994 to come to terms with England regarding the European lands of the "sick man. He was very frank, stating that he did not intend permanently to occupy Constantinople, protesting against allowing a group of small states to be formed, and urging the neutralization of the Straits. England refused to discuss the obsequies before the death of the patient, especially without consultation with Austria and France, and Russia soon sent a special commissioner to the Porte, asking for guarantees that the Holy Places in Palestine would be. respected and for the recognition of Russia's right of protectorate over the Christians in Turkey. The allies attempted to avert war, but their efforts failed and their bungled diplomacy actually forced war in which England, France and the Porte united against Russia. Austria remained outside, a sympathizer with the allies against Russia, because of her own fear of Russia's progress. To justify the war is a difficult matter. From almost every point of view England, who felt more concern than any other Power, might have secured more easily by other methods all that she gained by this war. Yet the question remains as to whether Russia would not have made herself the sole arbiter of southeast Europe had not the war been fought. " After two years of struggle, the contestants, with Austria and Prussia, met in Paris to draw up the terms of peace. In this peace, Russia received a definite repulse in southeastern Europe. The treaty provided for European recognition of Turkey in the Concert of Powers, made the protection of the Christian subjects of the Porte an international affair, neutralized the Black Sea, prohibited Russia from keeping any war vessels in it, and took from her the sole right to guard the interests of the Roumanian provinces. In addition to the Treaty of Paris, England, France and Austria jointly and severally agreed to make any infraction of the article a cause for war. The treaty gave a new lease of life to Turkey and forced the question of the Porte into the foreground, thus taking from Russia the opportunity to further her own ends under cover of other, seemingly plausible, designs. The Treaty of Paris remained in effect until 1870. During this year, Russia, with the support of Bismarck, sent a note to the Powers definitely repudiating the Black Sea clause of the treaty. Since The Czar of Russia coined the phrase "The Sick Man", in a communication to the English government. 5 Cf. the discussion in Marriott, The Eastern Question, pp. 236-7. none of the Powers were in a position effectively to question the matter, Russia was able to secure possession of the Black Sea." During the period from 1856 to 1876, Turkey failed miserably in her government of her European provinces, just when the national instincts of the people were making themselves felt. As a result there arose revolts and rebellions throughout Turkey. The Powers were forced to recognize the situation, and Russia, Austria, and Prussia drew up a demand for reform, then asked England to join in the presentation of the note. England refused, and the Turkish massacres continued until, late in 1876, aconference of the Powers agreed to and presented a demand for reform upon the Porte. The refusal of this demand and of a less drastic one presented later, made Russia declare war in 1877 on her own account. In this war, she was, after meeting some serious obstacles, entirely successful, and presented her terms of peace at San Stefano in March, 1878. This treaty gave Russia still more of Asiatic Turkey and in Europe allowed her a strip of territory lying near Roumania, which she was empowered forcibly to exchange with the latter state for Bessarabia, given up in 1856. In addition, Bulgaria was created, extending to the Aegean Sea, and was placed under the protectorate of Russia. This last event brought about the interference of the allied Powers, and a conference was held in Berlin in 1878 which reconstructed the treaty. By this conference, Roumania, Servia, and Montenegro were made independent, while Bulgaria lost the southern part of the territory mapped out at the Treaty of San Stefano (which left her about one half of the original territory), and was given only local autonomy. Again, Russia was deprived of her chance to secure a definite point of vantage in the Balkans. Her participation in the establishment of Bulgaria was soon forgotten by that state, and Russia's only satisfaction was the knowledge that she had practically annihilated the Turkish empire in Europe. There is a curious and interesting account of this struggle, which is in part quoted below, to show what was then the prevailing opinion of Russia's action throughout the course of the struggle. "No one can doubt that the invasion of the Ottoman Empire was the deliberate act and intention of Russia, that no other state desired it, and that but for her it would not have taken place. It was, therefore, on her part a direct and unprovoked violation and defiance of the most solemn treaty engagements existing in Europe "On England's demand, a new London conference was held, and Russia accepted an agreement setting forth in general terms that the consent of all the Powers was necessary to the abrogation of a treaty. treaties made, not with Turkey or for Turkey alone, but with all the Great Powers. No treaties could be more binding than those of 1856. Even the neutral states participated in them; and when they were partially repudiated by Russia in 1871, the principal clauses were reënacted, with her concurrence, under Mr. Gladstone's administration, with the addition of a strangely worded declaration 'that it is an essential principle of the law of nations that no Power can liberate itself from the engagements of a treaty, or modify the stipulations therof, unless with the consent of the contracting Powers by means of an amicable arrangement.' The Treaty of Paris, indeed, contrasts singularly with the terms now exacted from the Ottoman Empire, for Russia was not asked for a farthing of war expenses or any considerable cession of territory. The insolent violation of these solemn engagements and the open breach of the European concert in Eastern affairs which they were designed to establish, afford, therefore, a painful but effectual demonstration that no reliance can now be placed on such instruments and that they are broken with impunity." Here is to be detected the century-old hostility of Russia and Great Britain. Had Russia wished only for a warm water port, England might have had no fear, but Russian ambition was too patent and if she once secured control of the Eastern Mediterranean it would not be long until she would attempt to cut off English commerce with the East and open the contest for the control of India. This brief survey, perhaps, will have made it clear why Turkey The Situation in the Balkans since 1878. and the Balkan peninsula have never been allowed to live their own lives and why no solution of the Turkish question has ever been found. In the main, the Congress of Berlin in 1878 may be taken as the date which partly settled the problem for the earlier contestants and opened it the more seriously for those problems which have led directly to the world conflict in 1914. Thus, by 1878, all the Balkan states had been created and, with the exception of Bulgaria, had been given fairly their normal boundaries. The problems arising in the creation of these states were comparatively easy of settlement, for, since they were made at a date too early for the play of the full activities of either Austria or Germany, these earlier crises did not have the serious significance of those which have appeared since 1878. In this earlier period, the more important events gather about the independence of Greece, 1831-1832, the Crimean war, 1854-1856, 7 Edinburgh Review for 1878, Vol. 147, pp. 564-5. and the Treaty of San Stefano, 1877, which led to the settlement of the Congress of Berlin in the next year. Influence of Turkish rule in Europe fostered the growth of nationality among the Balkan peoples, for religion and national customs were left to influence the people as they might. It was, therefore, natural that this spirit should have received an impetus from the French Revolution and the settlement at Vienna in 1815. It was also natural that, within a generation after that settlement, the problem of nationality in the Balkans should produce anxiety among European diplomats. The Greek revolt against Turkish rule not only awakened the Russian dreams of Peter but was received in a frankly sympathetic spirit by the Russian people. Moreover, Europe, generally, was sympathetic. The Greeks had been a great people with a glorious past and they were oppressed by a ruler whose government was entirely foreign to European soil. The Greeks waged a courageous war and in 1827 the Great Powers met in London and demanded an armistice of the Sultan and a peaceful settlement of the question, recognizing the national aspiration of the Greeks. The demand was not complied with and Russia, in spite of the withdrawal of Great Britain, decided to force the independence of Greece. After a brief war the peace of Adrianople was signed in 1829, by which Turkey recognized Greek independence and gave to the Serbians local autonomy. In 1832, the organization of the new state was finally effected through an international conference held in London in 1830-1831. This conference fixed the boundaries of Greece and settled the form of government by suggesting Prince Otto of Bavaria as King with a responsible government. Thus the first great difficulty was overcome, without seriously compromising the position of any of the interested Powers. Russia had secured a possible influence in the outlying Turkish provinces of Moldavia and Wallachia, now Roumania, and had secured some territory in the Caucasus region in Asia. On the other hand, the war had materially strengthened Russia's influence in the Balkans because the peoples clearly recognized that Greek independence had been largely due to her initiative and persistence. It had also fired Russian ambition to go forward with her designs to force her way to a warm water port. The Crimean war was rather the result of Russian intrigue than, like the Greek war, of the national ambition of Balkan peoples or the misrule of the Turks. An occasion of war was found in a dispute over the Holy Places in Palestine. The Czar claimed the right The as head of the Greek Orthodox church, to protect the Greek Orthodox peoples of Turkey. A dispute between the Greek and Roman churches in Palestine giving the Czar a chance to interfere, he demanded the recognition of his right to supervise the Greek Christians throughout the Turkish Empire. Refusal led to the Crimean war, in which both Great Britain and France sided with the Turk because Russia refused to allow the European conference to settle the matter. As a result of the war, Russia was forced to give up her claim to the right of interference in the religious affairs of Turkey and to recognize the entire neutrality of the Black Sea. The Danube was at the same time neutralized and local autonomy was given to Moldavia and Wallachia which later became Roumania. No step was taken toward the solution of the Near East except that Russia was forced to recognize the authority of the European Concert to settle Turkish affairs instead of assuming that position for herself. of 1877. The next crisis, which came in 1877, was again the result of The Crisis Turkish atrocities and the national aspirations of the Bulgarian peoples. Russia refused to wait for the Powers, who did nothing but talk. War was declared and after a brief conflict the Turk was again forced to sue for peace, which was signed at San Stefano. This Treaty the Powers refused to recognize and Russia was forced to carry the matter to the Congress of Berlin for settlement. We have already noticed this settlement which created Bulgaria and brought Austria-Hungary directly into the Near East by giving her the administration of Bosnia-Herzogovina. Effect of Eastern The Congress of Berlin, as has been said, closes an epoch of the Eastern Question. It affected the union of all Europe against Russia and taught her the impossibility of destroying the Turk by direct attack. The Congress opens the new epoch also of the Eastern Question because it definitely led the ambitions of Austria toward the southeast by the gift of the Turkish provinces and the opening of the Danube to her commerce. The Congress also first attracted the attention of Germany both on Austria's account and for herself. Question. Here, then, is the opening of the Pan-Slavic, Pan-Germanic question. To both Russia and Austria the question was a vital one, for to each the success of the other meant the ruin of age-long plans and dreams. For a time, however, the question rested. Russia turned her attention eastward, as Bismarck hoped she would, and See Chapter 3 of Part II. |