

However, let us not forget that since economic dependency inevitably gives rise to political dependency, political independence is impossible without overcoming economic dependency and technological dependency. History is full of examples regarding this. 

An example? Let us not look too far. Let us look at our own history... We know that 1854, the year the Ottoman Empire received its first foreign loan due to the Crimean War (1853 – 1856), is an important year not only for the Ottoman politics, diplomacy, and military, but also for its finances. The final installment of the debt was paid exactly 100 years later, in 1954. 

Following the Crimean War, at the Paris Congress convened in 1856, European states guaranteed the independence and sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire, promised not to interfere in its internal affairs, and recorded that they accepted it as a European state within the European concert. With the Treaty of Paris signed after the Congress, the Ottomans were, in a sense, connected to a life support unit and placed in an oxygen tent. Although the European powers of the time gave these promises, they also underscored that they would be the supervisors of the practices regarding the Ottoman Empire's Christian subjects in particular. Ultimately, because the collapse of the Ottoman Empire or its falling under the complete control of a rival power did not serve the interests of any European power, the Ottoman Empire was able to see the early years of the 20th century. 

We acknowledge that the objective conditions were against the Ottoman Empire. The Greek Revolt, which began in 1821 and resulted in the independence of Greece shortly after in 1829, encouraged and gave hope to other minorities as well. It also made the great powers of Europe even more arrogant in their direction of interfering in the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire. However, the competition among the great powers themselves, especially their inability to reach an agreement on the future of Istanbul, the Straits, and the Black Sea, and the sharing of the Middle East, allowed the Ottoman Empire to take advantage of these contradictions and extend its life for a while longer.  

THE COMPETITION OF GREAT POWERS OVER THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE 

Throughout this entire process, the great European powers, who wanted to increase their influence over the Ottoman Empire and then partition the state, both encouraged and incited the rebellions within the Ottoman Empire and supported the terrorist acts of separatist organizations. Even during the period when they preferred to keep the Ottoman Empire, which had become almost a semi-colony due to its economic and financial situation, as a kind of buffer zone because they could not agree among themselves, each of the great European powers became a protector of a Christian subject group within the Ottoman Empire. Furthermore, they were also closely interested in Muslim elements, especially the Arabs and the Kurds. 

This interest, support, and protection directed toward the Armenians, Greeks, Arabs, and Kurds in the Ottoman Empire also accelerated the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire. After the Ottoman-Russian War of 1877–1878 (the 93 War), Britain saw that it was no longer possible to maintain the integrity of the Ottoman Empire. Extending the life of the Ottoman Empire was too costly for London. Moreover, it was a futile effort that was neither rational nor realistic in terms of its results. Since Tsarist Russia thought like Britain on this matter, the two great powers agreed on the partition of the Ottoman Empire and for the valuable parts to remain with them. In the words of Russian Tsar Nicholas I, there was no longer any benefit in trying to keep the "Sick Man" alive. Instead of waiting for his death or trying to delay it, Russia and Britain decided to do what was necessary. The patient in the oxygen tent, connected to a life support unit and kept alive with artificial respiration, would now have the plug pulled. 

Britain and Russia had very powerful tools at their disposal to provoke the minorities in the Ottoman Empire. With the 1878 Treaty of Berlin, European powers once again extracted major concessions from the Ottomans. The Sublime Porte agreed to carry out reforms in regions where the Armenian population was dense and to inform the European states of these reform activities. Based on this treaty, Britain, France, and Russia issued a note to the Ottoman Empire in 1880, reminding the Ottomans of their obligations to carry out reforms in regions where the Armenian population was dense. In its response, the Ottoman Empire stated that it was in the process of carrying out reforms. 

With the Decree of Muharrem in 1881, the economic activities of the Ottoman Empire came under the control of Europeans for the purpose of debt repayment. According to the decree, with the Public Debt Administration (Düyun-u Umumiye) established in 1881 for the collection of debts and the supervision of economic activities, the complete and institutional control of the great powers over the economic life of the Ottomans began.    

We know what happened next. The Ottoman Empire lost its economic independence, and consequently its political independence, lost World War I, and was subsequently liquidated. 

The War of Independence waged under the leadership of Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk and the Republic established as a result of this epic war are the products of such a historical process. One must know its meaning, importance, and value very well. 

Let us reiterate: belittling, ignoring, or rejecting Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the Turkish Revolution, and the Republic does not make anyone a better Muslim, a greater revolutionary, or a stricter nationalist. It makes one a satellite, an extension, and a collaborator of imperialism.