The US Ambassador, the Eastern Question, and the Ottoman Empire

The US Ambassador to Turkey and Special Representative for Syria, Tom Barrack, stands out not only for these two roles but also for his arrogant personality, his closeness to US President Trump, the ease that comes with being a wealthy businessperson, and a style he pays no attention to because he is not a career diplomat. He speaks with extreme ease. He does not think about how his words will be understood or where they will lead. He does not care about the institutions, rules, or sensitivities of the country where he serves. And clearly, alongside his country's imperialist character, he knows the historical importance of the Eastern Question due to his closeness to Israel and his family's origins. 

As is known, the Eastern Question, or in other words, the Question of the East, is a term used in the 19th century regarding the fate of the Ottoman Empire and the partitioning of its territories. However, there are also scientists who trace the Eastern Question back to the arrival of the Turks in Anatolia, specifically to 1071, which stands out as a common and symbolic date, although different and earlier dates are also mentioned in this context. The US ambassador is likely being given presentations and prepared with information notes on these subjects by the senior diplomats of the embassy. 

We know that in the 18th century, the great powers interested in the Ottoman Empire, besides England and Russia, were France and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. After 1871, Germany and Italy were added to these states. The Ottoman Empire, whose loss of power was clearly visible in the 18th century, adopted the diplomacy methods, understanding, and institutions of Europe—which it began to use with a delay in the second half of the 19th century—due to the pressure of not only internal dynamics but also external ones. 

The Ottoman Empire, which aimed to establish a European-style order, a constitutional monarchy, and a foundation for law with steps such as the 1839 Edict of Gülhane, the 1856 Reform Edict, and the 1876 First Constitutional Era, pursued two main goals while taking these steps: First, to put an end to the bad course of events within the country, to create an Ottoman nation, to prevent disintegration, and to regain strength. Second, to be accepted as an equal member of the European state system outside the country. 

Despite the steps it took, the Ottoman Empire did not find what it hoped for. On the contrary, nationalist movements among minorities and demands for independence grew even stronger. The idea of Ottomanism, the thought of integrating all elements as an Ottoman Nation regardless of their religious, ethnic, or sectarian origins, failed. Some well-intentioned steps taken in this direction also did not achieve their purpose. It must be stated that the Ottoman administrators of the period were truly sincere and well-intentioned in their efforts. Among them were those who considered taking extremely radical steps. So much so that Midhat Pasha even considered adding a cross next to the crescent and star on the Ottoman flag to increase the loyalty of the Christian subjects to the state.

However, objective conditions were against the empire. The Greek Revolt, which began in 1821 and resulted in independence shortly after in 1829, encouraged and gave hope to other minorities. It made the great powers of Europe even more arrogant in their interference in the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire. However, the competition between the great powers themselves, especially their inability to agree on the future of Istanbul, the Straits, and the Black Sea, and the partitioning of the Ottoman Balkans and the Ottoman Middle East, allowed the Ottoman Empire to extend its life for a while longer by taking advantage of these contradictions. 

THE CRIMEAN WAR AND THE EXTERNAL DEBT SPIRAL

The year 1854, when the Ottoman Empire received its first external loan due to the Crimean War (1853 – 1856), is an important year for the Ottoman Empire not only in terms of its politics, diplomacy, and army but also its finances. The last installment of the debt would be paid 100 years later, in 1954. At the Paris Congress held in 1856 after the Crimean War, European states guaranteed the independence and sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire, promised not to interfere in its internal affairs, and recorded that they accepted the Ottoman Empire as a European state within the European concert. With the Treaty of Paris signed after the congress in 1856, the Ottoman Empire was, in a sense, connected to a life support unit and placed in an oxygen tent. Although the European powers of the period gave these promises, they also underlined that they would be the supervisors of the Ottoman Empire's practices, especially regarding its Christian subjects. Ultimately, since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire or its falling under the full 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. 

Throughout this process, European powers, who first wanted to increase their influence over the Ottoman Empire and then partition it, encouraged rebellions on one hand and supported the terrorist acts of separatist organizations on the other. They wanted to keep the semi-colonial Ottoman Empire as a kind of buffer zone. During that period, each of the great powers became a patron, protector, or defender of a Christian subject within the Ottoman Empire. They also took a close interest in Muslim elements such as Arabs and Kurds. The Russians, British, and French supported the Kurds, and the British and French established influence over the Ottoman Empire's Arab subjects. 

This support, protection, and interest accelerated the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire. After the 1877 – 1878 Russo-Turkish War (the 93 War), England saw that it was no longer possible to maintain the integrity of the Ottoman Empire. Extending the life of the Ottoman Empire was seen by London as too costly and, in terms of results, an irrational, unrealistic, and futile effort. Since Russia thought the same way as England on this issue, the two great powers agreed on the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire and for the most valuable parts to remain with them. In the words of Russian Tsar Nicholas I, there was no longer any point in trying to keep the "Sick Man" alive. Instead of waiting for his death or trying to delay it, Russia and England decided to do what was necessary. 

England and Russia had very powerful tools at their disposal to incite minorities. With the 1878 Treaty of Berlin, European powers once again extracted major concessions from the Ottoman Empire. The Sublime Porte agreed to carry out reforms in regions where Armenian subjects were concentrated, to inform European states of these reform activities, and in a sense, to open them to their supervision and obtain their approval. Based on this treaty, England, France, and Russia issued a note to the Ottoman Empire in 1880, reminding it of its obligations to carry out reforms in regions where Armenian subjects were concentrated. The Ottoman Empire stated that it was in the process of carrying out reforms. 

THE DECREE OF MUHARREM, ECONOMIC CAPTIVITY, AND THE WORLD WAR

In 1881, with the Decree of Muharrem, the economic activities of the Ottoman Empire came under the control of Europeans for the purpose of paying off debts. With the Public Debt Administration (Düyun-u Umumiye), which was established in 1881 for the collection of debts and the supervision of economic activities according to the decree, the institutional control of the great powers over the economic life of the Ottoman Empire began.    

As a result, following the Eastern Question, which stood out as the most important problem in the 19th century, one of the most important causes of the first world war in the 20th century was, in the final analysis, the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire. The period was one in which rebellions and terrorist acts on Ottoman lands intensified with external support. Austria and Russia had designs on the Balkans; England and Russia, in particular, had designs on the Straits. While England wanted to keep the Near Eastern routes to India secure, France was making calculations over Syria. The Great War also began with a terrorist act. When the Austrian Crown Prince was assassinated in 1914, Austria declared war on Serbia. Russia, which supported Serbia, did not remain silent and declared general mobilization. Upon this decision by Russia, Germany declared war on both Russia and France. Moreover, it did not respect the neutrality of Belgium and invaded the country. Upon this, England declared war on Germany. Germany's greatest fear, having to fight on more than one front at the same time, came true all at once; in short, its worst nightmare happened. 

We know what happened next; after World War I, the Ottoman Empire was liquidated, and the Republic of Turkey was founded under the leadership of Gazi Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, with the sword, heroism, and valor of the National Forces (Kuvayı Milliyeciler). Those who fought against European imperialism established a Republic based on national sovereignty, full independence, enlightenment, modernization, secularism, gender equality, law, participation, and democracy. This Republic also became an example and inspiration to the third world, oppressed nations, colonial peoples, and the downtrodden. This is the fundamental reason for the US's hostility toward Atatürk and the closeness it shows to those who oppose Atatürk.