DOCSLIB.ORG

Report to the League STRAITS COMMISSION

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Report to the League STRAITS COMMISSION [Distributed to the Members of C. 265. 1926. VII. the Council.] Geneva, May 13th, 1926. LEAGUE OF NATIONS Report to the League by the STRAITS COMMISSION for the Year 1925. MEMBERS OF THE STRAITS COMMISSION. President: The T u r k is h D e l e g a t e . General M a r c o f f , Bulgarian Delegate. H.E. M. Henri Ga m b o n , Minister Plenipotentiary, French Delegate. Commander Ma c d o n a l d , British Delegate. Commander M eletopoulos , Greek Delegate. H.E. Prince Livio B o r g h e s e , Minister Plenipotentiary, Italian Delegate. Commander O k a , Japanese Delegate. H.E. M. F il a l it y , Minister Plenipotentiary, Roumanian Delegate. H.E. Admiral V a s sif Pasha, Turkish Delegate. CONTENTS. Page. I ntroduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 PART I. A c c o u n t o f t h e W o r k d o n e b y t h e S t r a it s C o m m i s s i o n .......................................................... 5 PART II. I n fo r m a t io n w h ic h m a y b e u s e f u l to C o m m e r c e a n d N a v ig a t io n Chapter I. Conditions for the Passage of Merchant Vessels : (a) Sanitary In sp e c tio n ........................................................................................................ 10 (b) Lighthouses.......................................................................................................................... 11 (c) Life-saving Service............................................................................................................. 16 (d) Customs Form alities......................................................................................................... 18 (e) P o l i c e ................................................................................................................................... 18 (f) P i lo t a g e .............................................................................................................................. 19 (g) V arious.................................................................................................................................. 19 Chapter II. S ta tis tic s ...................................................................................................................... 22 C o n c l u s i o n ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 Annexes : 1. Rules of Procedure of the C om m ission...................................................................... 23 2. Map of the S t r a i t s ............................................................................................................. 26 S. d. N. 250 5/26. — Imp. Réunies, Chambéry. — 3 — [Translation.] INTRODUCTION. The Straits Convention, which was incorporated in the Treaty of Lausanne, has put an end to the series of arbitrary systems, born of international suspicion, which, one after another, have been applied to the passage of war vessels from the Black Sea to the Mediter­ ranean and vice versa. For the first time in history, the problem of the Straits has received a broad solution based on the principle of equilibrium. In laying down simple rules to ensure such equilibrium, and in setting up an International Commission to see that it is maintained, the Treaty of Lausanne has transformed a permanent source of uneasiness and disagreement into an element of stability. A rapid survey of the phases through which the problem has passed will suffice to demon­ strate this fact. The passage of the Straits only became an international question at the end of the eighteenth century, for up to that time the Black Sea was a territorial sea, the Turks being in possession of its whole coast-line. When, in the reign of Catherine the Great, Russia also obtained a foothold on its shores, she naturally endeavoured to force her way through to the outside world and, in the words of the Empress herself, gain possession of the key to her house. Under the Treaty of Ka'inarji, which was signed on July 10th, 1774, the Russian Empire won the right for its merchant vessels to pass freely through the Straits ; the treaty contained no provision concerning war vessels. The occasions, therefore, on which, during the troubled period which ensued, foreign naval forces were present in the Straits are to be regarded merely as ephemeral episodes in the European wars, in no way affecting international law. This was the case when the Russian fleet, during Bonaparte’s campaign in Egypt, proceeded to occupy the Ionian Islands and then returned to the Black Sea ; or when the Straits were forced in 1807 by the British fleet under Admiral Duckworth, who did nothing more than make a useless demonstration before Constantinople. But this was also the period during which the European States first began to develop the various tendencies of policy, with regard to the passage of war vessels through the Straits, which each in turn prevailed for a time. On the one hand, Russia was striving to obtain access to the open sea for her vessels ; on the other, the Western maritime nations — particularly England — were becoming nervous at the increase of power which the freedom of passage through the Straits conferred on the Empire of the Czars. From the beginning of the nineteenth century, therefore, up to the Great War, the system governing the Straits was in turn advantageous to Russia or to the Western Powers, in proportion to the influence wielded by each at Constantinople, or, in other terms, according to whether the Sultan happened to desire the support of his Eastern neighbour or that of the Mediterranean States. As far back as 1809, England, by the Treaty of the Dardanelles, had persuaded the Sultan to prohibit war vessels from entering the Straits. This provision, which may be regarded as the first contractual act in the establishment of a regime for the Straits, was a direct blow aimed at Russia, who was at that time the ally of the French Empire. As soon as a favour­ able opportunity occurred, Russia was certain to make an effort to counteract its effects. Although at the Treaty of Adrianople (1829) she was satisfied with obtaining recognition of the right of its merchant vessels to pass through the Straits, three years later, through the influence acquired under that treaty, she secured from the Sultan at Hunkiar-Iskelessi (July 8th, 1833) particularly favourable terms, including not only freedom of passage but special facilities. The serious situation which arose in the East as a result of Mehmet Ali’s expedition prevented Russia from turning the existing position further to her advantage. As one of the concert of Great Powers, she was bound, with them, to sign the Straits Convention in 1841 and consequently to respect the closing of the Bosphorus not only to Turkey but to all of the signatory Powers. Thereafter, Turkey was made the guardian of the Straits. To her, in a manner, were entrusted the keys of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles. During the Crimean War, the Straits naturally remained open to her Allies. Turkey’s position was still further improved by the Treaty of Paris in 1856, under which the Black Sea was neutralised and the whole Russian Fleet eliminated. Finally, under the Straits Convention of 1871, the excessively severe measures imposed on Russia were abolished, and the principle of closing the Straits was confirmed, though it was added that Turkey might open the Straits in peace-time to the war vessels of nations in arms or to allies if she thought such a step necessary to safe­ guard the provisions of the Treaty of Paris. In 1878, the Treaty of Berlin confirmed these arrangements. In the ensuing period, however, prior to the Great War, a broader and more liberal conception of international law was evolving, particularly with regard to maritime law. The general tendency was to minimise restrictions and limit the remaining political obstacles which prevented the freedom of the seas by arbitrarily dividing them into separate sectors. In — 4 — spite of the care taken by Turkey to ensure respect for the principle of the closing of the Straits, that principle was not, in cases of serious crisis, secure from disguised or open violation. In 1904, for instance, during the Russo-Japanese War, two vessels of the Russian Volunteer Fleet — the Petersburg and the Smolensk — passed through the Straits on their way to the Far East under cover of merchant flags, which, as soon as the Straits were passed, they exchanged for naval ensigns. Finally, in August 1914, the German cruisers Goeben and Breslau entered the Dardanelles without any compunction, whereas the Allied naval forces which were despatched to pursue them drew up, out of respect for the treaties, at the entrance to the Straits. A waterway which connects the oceans with a sea bordered by no less than five States is so likely to become a scene of conflict that no single Power could undertake to become its guardian without considerable risk of serious misunderstanding, and even of becoming involved, against its will, in conflicts between third parties. The intention of the Treaty of Lausanne in proclaiming Turkish sovereignty over the Straits was to protect that sovereignty against impulsive action on the part of belligerents misusing their strength to obtain strategical advantage. Any such nation will, in future, be answerable for its acts to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • World War I Assessment
    N a m e ________________________________ D a t e _________________ P e r i o d _________ World War I Assessment Match each definition in the left column with the correct term from the right column. Write the letter of the term in the space provided. ____1. a war where one’s enemy is worn down to the point of collapse by A. League of Nations continuous losses in people, food and war weapons B. Fourteen Points ____2. agreement to stop fighting C. nationalism ____3. deadlock in which neither side is able to defeat the other D. total war ____4. Payments for war damage E. war of attrition ____5. all people and resources to the war effort and imposing censorship of the press. F. imperialism ____6. agreements or promises to defend and help another country G. alliance ____7. having pride in your country, willing to defend it H. stalemate ____8. trying to build up an empire, by taking control of weaker nations I. reparations ____9. peace plan by President Wilson that called for the League of Nations J. armistice K. militarism L. anti-Semitism ____10. World War I was more destructive than earlier wars because a. the armies were more ruthless. c. modern weapons were more deadly. b. it lasted longer. d. airplanes could drop huge bombs. ____11. Which of the following helped the Allies to achieve the breakthrough they sought in World War I? a. the Russian Revolution c. the waging of total war b. the involvement of the United States d. the battle of Somme ____12. Why was it difficult to gain an advantage over the enemy in trench warfare? a.
    [Show full text]
  • Treaty of Paris Imperial Age
    Treaty Of Paris Imperial Age Determinable and prepunctual Shayne oxidises: which Aldis is boughten enough? Self-opened Rick faradised nobly. Free-hearted Conroy still centrifuging: lento and wimpish Merle enrols quite compositely but Indianises her planarians uncooperatively. A bastard and the horse is insulate the 19th century BC Louvre Paris. Treaty of Paris Definition Date & Terms HISTORY. Treaty of Paris 173 US Department cannot State Archive. Treaty of Paris created at the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars79 Like. The adjacent of Wuhale from 19 between Italy and Ethiopia contained the. AP US History Exam Period 3 Notes 1754-100 Kaplan. The imperial government which imperialism? The treaty of imperialism in keeping with our citizens were particularly those whom they would seem to? Frayer model of imperialism in constantinople, seen as well, to each group in many layers, sent former spanish. For Churchill nothing could match his handwriting as wartime prime minister he later wrote. Commissioner had been in paris saw as imperialism is a treaty of age for. More construction more boys were becoming involved the senior age of Hmong recruits that. The collapse as an alliance with formerly unknown to have. And row in 16 at what age of 17 Berryman moved from Kentucky to Washington DC. Contracting parties or distinction between paris needed peace. Hmong Timeline Minnesota Historical Society. To the Ohio Country moving journey from the French and British imperial rivalries south. Suffragists in an Imperial Age US Expansion and or Woman. Spain of paris: muslim identity was meant to both faced increasing abuse his right or having.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Turks and Europe by Gaston Gaillard London: Thomas Murby & Co
    THE TURKS AND EUROPE BY GASTON GAILLARD LONDON: THOMAS MURBY & CO. 1 FLEET LANE, E.C. 1921 1 vi CONTENTS PAGES VI. THE TREATY WITH TURKEY: Mustafa Kemal’s Protest—Protests of Ahmed Riza and Galib Kemaly— Protest of the Indian Caliphate Delegation—Survey of the Treaty—The Turkish Press and the Treaty—Jafar Tayar at Adrianople—Operations of the Government Forces against the Nationalists—French Armistice in Cilicia—Mustafa Kemal’s Operations—Greek Operations in Asia Minor— The Ottoman Delegation’s Observations at the Peace Conference—The Allies’ Answer—Greek Operations in Thrace—The Ottoman Government decides to sign the Treaty—Italo-Greek Incident, and Protests of Armenia, Yugo-Slavia, and King Hussein—Signature of the Treaty – 169—271 VII. THE DISMEMBERMENT OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE: 1. The Turco-Armenian Question - 274—304 2. The Pan-Turanian and Pan-Arabian Movements: Origin of Pan-Turanism—The Turks and the Arabs—The Hejaz—The Emir Feisal—The Question of Syria—French Operations in Syria— Restoration of Greater Lebanon—The Arabian World and the Caliphate—The Part played by Islam - 304—356 VIII. THE MOSLEMS OF THE FORMER RUSSIAN EMPIRE AND TURKEY: The Republic of Northern Caucasus—Georgia and Azerbaïjan—The Bolshevists in the Republics of Caucasus and of the Transcaspian Isthmus—Armenians and Moslems - 357—369 IX. TURKEY AND THE SLAVS: Slavs versus Turks—Constantinople and Russia - 370—408 2 THE TURKS AND EUROPE I THE TURKS The peoples who speak the various Turkish dialects and who bear the generic name of Turcomans, or Turco-Tatars, are distributed over huge territories occupying nearly half of Asia and an important part of Eastern Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • 12 Blagojevic Milos.Vp
    Zbornik radova Vizantolo{kog instituta HHHÇH, 2001/2002. Recueil des travaux de l’Institut d’etudes byzantines, HHHÇH, 2001/2002 UDC: 929.513.33(=861)Œ14Œ : 881.01–94.077 MILO[ BLAGOJEVI] SRODSTVENA TERMINOLOGIJA I HIJERARHIJA VLADARA U SPISIMA KONSTANTINA FILOZOFA I WEGOVIH SAVREMENIKA Po~etkomHçvekaVizantijajeprestaladabudevazalosmanskihTuraka, {to je osve`ilo postoje}e shvatawe da je vizantijski car œduhovni otacŒ svih vladara. Takvo shvatawe bilo je prihvatqivo u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji, pa je u ne{to izmewenom vidu prisutno i u œ@itiju Stefana Lazarevi}aŒ od Konstan- tina Filozofa Kostene~kog. U Vizantiji je izgra|eno i u~vr{}eno shvatawe prema kojem je vizantij- ski car izabranik Bo`iji, jedini zakoniti car, jer je legitimni naslednik rimskog i prvog hri{}anskog cara Konstantina Velikog.1 Upravo zbog toga sa wim se nije mogao izjedna~avati nijedan vladar na svetu. Takvo shvatawe obi~no nije odgovaralo realnom odnosu snaga izme|u tada{wih dr`ava, pa je prona|eno zgodno re{ewe koje se svodilo na postojawe fiktivne hijerarhije izme|u vladara i dr`ava. Na vrhu zami{qene hijerarhijske lestvice nalazio se jedino vizantijski vasilevs, a na najni`em stepeniku vladari u vazalnom polo`aju, kojima on ima pravo da {aqe œnare|ewaŒ u pismenoj formi. Tokom desetog veka iznad wih su se nalazili œprijateqiŒ carevi, a jo{ vi{e œduhovni srodniciŒ carevi. Me|u wima su œvladari Bugarske, Velike Jermeni- je i Alanije nazvani œsinovimaŒ carevim. Najzad, na jo{ vi{oj lestvici staja- li su nema~ki i francuski kraqevi koji su bili ozna~eni kao careva œbra}aŒ.2 Iz ove tradicije potekla je ustanova porodice kraqeva koja se odr`ala sve do najnovijeg doba.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15Th-18Th Centuries)
    Hilâl. Studi turchi e ottomani 5 — The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15th-18th Centuries) Maria Pia Pedani Edizioni Ca’Foscari The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15th-18th Centuries) Hilâl Studi turchi e ottomani Collana diretta da Maria Pia Pedani Elisabetta Ragagnin 5 Edizioni Ca’Foscari Hilâl Studi turchi e ottomani Direttori | General editors Maria Pia Pedani (Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, Italia) Elisabetta Ragagnin (Freie Universität, Berlin) Comitato scientifico | Advisory board Bülent Arı (TBMM Milli Saraylar, Müzecilik ve Tanıtım BaŞkanı, İstanbul, Türkiye) Önder Bayır (TC BaŞbakanlık Devlet ArŞivi Daire Başkanlığı, Osmanlı Arşivi Daire Başkanlığı, İstanbul, Türkiye) Dejanirah Couto (École Pratique des Hautes Études «EPHE», Paris, France) Mehmet Yavuz Erler (Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, Samsun, Türkiye) Fabio Grassi ( «La Sapienza» Università di Roma, Italia) Figen Güner Dilek (Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye) Stefan Hanß (University of Cambridge, UK) Baiarma Khabtagaeva (Szegedi Tudományegyetem, Magyarország) Nicola Melis (Università degli Studi di Cagliari, Italia) Melek Özyetgin (Yildiz Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Türkiye) Cristina Tonghini (Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, Italia) Direzione e redazione Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia Dipartimento di Studi sull’Asia sull’Africa mediterranea Sezione Asia Orientale e Antropologia Palazzo Vendramin dei Carmini Dorsoduro 3462 30123 Venezia http://edizionicafoscari.unive.it/it/edizioni/collane/hilal/ The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15th-18th Centuries) Maria Pia Pedani translated by Mariateresa Sala Venezia Edizioni Ca’ Foscari - Digital Publishing 2017 The Ottoman-Venetian Border (15th-18th Centuries) Maria Pia Pedani © 2017 Maria Pia Pedani for the text © 2017 Mariateresa Sala for the translation © 2017 Edizioni Ca’ Foscari - Digital Publishing for the present edition Qualunque parte di questa pubblicazione può essere riprodotta, memorizzata in un sistema di recupero dati o trasmessa in qualsiasi forma o con qualsiasi mezzo, elettronico o meccanico, senza autorizzazione, a condizione che se ne citi la fonte.
    [Show full text]
  • An Ottoman Global Moment
    AN OTTOMAN GLOBAL MOMENT: WAR OF SECOND COALITION IN THE LEVANT A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy In History By Kahraman Sakul, M.A Washington, DC November, 18, 2009 Copyright 2009 by Kahraman Sakul All Rights Reserved ii AN OTTOMAN GLOBAL MOMENT: WAR OF SECOND COALITION IN THE LEVANT Kahraman Sakul, M.A. Dissertation Advisor: Gabor Agoston, Ph.D. ABSTRACT This dissertation aims to place the Ottoman Empire within its proper context in the Napoleonic Age and calls for a recognition of the crucial role of the Sublime Porte in the War of Second Coalition (1798-1802). The Ottoman-Russian joint naval expedition (1798-1800) to the Ionian Islands under the French occupation provides the framework for an examination of the Ottoman willingness to join the European system of alliance in the Napoleonic age which brought the victory against France in the Levant in the War of Second Coalition (1798-1802). Collections of the Ottoman Archives and Topkapı Palace Archives in Istanbul as well as various chronicles and treatises in Turkish supply most of the primary sources for this dissertation. Appendices, charts and maps are provided to make the findings on the expedition, finance and logistics more readable. The body of the dissertation is divided into nine chapters discussing in order the global setting and domestic situation prior to the forming of the second coalition, the Adriatic expedition, its financial and logistical aspects with the ensuing socio-economic problems in the Morea, the Sublime Porte’s relations with its protectorate – The Republic of Seven United Islands, and finally the post-war diplomacy.
    [Show full text]
  • THE MODERNIZATION of the OTTOMAN NAVY DURING the REIGN of SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ (1861-1876) By
    THE MODERNIZATION OF THE OTTOMAN NAVY DURING THE REIGN OF SULTAN ABDÜLAZİZ (1861-1876) by DİLARA DAL A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies Department of Classics, Ancient History and Archaeology College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham April, 2015 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT The main focus of this study is to examine the modernization of the Ottoman navy during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz, exploring naval administration, education, and technology. Giving a summary of the transformation of shipbuilding technologies and bureaucratic institutions of the Ottoman naval forces between 1808 and 1861, it analyses the structure of the Ottoman navy, its level of development in comparison to previous periods of time, and the condition of the vessels making up the naval fleet from 1861 to 1876. It also intends to evaluate the character of existing administrative structures at the outset of Abdülaziz’s reign in 1861 and the nature of subsequent changes, including structural reorganization of the Imperial Naval Arsenal, the Ministry of Marine, and the Naval Academy, as well as advancements in military training and seafaring; all within the context of the impact of these changes on the military, political, and economic condition of the Empire during the reign of Sultan Abdülaziz.
    [Show full text]
  • The Black Sea and the Turkish Straits: Resurgent Strategic Importance in the 21St Century
    The Black Sea and the Turkish Straits: Resurgent Strategic Importance in the 21st Century THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Andrew M. Hascher Graduate Program in Slavic and East European Studies The Ohio State University 2019 Master’s Examination Committee Angela Brintlinger, PhD, Advisor Yana Hashamova, PhD Rudy Hightower, PhD Copyrighted by Andrew M. Hascher 2019 Abstract The Black Sea and the Turkish Straits have played an important geopolitical role in the world since the time of antiquity, despite the Black Sea being a geographically closed body of water. The objective of this paper is to articulate the importance of the Black Sea region as a source of geopolitical power, both historically and moving into the future. Of particular importance are the power dynamics between the Russian Federation, Turkey and the West. This paper reviews the history of the region and the major treaties over time which attempted to answer the “Straits Question” of access to and from the Black Sea via the Bosphorus and Dardanelles Straits. Then analysis of the current geopolitical situation and a projection for the future of the region is offered based on the research. Analysis of the history and diplomacy of the area shows that the major actors continue to place a great deal of strategic importance on their territorial claims, military position and economic standing in the Black Sea region. The evidence shows that the Russians place an enormous level of importance on the Black Sea as it holds their only viable warm water ports.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great European Treaties of the Nineteenth Century
    JBRART Of 9AN DIEGO OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY EDITED BY SIR AUGUSTUS OAKES, CB. LATELY OF THE FOREIGN OFFICE AND R. B. MOWAT, M.A. FELLOW AND ASSISTANT TUTOR OF CORPUS CHRISTI COLLEGE, OXFORD WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY SIR H. ERLE RICHARDS K. C.S.I., K.C., B.C.L., M.A. FELLOW OF ALL SOULS COLLEGE AWD CHICHELE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND DIPLOMACY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD ASSOCIATE OF THE INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS AMEN HOUSE, E.C. 4 LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW LEIPZIG NEW YORK TORONTO MELBOURNE CAPETOWN BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRAS SHANGHAI HUMPHREY MILFORD PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY Impression of 1930 First edition, 1918 Printed in Great Britain INTRODUCTION IT is now generally accepted that the substantial basis on which International Law rests is the usage and practice of nations. And this makes it of the first importance that the facts from which that usage and practice are to be deduced should be correctly appre- ciated, and in particular that the great treaties which have regulated the status and territorial rights of nations should be studied from the point of view of history and international law. It is the object of this book to present materials for that study in an accessible form. The scope of the book is limited, and wisely limited, to treaties between the nations of Europe, and to treaties between those nations from 1815 onwards. To include all treaties affecting all nations would require volumes nor is it for the many ; necessary, purpose of obtaining a sufficient insight into the history and usage of European States on such matters as those to which these treaties relate, to go further back than the settlement which resulted from the Napoleonic wars.
    [Show full text]
  • "L • G - Minor Professor
    RUSSIA AND THE BALKAN WARS APPROVED: MaMajoj r Professor J "l • G - Minor Professor ^yirejgl^or of the Departmet^r m. History 1 K^^^h-4 ~i Dean of the Graduate School RUSSIA AND THE BALKAN WARS THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS By William Conley Johnson, B. A. Denton, Texas January, 1969 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS iv .Chapter I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1 II. RUSSIA AND THE FORMATION OF THE BALKAN ALLIANCE. ... 21 III. RUSSIA AND THE EARLY MONTHS OF THE FIRST BALKAN WAR 47 IV. RUSSIA AND THE SCUTARI QUESTION 67 V. THE DENOUEMENT: THE SECOND BALKAN WAR AND CONCLUSIONS 87 BIBLIOGRAPHY 102 lit LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. The Balkan Peninsula in 1912 69 iv CHAPTER X INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND This thesis is a study and evaluation of Russian foreign policy in the Balkan Wars, 1912-13. Its primary purpose is to seek out and define the goals and aspirations of Russian diplomacy at this time and evaluate them in terms of success or failure. Recent books and articles in pro- fessional publications have shown a renewed interest in the causes of World War 1.^ An understanding of Russian diplomacy in the Balkan Wars serves as a useful contribution to a further re-evaluation of the com- plex series of causes and events which came to a climax in 1914. Russian Near Eastern foreign policy before World War I had one general goal, re- vision of the Straits question, and three secondary considerations, Pan- slavism, Balkan nationalism, and Russian competition with Austria-Hungary in the Balkans.
    [Show full text]
  • Building Sovereignty in the Late Ottoman World: Imperial Subjects, Consular Networks and Documentation of Individual Identities
    Building Sovereignty in the Late Ottoman World: Imperial Subjects, Consular Networks and Documentation of Individual Identities Merve Ispahani Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2018 © 2018 Merve Ispahani All rights reserved ABSTRACT Building Sovereignty in the Late Ottoman World: Imperial Subjects, Consular Networks and Documentation of Individual Identities Merve Ispahani This dissertation examines the formation of Ottoman sovereignty in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries at the disciplinary intersection of international law and history. As an attempt to break away from a strictly territorial understanding of sovereignty as a fixed legal construct, it explores shifting definitions of sovereignty within and across the boundaries of the Ottoman Empire as well as its semi-autonomous provinces. It argues that Ottoman sovereignty was constantly re-defined by inter-imperial rivalries, jurisdictional politics and the formation of modern subjecthood and citizenship in the emerging arena of international law during the period in question. Exploring what it meant to be an Ottoman and a foreigner in the Ottoman Empire during this period, I argue that subjecthood; nationality and citizenship often appear as instrumental categories incidentally utilized by ordinary individuals when deemed necessary. A careful examination of the Ottoman passport regime, on the other hand, proves that there already existed a prolonged process of experimentation on individual documentation and movement controls during the second half of the nineteenth history. Studying a collection of identity cards and passports, I argue that individual documentation was more important for some subjects than others, who needed to maintain and negotiate their identities under overlapping structures of multiple sovereignties.
    [Show full text]
  • Negotiations and Agreements for Population Transfers in the Balkans from the Beginning of the 19Th Century Until the Balkan Wars of 1912–1913 Mehmet Hacısalihoğlu*
    Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies Year I, Issue 1, Fall 2018, pp. 31-75. Negotiations and Agreements for Population Transfers in the Balkans from the Beginning of the 19th Century until the Balkan Wars of 1912–1913 Mehmet Hacısalihoğlu* Abstract: The history of population transfers on the basis of decisions by ruling authorities dates back to ancient times. In modern times, however, the establishment of nation-states played a decisive role in forcible population transfers in the Balkans. Balkan historiographies tend to date back bilaterally agreed population transfers and population exchanges to the Balkan Wars in 1912/13. However, the process of establishing autonomous and independent states in the Ottoman Balkans saw multiple cases of forcible population transfer based on agreements and treaties. Some of them are well-known cases, for example, the forcible emigration of Muslims from the newly independent Greek state in 1830, the forcible emigration of Muslims from Serbian principality in 1862 and several cases of negotiations on the emigration of Muslims from different regions, such as Crete or newly established Bulgaria. This paper deals with these processes in the Balkans beginning already as early as in the 19th century. Keywords: population transfer in the Balkans, population exchange, Greek Independence, Russo-Ottoman treaties, Muslim Minorities, ethnic cleansing, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Greece, Serbia Introduction At the end of the eighteenth century, a new era of population transfers began in the Balkans.1 Almost all the Ottoman-Russian wars • Prof., Yıldız Technical University, Center for Balkan and Black Sea Studies, email: [email protected] MEHMET HACISALİHOĞLU caused mass migrations in occupied territories, and the creation of the Balkan states in the nineteenth century was accompanied by migrations and population transfers also, for different reasons.
    [Show full text]