ARMENIAN-TURKISH RELATIONS 1895-1908

2 IMPORTANT QUESTIONS! INTRA ARMENIAN IS ARF TO BE BLAMED FOR RELATIONS WITH THE CUP? (NATIONALISM PERVERTED?) HOW THE RELATIONSHIP WENT SOUR? PERIOD OF 1909-1914…

IMPORTANT!!! ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT WAS NEVER A SEPARATIST ONE ARMENIAN PARIES MANIFESTOS AND PROGRAMS NEVER MENTION INDEPENDENCE (EXPLAIN THE HUNCHAK’S CASE) ALL THAT WAS ADVOCATED WAS SOME SORT OF SELF RULE, NOT EVEN AUTONOMY OR FEDERATIVE GOVERNMENT EVEN WHEN REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA WAS FORMED IN 1918 ARMENIAN PARTIES WERE NOT READY FOR TOTAL INDEPENDENCE

1900-1910 3 REVOLUTIONS RUSSIAN 1905 PERSIAN 190 YOUNG TURK 1908 LEAST BLOODY OF THE 3 CONTINUATION OF MIDHAT PASHA’S CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM OF 1876

1878-1908 HAMIDIAN REGIME RUSSO-TURKISH WAR TREATY OF SAN STEFANO (ARTICLE 16) TREATY OF BERLIN (ARTICLE 61) ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT STARTS

SULTAN ABDUL HAMID II

1895 MAY REFORM PROJECT MASSACRES OF 1894 ARMENIAN ISSUE INTERNATIONALIZED INTERFERENCE OF EUROPEAN POWERS IN INTERNAL OTTOMAN AFFAIRS FIRST INTERACTION BETWEEN ARMENIAN REVOLUTIONARY SOCIETIES AND “YOUNG TURKS”

NEGOTISTIONS WITH ABDUL HAMID’S REPRESENTATIVES THROUGH THE OFFICES OF ARTIN DADIAN PASHA (FOREIGN MINISTER) WITH “DROSHAK” (TASHNAK) IN GENEVA NO TANGIBLE RESULTS BOTH SIDES WERE ADAMENT IN THEIR STANCES

ARTIN PASHA DADIAN

YOUNG TURK MOVEMENT 1890’S CONSIDERED A START REVOLUTIONARY CELLS IN IMPORTANT “UNIVERSITIES” PATRIATE SOCIETIES IN PARIS AND OTHER EUROPEAN CAPITALS

MIZANCI MURAT BEY AND “MIZAN”…THE “PALACE COUP” THEORIST

MIZANCI MURAT’S DECLARATION In Mizan O our Armenian Compatriots! O the committees of [the] nation [within the fatherland] and abroad! We are addressing this invitation to you on behalf of the Ottoman Committee of Union and Progress. Let us devote our efforts to the future by forgetting the past. Let us unite to rescue the fatherland from the calamity to which it is being subjected.

AHMED RIZA AND “MESHVERET”

RIZA Riza met with the ARF and the British (Anglo-Armenian Committee, and Friends of Armenia) in London. His positivist ideas, which did not include revolutionary tactics, and his centrist stance, which did not include a future federative form of government in the Ottoman Empire, were insurmountable obstacles for cooperation with Armenians. Consequently, the latter refused to recognize Ahmed Riza as the leader of the Young Turk movement in Europe.

DAMAD MEHMUT CELALETTIN PASHA

PRINCE SABAHETTIN

DAMAD MEHMUT PASHA-ARF MEETING IN EGYPT IN 1901 THIS COMES FROM THE ARF ARCHIVES: The report of the interview consisted of 29 handwritten pages in the ARF archives. Damad Mahmud Pasha confideD in the Armenian delegates and asked for secrecy regarding his revelation

CONTINUATION 1-Did not want a federative form of government, because that is very harmful for Turkey. It refuted the union of the country. The issue is the sultan. Who says that a new sultan would act [as Hamid] toward Armenians? Take for example the imprisoned Sultan Murad [V] or his son, who I think will act totally differently with you. And don’t think that since he is imprisoned he does not know what is happening in the country.

CONTINUATION 2-Armenia already knew what enemies planned and did not believe that there were any guarantees that Russian influence would not increase? 3-The constitution already was published and activated in 1876-77 however the federative system was totally against it since it could lead the country to a civil war.

CONTINUATION 4-Midhat Pasha’s constitution was ratified 25 years ago; therefore it is necessary to update 5-In Islam, the Caliph is elected by the people and must rule with the people’s consent. Much as was the case of the Russian Tsar, or the British Queen. 6-The comrades were found among the Turkish émigrés in Europe, which was discouraging.

CONTINUATION 7-Other nationalities were not involved because the pasha was familiar with the Armenians. On the other hand the pasha did not trust the Macedonians or Bulgarians. 8 -Secrecy was to be maintained since a leak would have caused Hamish prosecution of Armenians 9 -The defective coup d’etat of 1896 was the result of the lack of European intervention on the side of the reformers. A future coup could only succeed through European and especially British intervention.

1902 ANTI SULTAN CONGRESS IN PARIS

ARMENIAN PARTICIPATION IN THE 1902 PARIS CONGRESS HNCHAKS DIDN’T PARTICIPATE ARF PARTICIPATED DELIGATIO HEADED BY AVEDIS AHARONIAN ALSO SOME ARMENIAN INTELLECTUALS MINAS CHERAZ GARABET BASMAJIAN IMRO WAS NOT INVITED ARF HAD PROBLEM WITH THIS

RESOLUTIONS OF THE 1902 PARIS CONGRESS 1. Existence and the enthronement of the Ottoman Royal House and the obligation of obedience and loyalty to this dynasty of illustrious name within the orders legitimately vested. 2. Exalting of the religion of Islam along with [its] civilization and the protection of other religions. 3. Granting of Muslim and non-Muslim Ottoman subjects an equal share in the material and moral benefits by trying to unite them politically. 4. Acceptance of the Constitution that had been proclaimed in the year 1293 [1876] as grounds for unity and a guiding principle in the administration of domestic and foreign policies.

ARMENIAN-MACEDONIAN RELATIONS MAINLY WITH IMRO THROUGH GIORCHE PETROV SVETOSLAV MERDZHANOV WAS TO BECOME THE MAIN LIASON WITH THE ARF SULTAN HAMIDS ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT PREPARED IN SOFIA (BULGARIAN CONNECTION)

PAN TURKISM IN THE CUP AFTER 1902 CONGRESS DIVIDED AMONG MIDHATISTS (AHMED RIZA) AND REPUBLICANS (PRINCE SABAHETTIN) SABAHETTIN’S FACTIONS STARTS LOOSING GROUND AND RIZA’S FACTION STARTS TO RISE YUSUF AKCHURA JOINS RIZA ARMENIUS VAMBERI…

BEHAETTIN SHAKIR

BEHAEDDIN SHAKIR’S MANAGERIAL ABILITIES JOIN ALL FACTIONS (IMRO AS A MODEL) INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL BODIES INTERNAL IN SALONIKA EXTERNAL IN PARIS AN OPPORTUNIST WHO WANTED THE LEADERSHIP OF THE MOVEMENT AND GOT IT “BY ANY MEANS POSSIBLE”…

1906 AND THE BIRTH OF THE CUP IN PARIS

ARF 4th GENERAL CONGRESS VIENNA, 1907 RUPTURE WITH SABAHEDDIN AND JOINING FORCES WITH BEHAEDDIN SHAKIR AND THE CUP THUS WAY WAS PAVED FOR 1908 COUPE IT WAS THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATION (SALONIKA) THAT LED THE WAY EXTERNAL ORGANIZATION AGITATED FROM OUTSIDE