Arab Nationalism and the Ottomans: Arabs and Young Turks: Ottomanism, Arabism, and Islamism in the Ottoman Empire, 1908-1918 . Hasan Kayali.

1998 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 107-108
Author(s):  
Engin Deniz Akarli
Author(s):  
Taner Akçam

Introducing new evidence from more than 600 secret Ottoman documents, this book demonstrates in detail that the Armenian Genocide and the expulsion of Greeks from the late Ottoman Empire resulted from an official effort to rid the empire of its Christian subjects. This book goes deep inside the bureaucratic machinery of Ottoman Turkey to show how a dying empire embraced genocide and ethnic cleansing. Although the deportation and killing of Armenians was internationally condemned in 1915 as a “crime against humanity and civilization,” the Ottoman government initiated a policy of denial that is still maintained by the Turkish Republic. The case for Turkey's “official history” rests on documents from the Ottoman imperial archives, to which access has been heavily restricted until recently. It is this very source that the book now uses to overturn the official narrative. The documents presented here attest to a late-Ottoman policy of Turkification, the goal of which was no less than the radical demographic transformation of Anatolia. To that end, about one-third of Anatolia's 15 million people were displaced, deported, expelled, or massacred, destroying the ethno-religious diversity of an ancient cultural crossroads of East and West, and paving the way for the Turkish Republic. By uncovering the central roles played by demographic engineering and assimilation in the Armenian Genocide, this book will fundamentally change how this crime is understood and show that physical destruction is not the only aspect of the genocidal process.


2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 117
Author(s):  
Majlinda Peza

The development of education in the Albanian territories under Ottoman Empire witnessed a rapid evolution after the announcement of Hyrjetit (the Turkish Constitution of 1908). Thus, in the years 1909-1910 patriotic movement in the Albanian territories will mark a new phase of her, revealed at the opening of schools and courses in Albanian language in the new conditions of constitutional freedoms. In this period, through the organization of the Congress of Monastir displayed in 1908, was unveiled final resolution of the case and the use of a common alphabet writing Albanian language. But despite such a situation, Albanians will not enjoyed for a long period of so-called constitutional freedom. The Young Turks (Young Turks) newly consolidated their political positions in the Ottoman Empire, tried with any form to prevent the spread of great little bit he received learning Albanian. In the years 1909 - 1910, the Albanian National Movement difficulties faced even greater. Through this work we aim to highlight not only the achievements of the patriotic movement in the region of Elbasan Albanian education center, but most are focused on coverage of issues; obstacles and difficulties faced by the patriotic movement in this region in the years 1909-1910. The Young Turks use of all forms and, using all opportunities to curb educational movement in the region of Elbasan, using new tactics more sophisticated you put sticks under the Elbasan Patriots wheels. But it must be said that at the same time, taking advantage of the weaknesses of the Albanian patriotic movement, contradictions and differences that existed between the Albanian political elite of the time. Meanwhile, in moments when new tactics did not give the expected result, they turned to old methods of violence and terror.


Belleten ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 66 (247) ◽  
pp. 931-942
Author(s):  
Yücel Güçlü

At 6 a.m. on 1 October 1918, Feisal's forces entered Damascus. All day and night they flowed into the Omayade capital and started looting and killing, particularly Turkish soldiers who were wounded and sick. British units remained outside the city. The new Arab administration proved unable to keep order. One particularly gruesome incident was the looting of the main Turkish hospital. It contained between 600 to 800 wounded. Many of them died. The Turks had no cover for the sick. Few of the men had blankets; they had no medical organisation. There were no drugs, bandages, or food fit for sick men; no sanitation. Very little assistance could be obtained from the local Arab authorities in Damascus. They were indifferent to human suffering. However, the wounded Turks left in Damascus suffered not just because of Arab logistical problems, but also because the political need to exclude the British units from Damascus left the sick and wounded Turks bereft of care. The British re-occupied the Turkish military hospitals after four days' Arab control as the Turkish wounded were receiving no care. They then set about cutting the death rate from 70 to 15 a day. The patterns of military administration in Damascus were supposed to follow international practice as prescribed in the Fourth Convention Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land signed at the Hague in the Netherlands on 18 October 1907 and entered into force on 26 January 1910, to which both Britain and the Ottoman Empire were parties. The British clearly disregarded the general rules on the occupied enemy territories as defined by this convention. It was essential to obey the main rules of military occupation. Therefore the neglect of the Turkish hospitals in Damascus by British forces, was, to say the least, unlawful. The poor conditions for the wounded Turks were a direct result of the British army being instructed to promote an Arab administration in Damascus. The French looked upon this British connivance with indignation. Paris accused London of hiding behind the façade of Arab nationalism to undermine French influence in Syria. During the war Britain had already in the Sykes-Picot Agreement recognised French interest in Syria. In terms of international politics it must have been that the Turkish sick and wounded were marginal to the central objective of giving the impression that Feisal's Arabs were in charge. Turks suffered as a result of British realpolitik.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document