TURKEY'S INTERNAL DANGERS.
The anomalous position of foreigners in
Turkey--Capitulation privileges--The Porte has no
jurisdiction over foreign criminals--Attempts to modify
the anomaly--Reason for their failure to be found in
the Sultan's misrule--The independence of Turkey a
mere fiction--The native Christians--Their separatist
aspirations--Their treasonable acts--Their English
apologists--Tolerant policy of the Turks--Dangers of this
tolerance--The Armenians--Their ancient privileges--The
massacres--Their present position.
IN the preceding chapter I gave a summarised account of the
jurisdiction of Turkey, and also made an allusion to the admission of
the Armenians and other non-Mussulman natives of Turkey to the judicial
institutions. Here I will say something on the position held by foreign
subjects in regard to the law of the country, as well as on the
disposition of the non-Mussulman population towards the Ottoman empire.
As a matter of fact, foreigners enjoy a most extraordinarily privileged
position in Turkey, and their privileges are known as 'capitulations.'
Every foreign colony forms a distinct _imperium in imperio_ more
markedly in Constantinople than in any other city of the Ottoman
empire. Every individual foreigner enjoys extra-territorial privileges,
such as in other countries could only be afforded to the diplomatic
representatives of Foreign Powers. Whatever crime a foreign subject may
commit, he is not amenable to the authority of the Ottoman Government
The capitulation privileges of the foreign subjects granted in bygone
centuries by the Ottoman rulers to European visitors, who were then
few in number, were in reality acts of hospitality. But they have been
abused in later times by those in whose favour they were granted. I
cannot here enter into the details of the capitulation privileges
which[5] fetter the hands of the Ottoman statesman, which create
insurmountable difficulties for the thorough enforcement of the laws,
and which seriously impede the adoption of progress and reforms.
There was at one time a real possibility of the Porte getting rid, at
least partially, of these capitulation privileges, which are really
not justified by international law, and some friendly Powers, notably
Great Britain, appeared well disposed to discuss the advisability of
making some modification in them. In fact, certain concessions were
made to the Porte in the carrying out of the sentences passed by it
on foreign criminals. These modifications could still be successfully
brought about if Turkey could earnestly set to work to reorganise the
administration of the country, and to introduce such practical reforms
as are necessitated by the actual requirements of the case, and then
appeal to the justice and equity of the Great Powers not to insist
upon exercising fully the capitulation privileges of their subjects.
It was some thirty years ago that the statesmen of the Sublime Porte
seriously meant to accomplish this great task. But with the beginning
of Abd-ul-Hamid's disastrous reign all the previous schemes of the
Porte were brought to naught This capricious Sultan began to rule
over an important empire, which required the most delicate handling,
in a manner which has never before been seen in the history of any
civilised or semi-civilised State, and which can only be paralleled
by the mode of governing of some wild tribal chieftain. He proceeded,
with a tyrant's zest, to crush the influence of Ottoman statesmen of
capability and integrity, and handed over the most important offices
of the State to ignorant fanatics and to cosmopolitan upstarts, whose
one claim to notice was their dishonourable behaviour. One of the
results of the present rule has been that foreign residents in Turkey
have naturally clung more firmly to their extra-territorial privileges,
and the old capitulation privileges have given rise to new privileges
which are by no means based upon the stipulations of the ancient
treaties. So one can now see in Constantinople the most amazing anomaly
of many centres of Government, all distinct from one another, and all
of them utterly unaffected by the sovereignty of the Porte. Thus the
independence of Turkey is quite fictitious nowadays, and Abd-ul-Hamid
can only satisfy his lust of tyranny by oppressing the section of his
subjects who can expect no outside protection or sympathy.
Throughout these pages I have consistently condemned the misrule
of the present Sultan. My feeling against his ways is the stronger
because I am sure that, in spite of the ascendancy gained by foreigners
in Turkey, she might yet assert and maintain an honest and sound
administration, in place of the miserable tyranny which oppresses her
now. But as it is, the Foreign Powers, taking advantage of the existing
misrule, not only fetter the hands of Turkish statesmen by persistently
demanding fresh extra-territorial privileges for their subjects, but
also take up, some of them, the cause of those Eastern Christians who
are under Ottoman rule, alleging that they are acting in the name of
'humanity.'
Their real motive, however, is that they may use them as a _point
d'appui_ for their political schemes and designs. Thus these subject
populations of Turkey, whose true racial characteristics have often
been made clear by Englishmen who have travelled in the Levant,
form a great internal danger to the integrity of the Ottoman empire.
The subject populations of Turkey are of course of various distinct
nationalities, such as Greeks, Armenians, Bulgarians, non-Mohammedan
Syrians, and so forth. Each of these large communities has its own
quarter, churches and denominational schools, national aspirations and
separatist ideas. Each community speaks its own language, each native
Christian community entertains, nowadays more or less without disguise,
sentiments of animosity towards the Osmanlis, and even sympathises
with the enemies of the Turkish empire in time of international
trouble or war. These sentiments of the Eastern Christians are known
to many politicians in this country, and they excuse these treasonable
sentiments of their 'Christian brethren' by maintaining that they are
the natural outcome of long years of oppression and persecution. This
apologetic contention is not based upon an intimate knowledge of the
real state of things in the nearer East, nor is it at all justifiable.
Of course, the Ottoman empire has long been suffering from intolerable
oppression, but its Christian inhabitants have not been the only
sufferers; on the other hand, many of them have allowed themselves
to be the cause of oppression, and have even acted as the right-hand
men of the oppressors. If there had ever been a serious persecution
particularly directed against the native Christians, there would not
now be many Armenians or Greeks left alive in Turkey. In past ages
they were entirely at the mercy of the Ottomans; there was no European
Power, and no Concert of Powers, strong enough to stop the conversion
or extermination of the non-Mussulman population of the Ottoman empire.
There could be no better proof of the tolerant policy of the Osmanlis
towards their subject populations than the actual existence at the
present day in that country of so many millions of native Christians of
all denominations. Moreover, not only have native Christians had their
existence assured to them, but also their freedom of conscience, which
is amply proved by the fact that their ecclesiastical constitutions,
their languages, and their national customs have been respected by
the Turks. But this liberal treatment has been abused by the subject
populations of Turkey. They have never done anything to show their
gratitude, and have never displayed any patriotism towards the Ottoman
empire. If they were to do so it might perhaps save Turkey from
internal dissensions, and from consequent strife, anarchy, and the ruin
which stares it in the face. The history of Turkey must have taught the
Russians wisdom, for they are careful to insist upon the Russification
of their conquered subject populations, and never risk grafting on to
their stem a shoot which may turn out to have thorns. The fact is that
tolerance towards subject populations of alien race and faith, as shown
by Mussulmans, excellent as it may appear to sentimental humanitarians,
is a sure way of imperilling the future independence of a nation.
Of all her non-Mussulman subjects Turkey has the greatest reason to be
anxious about the Armenians and their separatist movement. The ambition
of Armenian agitators is to form an independent State in an important
portion of Asia Minor, the backbone of the Ottoman empire. I therefore
wish to make a few remarks here on Armenian matters, in particular as,
though Armenian affairs may seem to be in the background at present,
political mischief makers will take up this plaything of theirs again
sooner or later.
As I pointed out in the last chapter, among forty-five students of the
faculty of law, thirteen were Armenians. Thirteen out of forty-five
is proportionately a large number, considering the small number of
Armenians relatively to other nationalities of the Ottoman empire. The
Armenians are admittedly very industrious people. They won good marks
in the entrance examination, and the authorities at the Ministry of
Public Instruction would not affix a limit of number, but admitted as
many as successfully passed the examination. I doubt, however, after
those agitations, if such impartiality has been shown towards the
members of that race in all Ottoman institutions. And if not it would
not be a matter for surprise when one considers how the Armenians have
conducted themselves towards the Empire and their Mussulman compatriots
for some time past.
Yes, people in this country heard much about the massacres. Doubtless
they were abominable, and doubtless many innocent persons were
slaughtered. But it is only common justice that one should try to find
out what were the reasons for attacking Armenians before one judges
and condemns those who did so. It is a fact that there was never such
an outburst of enmity to the Armenians before; if there had been,
there would not be over two millions living in the Ottoman empire now.
The Armenians are an adventurous race; they can go anywhere, settle
anywhere, and become subject to any State. Some years before the
troubles, many of the foreign subject Armenians came over to Turkey,
styling themselves Frenchmen, Englishmen and Americans, sometimes in
the shape of missionaries, sometimes as teachers. These adventurers,
together with the revolutionary Russian subject Armenians, who came
mostly from the Caucasus, began to stir up the people of their own
race all over Asiatic Turkey in favour of a national independence.
The younger generation of the Armenian people, becoming intoxicated
with great ideas and dreams of a national kingdom, overlooked the
impossibility of establishing any such thing in any particular part
of the Ottoman dominions, and did not realise that their people
formed a miserable minority everywhere. It has been maintained by
their political sympathisers in England that their agitations were
for the purpose of being better governed, and in no way a separatist
movement; but this is absurd, and was merely an after-thought. As
a matter of fact the Armenians gave loud expression to their new
aspirations of having an independent kingdom in Eastern Asia Minor.
We heard everywhere from them that the Christian Powers--above all,
Great Britain were going to hand over that portion of the 'decaying'
Ottoman empire to them, as they had handed over Ottoman territories
before to other Christian races of the East They were simply awaiting
the prophesied moment of the partition of Turkey to establish their
independence on their share of the divided territory. I myself heard
Armenians talking about who were to be the future rulers among their
own people. The Turks began to ask themselves such questions as, "Why
do these people revolt against us when we suffer from misrule much
more than they do, and when, moreover, the official misdeeds are
partly due to Armenian jacks-in-office?"[6] The agitation among the
Armenians grew worse and worse every day; the agitators resorted to
the same old method, namely, they tried to provoke the Turkish populace
to retaliate on its offenders, hoping that this would be represented
in Europe as an outburst of Mussulman fanaticism, and would induce
the Powers to intervene, and so hasten the partition. The Turks, or,
more widely speaking, the Mussulman population of Asiatic Turkey,
were gravely discussing what could be done to check this overbearing
and mischievous behaviour. Turkish women and children were exposed to
ill-treatment and insult throughout Asia Minor. The Turk's patience
is almost inexhaustible, but when you attack his women and children
his anger is roused, and nothing on earth can control it, and he saw
that the Government of the Sultan was utterly powerless to punish the
Armenian agitators and revolutionists of foreign nationality. Did
the humanitarian British public know these things? No; it does not
care to know anything which might be favourable to the Turks. Have
the political journals of this country mentioned the facts. I have
stated? Of course not, because--to speak plainly--they knew that in the
Armenian pie there were the fingers of some of their own politicians.
Shortly before the massacres, I heard many Turkish people, who had
lived side by side with the Armenians for centuries, saying that it
was a mistake to be angry with the Kurds for their treatment of the
Armenians in Eastern Asia Minor, and that it was the right thing to
crush these people. Then there came the dark days of those terrible
massacres. The Armenian revolutionists, who ultimately managed to go
abroad scot-free, gave great provocation by throwing dynamite bombs in
many places and killing women and children of the Mussulman population.
These people could no longer expect that the Government of the Sultan
would do anything to settle the agitation and prevent further mischief,
so at last they took the law into their own hands and put down the
Armenian movement in the manner we all know. The Sultan, who was eating
his heart out at his inability to punish the revolutionary Armenians
of foreign extraction, simply connived at the doings of the enraged
populace, if he did not actually instigate and encourage them; but,
unfortunately, by his connivance, it was mostly innocent Armenians who
perished at the hands of the mob, and only a very few of the guilty
ringleaders suffered.
Although the Armenians are hard-working and energetic, they will never
recover their former prosperity.
They have always had every opportunity of enriching themselves.
They had a firm footing and influential positions in the royal
establishments, which made them practically the trustees and paymasters
of the revenues of the empire. Their opportunities began with the
foundation of the Ottoman power in Asia Minor, which found them a
scattered remnant of a race, with their political existence already
stamped out by other conquerors, and which, though it did not restore
their freedom politically, at least assured to them the advantages of
individual prosperity, protection and toleration. As an instance of
what the Turks have been willing to do for the Armenians, I may quote
the religious difficulties early in the last century. It was at the
beginning of the missionary movement in Europe, and both Protestant and
Catholic missionaries poured into Turkey and set about proselytising
the Armenians, with more zeal than discretion. The Armenian Patriarch
appealed to the Turkish Government to expel these foreign missionaries
who were causing trouble in his community, and in response to his
appeal the Government at once put great restrictions upon the
missionaries, and this in spite of the fact that by so doing it ran
the risk of incurring European enmity. In mentioning this I do not
say anything against mission work; I merely instance the circumstance
to show the tolerance with which the Turks have always treated the
Armenians and their religion, and how untrue is the accusation brought
against them of systematic religious persecution.
However, I doubt if the Mussulman population will ever place the same
confidence in the Armenians again. We do not see now so many of those
flourishing Armenian Pashas in the high Government offices of Turkey
as we did before, though they are regaining some of their old hold in
Government circles. As a natural result of being out of favour, the
race will not probably find it so easy a matter to gain admission to
the educational institutions of the State.