Download PDF | (South-East European History_ 6) Ercan Karakoç (editor), Ali Serdar Mete (editor) - The Balkan Wars_ Ottoman Perspectives-Peter Lang (2024).
259 Pages
Preface
Described as “the Sick Man of Europe” by the Great Powers, at the beginning of the 20th century the Ottoman Empire was in dissolution. The Balkan nations, which gradually gained their independence as nationalist ideas, a crucial result of the French Revolution, spread across Europe, were in a struggle to divide the last Ottoman lands in Europe. Eventually, the newly emerging Balkan states, under the guidance of Russia, joined forces against the Ottomans under the name of the Balkan League in 1912. Taking advantage of the Ottoman Empire’s war with Italy in Tripoli in 1912, the Balkan states’ struggle for dominance of the Balkan region, first began as an armed conflict with the Ottomans before the Balkan states fought each other from 1912 to 1913. In the first phase of the Balkan Wars, which would have vital consequences for the belligerents, Bulgarian, Greek, Montenegrin and Serbian armies fought together against the Ottoman Empire, dealing the Ottomans a heavy defeat in a result that shocked world public opinion. In the second phase, the Balkan states fought each other, and Romania also entered the war. The Ottoman defeat was the most discussed outcome of the wars. Edirne, previously Adrianople, the former capital of the Empire before İstanbul, was captured and the enemy armies approached the outskirts of İstanbul. The borders determined after the Balkan Wars did not please any of the parties. Interventions by the Great Powers further increased tensions in the region.
As the ultimate result, the first bullet that triggered World War I was shot, within the Balkan geography, in Sarajevo in June 1914. The causes and effects of the Balkan Wars have retained their fervor despite the passage of so much time. Several writers from different Balkan nations and from across different disciplines joined together under the coordination of the Balkan History Association, based in Romania, to develop a project that addresses little known and little studied aspects of the Balkan Wars. They analyzed the political, historical, medical, sociological and religious elements of the Balkan Wars, bringing together their perspectives in this edited volume. In the book, the Balkan Wars, one of the most important events of the modern era, are handled meticulously and impartially through the use of different sources. Furthermore, this book opens important areas for future research in the Balkans and Turkey and for the whole scientific world. The book, with its content, figures and unique bibliographies, will be a significant guide for undergraduate and graduate students who study the political, military and social history of the Balkan Wars and Balkan nations. In concluding my words I would like to thank you Dr. Ali Serdar Mete, who helped me during the preparation of the edited book, Stevan Bozanich, who read and edit the chapters, Dr. Mihai Dragnea, President of the Balkan History Association, offered to prepare the book and Dr. Philip Dunshea from Peter Lang Publishing for their valuable cooperation during the printing phase of the book. Ercan Karakoç, Ph.D. İstanbul, September 15, 2023
Introduction
ERCAN KARAKOÇ AND ALİ SERDAR METE
The first steps of Ottoman power in Europe started with raids into the Balkans. These raids also heralded Ottoman domination over the Balkan Peninsula, which lasted for almost six centuries. Ottoman sovereignty over the Balkans, where they had settled since the middle of the 14th century, became an important source of power in the empire’s transition from principality to imperial state and in all its subsequent political processes. The state originally established in Anatolia developed in Eastern Europe, and for this reason Edirne was chosen as the second capital of the Ottoman Empire. Thanks to the “Millet System,” the Balkan nations lived relatively autonomously during the centuries of Ottoman rule. The Ottoman administration was inclined to make use of local power structures and elites, and it maintained the balance in the Balkans by utilizing regional dynamics. Although revolts occurred from time to time, they were not on a large enough scale to threaten Ottoman domination. In the areas where the Ottoman Empire ruled, internal turmoil began to emerge in the 19th century that would shake the administration.
Since the Balkans were also open to European and Russian intervention, the tensions that rose in this region shook the very foundations of the Empire. As this turmoil and unrest started to take the form of organized national movements in the Balkan Peninsula, the first people to succeed in their struggle for independence were the Greeks. Sovereign Greece became the pioneer of the subsequent ruptures in this region, and after Greek independence the Ottoman Europe was quickly dragged into the turmoil. Instability in the Balkans was also a determining factor in Ottoman foreign policy. While the increasing Russian threat to the Empire began to press more in the Balkans with Pan-Slavic policies, Austria-Hungary was another powerful actor that played an active role in the power struggle in the region. As Ottoman power was damaged by rebellions and wars, the Balkans were turning into an even more chaotic region.
The Ottoman-Russian War of 1877–1878 and the Treaty of Berlin accelerated the intensification of the chaos in the Balkan Peninsula and spurred the independence struggle against the Ottomans. Almost every development after the Berlin Treaty, which weakened the Ottoman Empire’s position considerably, dealt a blow to the Ottoman authority in the Balkans. For Romania, Serbia, and Montenegro, which had gained their independence, the Balkans were the site of a power struggle in which Greece also participated. From time to time, the parties fought each other and from time to time allied against the Ottoman Empire. As in the case of the Macedonian Question, the international community was also involved in issues and matters that actually concerned the Ottoman Empire. As independent states it did not take long for the Balkan nations to establish their political and military systems as they could count on the support of the international community to achieve their national goals. The army was the most significant institution in the relations of these states with their neighbors. Every Balkan state had to establish an army and navy and modernize them in accordance with the requirements of the era.
The path that the Ottomans had followed in military modernization was also followed by these states. In fact, before both its allies and the Ottomans the Serbian government began to build a modern army equipped with the newest technology. For example, the Serbian order for Mauser rifles preceded the Ottoman order by about five years. Thanks to this, war materiel, which was a significant product of Western industry, found an active market in the Balkans. Along with the purchase of modern weapons and equipment, administrative and logistical improvements gradually turned into war preparations. The Greek, Serbian, and Bulgarian armies, which learned modern war techniques and methods under the supervision of foreign experts, became the locomotive of the Balkan League that was established by the four Balkan states. Although the Ottoman government tried to reduce tensions in the region through diplomatic channels, this proved futile. Tensions in the Balkans were so much on edge at the turn of the 20th century that even the breeze of freedom brought by the Young Turks could not lessen them.
While German manufacturers such as Mauser and Krupp were the first choice for arms purchases, almost the entire German war industry found a foothold in the Ottoman market. A neutral observer looking at the situation just before the war would have come to the conclusion that Ottoman defeat by the Balkan League was out of the question. As a matter of fact, and even though they were not parties to the war, the Great Powers declared that the status quo would be maintained and that no boundary changes would be permitted in the Balkans, regardless of the outcome. The defeat of the Ottoman Empire caused great surprise among the belligerents and in international public opinion. This unexpected defeat was the start of a process that would have serious military, political. and social consequences not only for the Ottomans but also for the Balkan nations. The war broke out on October 8, 1912, two days after the Tripoli War between the Ottomans and Italians ended with the signing of the Treaty of Ouchy when Montenegro declared war on the Ottoman Empire.
The arrival of enemy armies in front of Edirne about three weeks after the start of the war was a striking indicator of the magnitude of defeat suffered by Ottoman forces. From a military point of view, the mistakes that occurred during the war can be chalked up to problems of mobilization, military command, supply, and moral superiority. While the enemy armies were ready for war two weeks after completing their war preparations and declaring mobilization, even after 45 days the preparations could not be completed in the Ottoman army. In addition, the demobilization of experienced soldiers due to ignoring the possibility of war aggravated the situation and slowed the adaptation of new recruits. Since the reserves and guard forces were subject to insufficient and superficial preparations and training, these soldiers were taken to the front before they could even complete their close-order drills, let alone prepare for war. The chances of success were further diminished when mistakes in deployment and command compounded faults arising from the mobilization. While there was no coordination between the principal units such as the army, corps, divisions, and regiments, even coordination between battalions and smaller units was insufficient. Unit commanders were acting independently of their superiors and their subordinate troops and were unable to follow the larger strategic picture of the war.
This lack of coordination at the command level was shown to be the most serious factor in turning defeat into a fiasco. According to sources from the period, the inability to establish a uniform officer committee was the main criticism leveled at the high command. While this statement emphasized differences in education, experience, and opinion among officers, political rivalries within the army were also implicated. The Ottoman army paid a heavy price for officers’ inability to coordinate and act together during the wars, which is perhaps the most significant factor in ensuring the successful operation of the army. Lack of communication and political rivalries among the officers also directly affected the soldiers. When poorly managed units collapsed quickly in the face of enemy attack, these defeats turned in a short time into desertions. Considering that officers started to desert before their troops, the officer class deserved the heavy criticism directed at them. Disruptions in mobilization, command, and rear service caused the Ottoman army to lose its morale and motivation.
The soldiers, who could not be satisfied with national and moral resources, were also deprived of direction by the command echelon, and the enemy gained moral superiority in a short time. Since the Balkan League armies were superior to the Ottoman army in many respects, they achieved success in a short time. The most important factor in their success was the coordination and regular service behind the front, which was not present in the Ottoman army. While the Ottoman army could not achieve internal unity, the four separate armies of the allies deployed and acted as if they were one army. While the Bulgarian army, which formed the main force, advanced rapidly and decisively toward İstanbul, the other armies continued the war on their own fronts. While the Montenegrins, who used their geographical advantages in the best way, occupied the Ottoman forces in the steep mountain passes, Serbia sent a force to support the Bulgarian siege of Edirne, even when it fought along its own front. In addition to fighting successfully on land, the Greek Navy also achieved significant successes at sea. The moral superiority, unity of command, discipline, and good management of rear-guard support, all of which were lacking in the Ottoman army, brought the Balkan League victory. The consequences of the heavy defeat of the Ottoman army were also disastrous.
The First Balkan War ended with the Treaty of London, signed on May 30, 1913, in which the Ottoman Empire lost 167,312 square meters of land. After the First Balkan War, the Allies, along with Romania, began to quarrel among themselves. Taking advantage of this conflict, known as the Second Balkan War, the Ottoman government at least succeeded in retaking Edirne. Although Edirne was recaptured, the sociopolitical effects of the Ottoman defeat overshadowed the military outcome by creating severe trauma due to the fact that few expected the war would bring such dire consequences. The Balkan Wars, which put an end to the Turkish presence in the Balkan Peninsula, also called Ottoman Europe, were not enough to end the tension in this region. In the period following this war, which many consider a rehearsal for World War I, political tensions in the region increased continuously. Great Power competition was added to ongoing disagreements between the parties involved in the Balkan Wars. While Austria-Hungary and Italy intervened directly in the Balkans, Russia continued to influence events indirectly. As is well known, the spark that set off World War I was ignited in the Balkans, the intersection point of conflicting interests. Although the wars ended, tensions remained in the Balkan lands. In these generous lands of Europe, ethnic, political, and religious tensions remain palpable.
Despite being Ottoman-centered, this edited volume is the product of studies that evaluate the Balkan Wars from different perspectives. This work by academics from the Balkan nations, who came together under the umbrella of the Balkan History Association, is divided into three main sections: The War, The Struggle, and The Nations. This organization is not intended to divide the work into disparate sections so much as it seeks to gather closely related articles under the same heading. The reader will see that the book includes important issues such as nationalism, differences in belief, war technology, diplomacy, and border conflicts, all of which contributed to the outbreak of the Balkan Wars and to postwar political tensions. Over the past century plus, many studies have been published examining the Ottoman defeat in the Balkan Wars and its effects. In the years following the war, works written by Ottoman officers drew special attention in many important works that were published by people from different nationalities, mostly academicians.
The literature on the Ottoman defeat and its consequences in the Balkan Wars can be organized into two main categories: (1) Studies published in the Ottoman period/era; (2) Studies published in the recent period. Studies published in the Ottoman period focused on the conclusion of the Balkan War as a defeat, and the reasons for defeat rather than its consequences. The fact that these studies, carried out by officers who had been personally involved in the war or by staff who evaluated war reports, and include the determination of the last period of the empire as well its military values, is what makes these works of great importance. Some were also used as textbooks in the military schools. Written by soldiers, their focus was the event, unit, or person and its part in the defeat. From this point of view, field battles, defensive battles, the situation of big units, and the people and decisions that led to defeat at the command level were among the subjects examined in particular. It is known that these officers, some of whom also held important positions in the Republican period, emphasized the lessons learned from the Ottoman defeat and tried to apply these lessons in the new era. Fevzi [Çakmak] served as the Chief of the General Staff of the Republic of Turkey for many years. Marshal Fevzi’s book, Garbî Rumeli’nin Suret-i Ziyaı ve Balkan Harbinde Garb Cephesi, 1 is a detailed source examining the loss in the Balkan War and its causes.
Books by Ali Fethi [Okyar]2 and Ali İhsan [Sabis],3 among the important names of the administrative staff who transferred from the Ottoman Empire to the Republic, also examine the results of the war and its causes in terms of politics and military. It is possible to list other significant sources that stand out and where the impact of the Balkan War on the next generation of Ottoman officers can be found: Ömer Zeki, Balkan Harbi ve Şark Ordusunun Hezimeti (İstanbul: Matbaa-i Hayriye, 1914/1332); Selanikli Bahri, Esbâb-ı Felâketimizin Orduya İsâbet Eden Hisse-i Mes’uliyetinden: Balkan Harbinde Garb Ordusu (İstanbul: Yeni Turan Matbaası, 1331); Sadık Ulvi, Tahsin Paşa Ordusu ve Selanik’in Teslimi (Dersaadet: Sancakciyan Matbaası, 1331); Mahmud Muhtar Paşa, Üçüncü Kolordunun ve İkinci Şark Ordusunun Muharebâtı (Dersaadet: Kanaat Matbaası, 1331); Şükrü Ali ve Şerafeddin, Balkan Harbi Tarih-i Harb Meseleleri (İstanbul: Erkân-ı Harbîye Mektebi Matbaası, 1926), and Ahmed Cevad, Kırmızı Siyah Kitap, 1328 Fecayi’i (İstanbul: Matbaa-i Hayriye, 1329). Ottoman officers’ and intellectuals’ research on the Balkan War and the different reasons for these results also serve as a source for the studies carried out in today’s Turkey. When the work done in Turkey is added to the work done in the Balkans and around the world, it is understood that this war is still an important academic research area. While the publications of researchers/academics from countries that participated in the Balkan War make it easier to understand the war from different perspectives, researchers from many different disciplines around the world continue to work on different aspects of the subject. Recently, quite detailed studies have been published that examine the situation of both the Ottoman and Balkan nations in the war and evaluate the war’s military, political, social, and cultural consequences in the light of these studies.
It is possible to examine these publications, which will be sources for almost all research on the Balkan Wars, by dividing them into sub-categories. Richard C. Hall’s The Balkan Wars, 1912–1913: Prelude to the First World War4 examines the triggering effect of the war in the international arena. E. R. Hooton’s Prelude to the First World War: The Balkan Wars 1912–1913 focuses on the effects of the Balkan Wars on the outbreak of World War I.5 The nationalist movement and its effects, which researchers see as the most important cause of the war and which lies at the root of tensions in the Balkans, is another topic covered in publications examining the Balkan Wars. Among the publications that focus on nationalism, War and Nationalism: The Balkan Wars, 1912–1913, and Their Sociopolitical Implications, 6 edited by M. Hakan Yavuz and Isa Blumi, stands out. Paul Hockenos also examines the relationship between the nationalist movement7 and the Balkan Wars in his Homeland Calling Exile Patriotism and the Balkan Wars. 8 Nationalism, an important motivation for the warring parties and especially for the Balkan nations, was noticed quite late by the Ottoman Turks. There were also publications criticizing the nationalist policies implemented by the Committee of Union and Progress, which obtained and held power after the Balkan War. Among these publications are Ümit Kurt’s book “Türk’ün Büyük, Biçare Irkı:” Türk Yurdu’nda Milliyetçiliğin Esasları (1911–1916)9 and an article the author co-published with Doğan Gürpınar.10 The following publications can provide examples of studies that focused on the claim that Turkish nationalism, which rose after the war, negatively affected non-Muslims: Y. Doğan Çetinkaya, “Illustrated Atrocity:
The Stigmatisation of Non-Muslims through Images in the Ottoman Empire during the Balkan Wars,” Journal of Modern European History 12, no. 4 (2014), 460–478 and R. Hakkı Öztan, “‘Point of No Return?:’ Prospects of Empire after the Ottoman Defeat in the Balkan Wars (1912–13),” International Journal of Middle East Studies 50, no. 1 (2018), 65–84. Publications that focused on the nation and nationalism were followed by publications examining the different ongoing effects of the war. The Balkan Wars from Contemporary Perception to Historic Memory, 11 edited by Kathrin Böckh and Sabine Rutar,12 is particularly important in terms of examining the war effects today. In this study, the war’s effects on today’s Balkan geography and nations, the war’s relationship to fields such as religion, geography, and diplomacy, and the effects of the war on social memory were examined. Another case study, which evaluates many important issues by looking at the war from different perspectives, was published under the title War in the Balkans Conflict and Diplomacy before World War I, 13 edited by James Pettifer and Tom Buchanan. In this study, divergent views of the Balkan nations can be observed. After the studies that examined the war’s effects in different areas, the sources examining the war through the point of view of the warring parties also made important contributions to the field.
The Balkan Wars, which were a very important threshold for both the Ottomans and the Balkan nations, had a significant impact on the warring parties politically and economically. Igor Despot14 seriously analyzes the war and warring parties in his work. Despot’s work, which examines the Balkan War from many different perspectives, has become a reference source in the field. Another work that examines the origins and effects of the war, and especially the gains of the Balkan nations, is the editorial work published under the title Battling over the Balkans Historiographical Questions and Controversies. 15 In addition to studies evaluating all sides of the Balkan War, important sources dealing with the Ottoman Empire’s great defeat also guide researchers. The first prominent publication on this topic was prepared by Edward J. Erickson. Erickson, who has an important place among Ottoman military historians. He examined the stages of the Balkan Defeat for the Ottomans, starting from the Eastern Question in his work called Defeat in Detail: The Ottoman Army in the Balkans, 1912–1913. 16 Eyal Ginio17 is one of the names who published a careful study of this defeat. While examining the situation, Ginio’s evaluation by focusing on the postwar effects and supporting developments in the following periods with documents from different sources raises the importance of the work. Among recent studies evaluating the reasons for the Ottoman defeat, a prominent source in military history studies was published by Bülent Durgun.18 In his study, Durgun evaluated the general situation of the Ottoman military power and discussed the issue through the logistics activities19 carried out in the Balkan War. In this respect, the studies titled Balkan Harbi’nde Osmanlı Ordusu’nun Ulaştırma Faaliyetleri 1912–1913 and Balkan Savaşlarında Salgın Hastalıklar ve Sağlık Hizmetleri make great contributions to the literature.
The book begins with Biljana Stojić’s two chapters, in which she evaluates the road to war and the alliance of Balkan nations against the Ottomans. Stojić traces the political and diplomatic relations between the victorious allies, their internal situations, and their relations with the European powers and the Ottoman Empire. Her studies serve as an introduction that facilitates an understanding of the diplomatic efforts before the Balkan Wars and the factors that led to war. The second chapter in Part I was written by Osman Yalçın. In this study, in which Yalçın examines the emergence of air power in the Ottoman army, which had just started to be used in militaries across the world. In this review, he outlines the situation of the Ottoman Air Force in the Balkan Wars, which provides one of the best examples of the Ottoman administration’s close attention to developments in military technology.
The last chapter in the Part I is by Sabri Can Sannav, who surveys the situation of the Aegean Islands during the Balkan War from a historical perspective. Through the perspective of the Balkan Wars, Sannav evaluates the Aegean Islands Problem, which remains an important issue on the diplomatic agendas of Turkey and Greece today. Part II of the book, The Struggle, contains two chapters that cover difficulties during the Balkan Wars and after. The first chapter by Theodoros Giannopoulos and Christos Mantzanas, tackles one of the most difficult and vital elements of the war: the war hinterland. While evaluating the help provided by the German Red Cross to the Ottoman army during the Balkan Wars, they detail German aid workers’ arrival in İstanbul and their work there. Giannopoulos and Mantzanas reveal the difficult conditions behind the front and also draw attention to Turkish-German solidarity.
The second chapter focuses on the Albanian Question, which was a serious source of tension for the Ottomans and other Balkan states. Ethem Çeku discusses Albanian independence efforts, which emerged on the Ottoman agenda due to the periodic rebellions that escalated the already high tensions in the Balkans, and how the Balkan Wars affected these efforts. Examining the war’s impact on the Albanian Issue, the author also highlights the political and diplomatic factors that shaped the rise of Albanian national consciousness. The third and final part of the book is named “The Nations” because it examines the effects of the war on the Ottoman “nations.” Cengiz Yolcu’s contribution evaluates the conditions in which immigrants, unprecedented in number and profile, were received by the Ottomans, particularly concerning Bulgaria. In this chapter, which also touches on the diplomatic and administrative aspects of the population exchange between Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire, he discusses the significance of the forced migration caused by the war.
The second chapter is based on research on Ottoman Foundations, an interesting and complex subject. Starting with general information about the concept of foundation and foundations in the Balkan Peninsula, Irena Kolaj Ristanović specifically examines the Skopje Sanjak in this chapter. She focuses on the Ottoman foundations in Skopje, notably the institutions known as Münderise and evaluates their place within the education system after they had lost their economic effectiveness. By assessing the records of the Skopje Foundations, this chapter, which also includes statistical data, draws attention to the problems with which the Muslim population had to struggle after the war. The third chapter, by Denis Ljuljanović, evaluates the policy of the Young Turks toward the Albanians and the Albanian revolt. In his chapter, Ljuljanović examines Ottoman-Albanian relations between 1908 and 1914, while also evaluating the political tension of the period from the point of view of Albanians. This evaluation—starting with the relationship between the Young Turks and Albanian political actors—details the transformation of this relationship into the Albanian revolt.
The final chapter of Part 3, by Ilirjana Kaceli, also focuses on Albanians and Albania, the Ottoman nation most affected by the Balkan Wars. She emphasizes that during the war Albanian nationalism was rekindled and the idea of an independent Albania was revived. The idea of independence, which was also influenced by the Great Powers and the internal conflict in the Balkans, brought Albania on stage as a new political actor after the war. The fact that the study is based on Ottoman documents reveals that the Albanian issue was closely followed by the Ottoman administration. What distinguishes all these chapters collected in this volume is their attention to the myriad perspectives on the Balkan Wars and its effects. Certainly, numerous topics go untouched and open up avenues for future research. This is, in fact, one of the main goals of this book: to lay the groundwork for and encourage future studies of new perspectives on the Balkan Wars.
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق