Download The Eastern Question

History of modern Europe 6.2.3
Europe between 1871 and 1914
Eastern Questions
1. Introduction
In the nineteenth century Czarist Russia had embarked on a policy
of
aggrandizement
towards
south-eastern
Europe.
The
lengthening shadows of the Czarist Russian Empire on Europe was
accompanied by a progressive weakening of the centuries old
Ottoman Empire, as it was forced to retreat from the Balkans and
the Dalmatian peninsula. The Eastern Question essentially refers
to the series of international crises generated by Ottoman decline,
steady Russian advance, and the attempt of the other European
powers to somehow prevent the disintegration of the Ottoman
Empire which would allow the Russians to move closer to the
Mediterranean Sea.
The Background
In order to understand the nature of the Eastern Question one
needs to look at the manner in which the Ottoman Empire came
to play such a pivotal role in shaping the international relations of
Europe in the nineteenth century. The Ottoman Empire spanned
over three continents. On the Mediterranean in the East, to the
south, it spanned over the north African coastline, touching Egypt
and Libya, it spanned over Asia along the Levantine regions,
including the plateau of Anatolia, and in Europe itself it had its
space in the Dalmatian peninsula and the Balkans. The capital of
such a sprawling empire was in the former Byzantine Empire
imperial capital of Constantinople, which the Turks renamed
Istanbul, when they captured it in 1453. The Ottoman Empire was
in its true sense a multi-national empire although the central
ruling cadre remained concentrated in the Turkish dynasty or the
Ottoman
dynasty.
Nevertheless
the
various
component
nationalities and ethnicities of the Ottoman royalty, came to have
a kind of a partnership in the running of this empire, which
basically meant that in Africa there were the Arabs and Berbers, in
Asia the Arabs and Turks, and in Europe it was the Balkan people
such as the Serbs, Croats, Albanians, Bulgarians, Romanians and
the Greeks, although these are terms we use today, but in those
days it was principally denoted by the languages they spoke,- so
the Rumanians were not recognized as a people, they were
principally people living in the principalities, for instance of
Moldavia-Wallachia, and Bessarabia. The various provinces of the
Ottoman Empire were governed by individual traditional elite of
these regions. As a result this partnership lasted for a fairly long
period, while the Ottoman Empire was expanding.
2. Ottoman Decline
The defeat at the gates of Vienna in the seventeenth century
marked more or less the end of the Ottoman imperial expansion.
Thereafter the Ottoman Empire in south-eastern Europe was
basically hanging on till it was eventually pushed out.
The process of the decline of the Ottoman Empire, properly
speaking began in the eighteenth century because of changing
economic realities around the Mediterranean as commercial
revolution began to push the older ways of doing business out of
the market, and the Ottoman Empire which had been for such a
long
time
an
important
trading
destination
for
European
manufacture, began to shift its character, towards the end of the
eighteenth century this led to disintegration, or internal crumbling
as it were in the Ottoman Empire and was accompanied by the
growing desire of Tsarist Russia to move southwards.
The basic condition of the Eastern Question emerging was
primarily to do with the Ottoman attempt at stalling Russian
expansion, and also preventing its own disintegration. The first
major reverse in the Ottoman scenario is to be noticed essentially
in the year 1740, long before Russia had embarked southwards.
In 1740, the Ottoman Empire which was unable to maintain a
major naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean anymore,
decided to reach out to France and signed a treaty under which
France was to come forth and give some it sort of military security
in the eastern Mediterranean in return for which France was to
gain a privileged commercial position in the Ottoman Empire. For
all practical purposes, this was the beginning of Ottoman
dependence on foreign powers, specifically European powers, for
its own survival.
The nature and origins of the eastern question
By the second half of the eighteenth century as France was going
through its own period of turmoil, the Russian Empire began to
grow more and more powerful, it began to play with the options of
searching for ‘warm-water ports’, or ports that would not freeze
up during the winter. This could be found only to the Russian
south in the three nearest water bodies,- the Caspian Sea, Black
Sea and the Mediterranean, and from the second half of the
eighteenth century Russia therefore began a policy of steady
expansion towards the south vis a vis the Persian Empire in the
Caspian Sea, vis a vis the Ottoman in the Black Sea and the
Mediterranean.
3. Russian ‘warm-water’ policy
For Russia in terms of their ‘warm-water’ policy the preferred
alternative was direct military conquest of the concerned regions,
and Russia in fact embarked on such a policy of conquest vis a vis
the kingdom of Persia in the Caspian regions. The Ottomans
however proved a little tricky because repeatedly Russia had to
witness
greater
European
opposition
to
Russian
policy
of
expansionism and direct control of these regions. Russia’s primary
aim was to push the Ottomans out altogether of the Black Sea,
and more particularly of their possession of the Straits of
Dardanelles and Bosporus which connected the Black Sea with the
Mediterranean Sea. Their preferred alternative was to dismantle
the Ottoman Empire. To this in effect in fact, in the second half of
the eighteenth century Tsarina Catherine had actually proposed to
the Habsburgs who were presiding over an imperial formation that
had fought the Ottomans for long from the seventeenth century if
not longer, the Tsarina had actually proposed to the Habsburg
Emperor that the Ottoman Empire in Europe should be divided up
between Vienna and St.Petersburg.
The idea of Russian presence on the Mediterranean however or
the
Russian
domination
of
the
Straits
of
Dardanelles
and
Bosphorus was not a welcome suggestion, neither for the
Habsburgs nor for the British, and nor indeed for the French. The
Habsburgs were of the opinion that if the Habsburgs reached the
Danubian principalities of the south such as Moldavia Wallachia
and Bessarabia then it would only be a brief time before which
Russia would advance westwards and upwards into the Danubian
principalities ruled by the Habsburgs, so they were determined to
keep Russia out. Britain was also becoming increasingly alarmed
at the prospect of Russian expansion into the region because from
the later half of the eighteenth century Britain was developing its
British-Indian empire and was unwilling to let Russia come
anywhere near the eastern Mediterranean which was pivotal in
Britain’s passage to India. France was moving with a defensive
impulse, - they had substantial commercial presence in the
Levantine region and were unwilling to see Russia probe deeper
into this. So when in the 1770’s a major war was fought between
the Russians and the Ottoman Turkish Empire, the Ottomans were
defeated and Russia ran over the Danubian principalities of
Bessarabia Moldavia and Wallachia, but they had to- under
international pressure, leave this region. The Russians left
however with, They signed the treaty of Kuchuk-Kainarji in 1773,
under the terms of which Russia secured from the Ottomans the
right of the guardianship of the orthodox Christians who lived in
that region which basically meant that, if there was to be any
Ottoman interference in the lives of the Orthodox Christian
subjects in the region, Russia could intervene and use this as a
further foray into the Ottoman Empire. Thereafter the affairs of
Europe occupied the minds of everyone as Napoleon knocked hard
into the Ottoman Empire in the south in the 1790’s and early
1800’s and for a time the Ottoman Empire was left undisturbed by
Russia. They had to look after its defence vis a vis France.
By the 1820’s as the Napoleonic Empire crumbled and France
became a pale shadow of its former self the Ottoman Empire in
fact began to lean closer towards an aggressive Russia.
4. Greek Independence
The real problem for the Ottoman Empire in the first half of the
nineteenth century however came from the Greeks. Given the
progressive weakening of the Ottoman Empire and given the
changing nature of European commerce the Greeks who used to
constitute the main frame of Ottoman commerce with Europe
began to look for their own independent space outside the
Ottoman Empire which was declining, and stagnating, and they
began to look to the West as their natural economic partner. By
the 1820’s the Greek merchants were keener to move towards
Europe and they began to fund secret societies that would
ultimately work for Greek independence. The most important of
these societies was the Hetairia Philika, which was triggered by a
team of three Greek merchants spreading national consciousness
among the Greeks. By the early 1820’s there were a number of
fanatic leaders who began to associate themselves with the
Hetairia
Philika
and
in
1822
a
full
fledged
demand
for
independence or at least autonomy for the Greeks within the
Ottoman Empire. This Ottomans were determined to subdue. So
Mohammad Ali Pasha (1769-1849) from Egypt was given the brief
of subduing the Greek demand for independence. Pitched battles
were fought before Russia decided to intervene claiming to defend
the rights of the Orthodox Christians that the Greeks were. Using
the proviso of the Treaty of Kuchuk-Kainarji Russian intervention
turned to be fairly decisive in the first phase of the battle. The
British were alarmed at the growing Russian influence in this
region and were afraid that this might mean that Russia would
gain both in Istanbul and the newly emergent Greek region. So
Britain also began to intervene and so did France to such an
extent that in the late 1820’s at a time when the Egyptian fleet of
Mohammad Ali Pasha was almost about to subdue the entire
Greek demand for independence, British and French intervention
prevented a decisive Ottoman victory. This led to a period of
cooling off as it were of but it was becoming fairly clear by the
1830’s that Greece was going to go a different path from the rest
of the Ottoman Empire. In 1831 Russian mediation in favour of
the Greeks was almost about to bring the Greeks an autonomous
status within the Ottoman Empire, which alarmed London and
Paris. So Britain and France began to push for a demand that the
Ottoman Empire should ultimately allow Greece to break away
from it, and Greece was to be set up as an independent state. This
was the understanding that was arrived at in 1832 and in order to
make certain that the Greeks did not get the opportunity of
bringing the Russians into the Balkans it was decided that the
Wittelsbach dynasty of Bavaria which was a German speaking
dynasty, which was quite removed from the Russian sphere of
influence would provide Greece with its first king. So in 1833
when the independent state of Greece came into being it was
headed ironically not by a Greek, but by a German speaking
prince.
5. Unkiar Skelessi treaty
So even as the Russians were being made to withdraw under
Anglo-French pressure, the Ottoman Empire signed the Treaty of
Unkiar Skelessi (1833) with Russia. This was to prove a crucial
development because there were two dimensions to the Treaty of
Unkiar Skelessi. On the one hand the Ottomans and the Russians
were to enter into an offensive and defensive military alliance,
which basically meant that if the Ottoman Empire was under
attack from any other power, the Russians would step forth and if
the Russians were to be under attack from any other power, the
Ottomans would step forward. For the Ottomans this was an
important thing as around this time in the 1830’s Mohammad Ali
Pasha of Egypt was trying to carve his independent space by
creating a hereditary succession in Egypt by nominally within the
Ottoman Empire but virtually preparing for a secession. So the
Ottoman Sultan was trying to take out some sort of guarantee or
insurance from the Russians. Now in return for giving this
offensive and defensive alliance or guarantee, the Russians
demanded that the Ottoman Empire should allow the Straits of
Bosphorus and Dardanelles to remain open to the Russians even
in times of war. The general practice till that point of time had
been that the Straits of Bosphorus and Dardanelles would remain
open for all powers, but in times of war the Ottomans used to
close the Straits. Russia was simply securing the guarantee that
even in times of war, Russia would have the freedom to navigate
into the Mediterranean Sea.
The period between 1832 to 1852-53 was one of turbulence in the
Ottoman Empire, because all through the 1830’s the Ottoman
Empire had to struggle with its own protégé in Egypt, Mohammad
Ali Pasha, and there were several occasions when the differences
almost came to the verge of conflict. Towards the closing years of
the 1830’s in 1839 it was the possibility of a conflict that pushed
the Ottomans to seek Russian support once again. When the
forces of Mohammad Ali Pasha ran over Levantine Asia-the entire
region between Aleppo and Damascus and established its control,
the Ottoman Sultan in a bid to fight back decided to bring in
Russian troops. Twenty thousand Russian troops were promptly
dispatched to the aid of the Ottoman Sultan. Alarmed at this
prospect the British and French intervened. They demanded that
the Sultan that the Russian forces should be asked to withdraw. In
return they offered to mediate between the Ottoman Sultan and
Mohammad Ali Pasha. The outcome of this resolution in 1840 was
that Mohammad Ali Pasha was recognized as the hereditary ruler
of Egypt, and was also given the Governorship of Syria, Aleppo
and Damascus but on the condition that these regions would
continue to remain within the Ottoman Empire.
6. Russian intervention
The British and the French further pledged to uphold the unity and
integrity of the Empire. This pledge was finally formalized in the
Straits Convention of 1841. Under the Straits Convention the
Ottoman Empire was made to agree to the idea that in future in
times of conflict, the Straits of Dardanelles and Bosphorus would
have to be closed to all powers. Now this remained in violation of
the secret provision that the Ottomans had already signed in the
Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi. The complications generated by this
Straits Convention were to have momentous significance in the
years that followed. In the course of the 1840’s France decided to
step up its diplomatic presence in this region, and particularly with
the coming of Napoleon III, the French decision to increase French
profile in the region began to have a more hard consequence.
Napoleon III desirous of soliciting Catholic support in the domestic
arena began to push for a change in the status of the Ottoman
Empire’s disposition towards Christians. The Ottoman Empire in
Levantine
Asia
ruled
over
the
lands
which
the
Christians
considered holy- Bethlehem and Jerusalem, and some of the
holiest churches of Christendom happened to be in Levantine Asia.
When this diplomatic offensive was brought into being the Russian
Tsar was very concerned, and he decided to make another push.
In 1853 he is supposed to have told the British Ambassador Philip
Seymour that ‘we have a very sick man in our hands and unless
something is done about it he will bring all of us down with him.’
The British Ambassador is supposed to have said that ‘the sick
man actually needs a physician not a surgeon’. This was clearly
indicative of what Tsar Nicholas was planning to do. Tsar Nicholas
(1796- 1855) meant to give the Ottoman Empire a push and when
the
French
diplomatic
offensive
looked
like
displacing
the
significance of the Russians as a guardian of the Orthodox
Christians, the Russians decided to go to war. When the Russian
advance in this region began, the British and the French
immediately decided to give the Ottomans military support, which
allowed them to push them back in 1853.
7. Conclusion
But even after Russian withdrawal had been staged, the British
and the French decided that the problem had to be solved once
and for all. So in 1853 Russia was asked to pull out of the
Danubian provinces of Moldavia and Wallachia and even from the
province of Bessarabia and from their status of guardianship and
that Russia was not to use their guardianship of the Orthodox
Christians as a diplomatic counter against the Ottoman Empire.
Several other proposals were also forwarded. It was argued that
apart from the guardianship of the Danubian provinces Russia had
to stop meddling unnecessarily in the internal affairs of the
Ottoman Empire on the grounds of protecting Orthodox Christians.
Further it was argued that the Straits Convention of 1841 would
have to be re-evaluated to consider whether the Russians would
have access to the Mediterranean even in peacetime without
consulting the other powers. Finally it was argued that the Danube
would have to be open to all. The last provision Russia could live,
with but idea of re-evaluating of the Straits Convention and also
stopping interfering in the lives of Orthodox Christians were
provisions that the Russians could not stomach. This led to the
Crimean War, where the Russians had to fight the joint forces of
the British and the French and the Austrian Empire joined in as it
was keen on expelling Russia from the Danubian principalities. In
1856 when the war came to a close, the Treaty of Paris in 1856
more or less framed the terms on which the Eastern Question was
to turn from this point of time. One of the most important
provisions of the Treaty of Paris, at the end of the Crimean War
was to bring about de-militarization of the Black Sea region –
none of the powers were allowed to have a naval station in the
Black Sea region. Since none but Russia had a presence in the
region it was basically urging the Russians to move out of the
Black Sea. The second most important provision was that the
Ottomans had to reform their state structure in such a manner
that Orthodox Christians would not give the Russians the pretext
of returning to the region. The last provision was about Russia
pulling out of Danubian principalities was also indicative that in
future Austria-Hungary would have a major stake in the unity and
integrity of the Ottoman Empire. From this point of time the
Eastern Question began to transpose itself as Balkan nationalism.