 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
| Anglo-Turkish War (1918–1923) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part of the Turkish War of Independence | |||||||||
 Turkish forces enter Constantinople under the command of Şükrü Naili Pasha | |||||||||
| |||||||||
| Belligerents | |||||||||
 Turkish National Movement
Supported by:
|
Rebellions supported by the British: | ||||||||
| Commanders and leaders | |||||||||
Mustafa Kemal Pasha Ali Fuat Pasha Şefik Özdemir Bey.svg){kind=small} Sheikh Mahmud Barzanji Mahmut Bey |
 David Lloyd George Charles Harrington George Milne Faisal ibn Hussein Major Noel | ||||||||
| Strength | |||||||||
|
28,000 soldiers in Constantinople Al-Jazira Front: Remmants of the 13th army corps (initially) 6,700 (creation of the regular army, December 1920) ~10,000 (1922) |
27,419 in Constantinople
Total in Constantinople: ~38,000 30,000–40,000 in Anatolia 20,000–30,000 (initially) | ||||||||
| Turkish War of Independence | |
|---|---|
|
During the Turkish War of Independence the United Kingdom sought to undermine and contain the Turkish National Movement. London hoped the defeated Ottoman Empire would play a subservient role in its new Middle Eastern order drawn up over several diplomatic agreements during World War I, culminating with the Treaty of Sèvres. Another goal of the British was to prosecute Ottoman war criminals, whom they believed Constantinople/Istanbul was not taking seriously.
In addition to diplomatic initiatives against the Istanbul and the Ankara governments, British Empire forces directly fought the Nationalist Forces on the Al Jazira front and in scattered actions among Anatolian occupation garrisons. With military force proving ineffective, and not wanting to commit to a potential new war, Britain provided instrumental support for Greece in the Greco-Turkish War and to the Istanbul government. In the end of the conflict, the United Kingdom almost formally declared war against the Ankara government during the Chanak Crisis, and its conclusion lead to the Allies abandoning Constantinople to Ankara forces, and fall of the David Lloyd George cabinet.
De-facto occupation of Constantinople
The de-facto occupation of Constantinople commenced on 13 November 1918. On 7 November, under the pretext of clearing mines, the Allies' navy passed through the Dardanelles and reached the city. The Allies' navy, consisting of 61 warships, anchored in front of the capital. With the addition of 11 warships and a Greek battleship, the number of ships anchored in front of Constantinople increased to 73. 3626 soldiers, mostly British from the Allied Fleet, landed. They were stationed in various official and unofficial buildings in Constantinople. Beyoğlu/Pera and the Rumelian coast were left under the control of the British, the Fatih district under the control of the French, and the Anatolian coast under the control of the Italians. Occupation Commander Maitland Wilson established a headquarters with a ceremony at the British Girls' High School in Beyoğlu. The number of ships anchored in front of Constantinople increased to 167 by 15 November.
Politics in Constantinople
The National Pact and the start of the occupation
Ali Rıza Pasha was appointed Grand Vizier on 3 October 1919 following the resignation of Damat Ferit Pasha. The nationalist tendencies of some members of this cabinet were known to the Allied representatives in Constantinople. Chief among these members was the Minister of War, Mersinli Cemal Pasha. Cemal Pasha was quick to enter into a conflict over the Allies' military control in Anatolia, in accordance with the Armistice of Mudros.
As soon as Rıza's cabinet was established, he announced elections to be held for the Chamber of Deputies. Following the elections, the Chamber of Deputies held its first meeting on 12 January 1920, which was dominated by nationalist deputies loyal to Mustafa Kemal Pasha (Atatürk). Parliament secretly passed the National Pact (Misak-ı Millî) on January 28 which became a political manifesto for the Turkish Nationalists. The Turkish Nationalists challenged the allies, and more importantly, at a time when the Allies were preparing peace terms, the Turks themselves were determining the peace terms they would accept. Moreover, Sultan Mehmed VI was far from being in control of all these events.
The National Pact was declared to the public on 17 February 1920, which angered the Allies. They pressed the Ottoman government for the declaration to be reversed. Failure to revoke the decision resulted in the British raiding of the Şehzadebaşı barracks. The British high commissioner announced that would fully occupy Constantinople at 10 A.M. According to the W. S. Edmons, the only true way to punish Turks was "invading Constantinople fully".
Under full occupation
Until September 1922, no serious events occurred in Constantinople. But in Constantinople, some Turkish secret services was founded like "M. M. Grubu" (M. M. Organization). The British also learned of the Karakol group.
Before the Battle of the Sakarya, the position of Turkish army was not good. All the supplies that the Ankara army needed were stored in depots in Constantinople, which were now guarded by Allied soldiers. The secret organizations which were founded by Turkish nationalists raided those depots and brought those materials to the Ankara government.
The Chanak Crisis
Main article: Chanak CrisisAfter the Great Offensive, the Turkish army advanced on the Dardanelles. The British Councils of Ministers met on 15 September 1922 and said that British soldiers must defend their positions. The next day, in the absence of Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon, some cabinet ministers threatened Turkey with a declaration of war by Britain and its dominions, on the grounds that Turkey had violated the Treaty of Sèvres. Curzon, who returned to his country after discussing this issue in France on 18 September, was recalled by French Prime Minister Raymond Poincaré. Poincaré informed Curzon, who came to France again on 20 September, that the French troops in Chanak had started to withdraw immediately and harshly rebuked him for a ceasefire.
The British people did not want to go to war with the Turks again in the Dardanelles. The Dominions announced that they would not send any forces after Prime Minister David Lloyd George did not consult on the issue. Canadian Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King announced that the situation was different from World War I, which broke out 8 years ago, and that the Canadian Parliament had to decide in order to send troops.
The UK Council of Ministers, meeting on 23 September, decided to leave Constantinople and Eastern Thrace to Turkey. Thereupon, the Commander-in-Chief of the Turkish Armies, Mustafa Kemal Pasha, ordered the army to stop. He offered to negotiate in Mudanya for ceasefire talks. The parties met in Mudanya on October 3. On October 11, the terms of the ceasefire were accepted by the United Kingdom with a 2-hour delay after the British received reinforcements. The Ankara Government was convinced that this reinforcement would not cause any resistance.
The Conservative Party left the government with the Carlton Club meeting on 19 October 1922, and declared that it would enter the next elections separately from the Liberal Party. Thus Lloyd George was left without significant support. Additionally, Lord Curzon announced that he was withdrawing his support from Lloyd George. Lloyd George subsequently resigned as prime minister, never to return as a key figure in British politics.
Al Jazira front
While the Turkish War of Independence was continuing in Anatolia, Mustafa Kemal expressed interest in the Al Jazira front (Turkish: El Cezire Cephesi), also known as the Mosul front. The most important example of this is undoubtedly the appointment of Cevat (Çobanlı) Pasha to the Al Jazira Front. It is obvious that Cevat Pasha, who served on the Mesopotamian Front in World War I, was appointed to the position because he knew the region well. Cevat immediately went to Diyarbakır to set up a headquarters. In the following dates, Özdemir Bey and many Turkish officers were sent to Revandiz (Rawandiz) by Mustafa Kemal to manage the ongoing resistance in the region.
With Sulaymaniyah erupting in revolt on 26 May 1919, four days before the Battle of Ayvalık, it is there that the Turkish resistance first began and where resistance last ended. The Al Jazira front was the longest-lasting front of the Turkish War of Independence.
Mahmud Barzanji's revolt of May–June 1919
On 23 May 1919 Mahmud Barzanji, a Kurdish Sheikh, revolted against British forces with 300 men. During the first stages of the rebellion, Barzanji had some success. Sheikh Mahmut was previously appointed by Halil Kut Pasha to manage of Suleymaniye, an Ottoman sanjak.
Mustafa Kemal and Barzanji were in correspondence during this time. This resistance, which started in Sulaymaniyah, took Kemal Pasha's attention. After the Erzurum Congress, Kemal congratulated Sheikh Mahmut, who was carrying out military activities in the region, but his message could not reach him. Mahmud and his men were ambushed and captured by the British in the Bazyan pass between Sulaymaniyah and Kirkuk.
The British, who were worried that Mosul would be completely occupied by the Turks after the Battle of Derbent, brought Sheikh Mahmut back to Sulaymaniyah and officially established the Kingdom of Kurdistan as a British mandate on 10 October 1922. Thus, the British wished to prevent Mosul and its surroundings from being connected to Turkey and wished to maintain their economic interests in the region. However, the Sheikh again revolted, being a thorn in the British side until 1924, when the kingdom was forcibly dissolved, and the region eventually ended up under Mandatory Iraq.
Tal Afar Uprising (1920)
Main article: Tal Afar uprisingWith the capture of Sheikh Mahmud and his exile to Kuwait, the first period of the Kuva-yi Milliye movement in Sulaymaniyah in 1919 ended. After this, resistance efforts shifted to Mosul. Various organizations, especially the Cemiyet-i Hilaliye were established there, which gained support of Arabs opposed to British occupation. Many uprisings flared up in 1920, but the most important of these is the Tal Afar Uprising which took place in late June. Due the leaderships' ties with Ankara government, this rebellion and the following ones were known as the "Hareketü'l-Kemaliye" (Movement of Kemal).
Tel Afar was captured by a group of Iraqi Turkmen rebels led by Lieutenant Colonel Cemil Muhammed Halil Efendi. With the delay in the reinforcements coming from Anatolia, a forward operation to retake Mosul remained inconclusive. Learning about the situation, British troops entered Tal Afar with the support of the RAF Iraq Command and recaptured the town, putting an end to the rebellion.
Revandiz Rebellion
After what happened in Tal Afar, the resistance continued in Revandiz. On 1 May 1920, Mustafa Kemal Pasha drew attention to the National Pact and the importance of Mosul in a speech before the Grand National Assembly. According to him Turkey's national borders started from the south of Iskenderun and extended towards the east, including Mosul, Sulaymaniyah and Kirkuk. The British were concerned that Mustafa Kemal Pasha would target Mosul after defeating the Greeks. Tribes in the Revandiz region asked for help from the Ankara government for their rebellion against the British, and Ankara sent a company of three officers and 100 privates to Mosul; On 9 August 1921, Major Şevki Bey was appointed as the commander of Sulaymaniyah. This force was ordered to avoid conflict with the British unless necessary. Despite this order, the company united with the forces of Revandiz Turkmen and raided the British whenever the opportunity arose; To the British who attacked Revandiz with a large force with air support on 16 December 1921; Babaçiçek suffered great losses in the strait.
The Özdemir expedition
.jpg)
As the attacks by the British against Erbil and Revandiz increased in January 1922, Mustafa Kemal Pasha ordered a militia unit to be sent to Mosul. The General Staff focused on the appointment of a commander who knew the local terrain, tribal relations, traditions, and banditry, and appointed Militia Lieutenant Colonel Şefik Özdemir Bey, who was the commander of the National Forces in Antep, to this position. Mustafa Kemal as Speaker of the Ankara government, delivered a personal instruction to Özdemir, ordering him to undertake the mission as a private individual for the sake of legal fiction.
Özdemir Bey was a capable officer, and organized a successful insurgency in the Mosul region. Departing from Ankara to Revandiz with a skeleton staff, he hoped to fill his ranks with Turkmen and other tribes loyal to the Turkish administration in the region, and from Tunisian and Algerian soldiers who escaped from the French army in Nizip that took refuge with the Turks. Özdemir arrived in Diyarbakır on 22 April where he met with Al Jazira Front commander Cevat Pasha. After some financial problems were resolved, an instruction was given regarding the operation to be carried out by Özdemir Bey. Wherever he went, Özdemir immediately organized on behalf of the Ankara government and reestablished order where government wasn't functioning before. The detachment reached Revandiz on 22 June 1922, after an arduous journey. The detachment entered the town amidst the enthusiastic welcome of the people, festivities were held, the tribes around came to the city and greeted Özdemir and the detachment; Sacrifices were made and prayers were said. Özdemir immediately established an organization in the region and acted in line with the general wishes of the people. The Revandizians, who had been without a functioning government for a long time, were delighted with Özdemir as the representative of Mustafa Kemal Pasha, affectionately called him Özdemir Pasha.
Özdemir Bey expanded his organization day by day in the region. It went beyond Northern Iraq and into the Lahican region in the south of Rumiye Lake. Defense of Law Associations founded by Turkmens also emerged from behind the scenes and began to conduct their activities in the open. After taking control in Revandiz, Özdemir Bey tried to increase his influence noticeably in centers such as Kirkuk, Sulaymaniyah, Akra, and Mosul. In addition to providing a communication network with the telegraph line drawn from Revandiz to Diyarbakır, control was gained in the Akra, Ranya, Erbil and Köysancak regions, making great use of the power of the tribes in the region. Seeing that Turkish influence was increasing, the British attacked Revandiz with 12 planes on 10 July 1922, but they were unsuccessful. Özdemir's troops, who completed their supplies in the region, attacked the British on 31 August 1922. Özdemir Bey's platoon won the Battle of Derbent despite British air superiority, shooting down four British planes and capturing six machine guns, two cannons, and many supplies, in exchange for fourteen killed.
The Mosul operation
On 7 September 1922 Chief of General Staff Fevzi Pasha (Çakmak) ordered that Mosul be taken by arms if necessary. The Al Jazira Front was to attack with all its strength from both sides of the Tigris towards Mosul. The Eastern Front would be tasked with attacking Mosul-Kirkuk via the Imadiye and Suleymaniye line. Fevzi and Kâzım Pasha were assembling a force consisting of an infantry division reinforced by mountain batteries made up of Van, Hakkari and Iğdır border units, a cavalry brigade, cavalry consisting of tribes, and an aircraft squadron consisting of fast reconnaissance and war planes. Meanwhile, in the telegram sent from Özdemir to the Al Jazira Front Command on 6 November 1922, it was proposed that after the reinforcements reached Revandiz, they would take Zakho, and then one branch would descend on Dohuk from the south, while the other branch would march on Imadiye. Within the framework of the answers received, Özdemir was ordered to complete the necessary preparations for the Al Jazira Front by 10 November 1922.
The British started bombing Köysancak, İmadiye and Dinart from the air on 17 October 1922. The issue that attracted the most attention among the efforts of the Turkish General Staff of the Al Jazira front was reinforcing aircraft divisions.
Conclusion
While these developments were taking place, the Lausanne Conference was under way. The Mosul Question proved to be the most contentious issue of the conference. In his statements in the Grand National Assembly on 2 January and 30 January 1923, Mustafa Kemal Pasha stated that the province of Mosul was within the national borders of the Turkish state; He stated that it would not be possible to tear these places away from the motherland and give them as gifts to others. Judging by the news coming from Lausanne, there was a possibility that the conference would collapse, whereupon the Mosul operation would commence. Kemal's statements about Mosul and his request for a plebiscite mobilized the locals against the British. The British aircraft fleet bombarded cities, tribal areas, their herds and cultivated areas; angering the locals of the region. British air attacks continued intermittently until February and March 1923. With negotiations in Lausanne going otherwise well, Turkish government requested the planned military operation against Mosul be shelved, where it was hoped the city could be retaken through diplomatically later.
Özdemir and his organization were caught off-guard when news reached them. The movement in Revandiz and its surroundings suddenly took a different shape and color. In his report sent to the front command on 5 April 1923, Özdemir Bey asked for a ceasefire to be signed with the British so that at least the Revandiz region would remain under Turkish control; He stated that he did not find the diplomatic movement initiated appropriate in this situation. While the Lausanne negotiations were continuing, British-Iraqi troops in Mosul took forward action again in two directions on 8 April 1923, one towards the Devil's Strait via the Hodran River and the other towards Serderya from the Great Zap River Valley. The British were inflicted casualties with the raids carried out by Özdemir Bey's detachment on the night of 11/12 April. On the night of 20/21 April, the battle between Özdemir Bey's detachment and the British became even more intense; Unable to hold their own against the British, the detachment decided to withdraw to Iranian territory on 23 April 1923. Özdemir Bey's detachment crossed the steep mountains and reached the town of Ushnu in Iran with its weapons on 29 April 1923. Özdemir Bey asked for his asylum to be accepted in the letter he sent to Yusuf Han, the Iranian military officer in the Savcıbulak area. Özdemir Bey and his platoon entered Turkey from Van's Bahçesaray district on 10 May 1923. The military operation, which was initiated to achieve the National Pact goals, did not yield the expected results due to the lack of necessary support.
Actions against British troops in Anatolia
Black Sea Region
Main article: Samsun Clashes (1920)On 9 March 1919, when 15th Division Commander Mustafa Asım Bey and Samsun Governor İbrahim Ethem Bey declared martial law in the city, the city was occupied by a 200-man British military detachment, citing the terms of the Armistice of Mudros. Some of the 150-person Australian and New Zealand Corps forces that arrived later settled in the barracks and some settled in the Samsun Sultani building. Şefik Avni Pasha, who came to Samsun on 7 May 1920, assumed the command of the 15th Division and the division was rearmed with the help of the Grand National Assembly. Under pressure by the 15th Division, British and French troops had to withdraw.
Eskişehir
British forces occupied Eskişehir Station on 23 January 1919, to inspect the railway line after World War I. Kuva-yi Milliye forces led by Ali Fuat Pasha (Cebesoy) ended the occupation on 20 March 1920.
Anglo-Turkish belligerency outside the battlefield
British diplomatic actions against the Turks
Greece
During the Greco-Turkish war, British government supported Greece against the Turks diplomatically and financially. During the Paris Peace Conference, Eleftherios Venizelos made territorial demands from Anatolia at the conference. He used the power of propaganda, his oratory skills, and ethnographic maps (some less than reliable) to justify his demands. Venizelos were supported by British Prime Minister David Lloyd George, despite the objections of some British statesmen and military administrators. According to Lloyd George, for geopolitical reasons, England had to support Greece to fill the power vacuum that would arise in the Eastern Mediterranean with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the First World War. As a result of Lloyd George's support, the Supreme Council at the Paris Conference allowed Greece to invade Western Anatolia on May 6.
The British and French government promised to send the Greeks 850,000,000 Golden Frank, but with King Constantine's ascension in Greece and heavily losses in Cilicia, the French stopped supporting Greece shortly after the Battle of Kütahya-Eskişehir. The British government were also uneasy about the fall of Venizelos, which came with Constantine's elevation. In return for not liquidating some Venizelist officers, the British continued supporting Greece and its campaign into Inner Anatolia.
The British government supplied Greeks with Airco DH.9s, Sopwith Camel F.1s, and Gotha WD.13 seaplanes. Most of the Greek operations (Greek Summer Offensive, Second Battle of İnönü etc.) were carried out by British permission and support. On 17 February 1920, Lord Curzon wrote to Admiral John de Robeck that he had "given the necessary order for the Greek army to attack the Turks." In Toynbee's words, the Greeks were equipped with never-used weapons given by the British and French. The amount of British aid to Greece between 1914 and 1920 exceeded 16 million pounds. As there were no cannon or rifle factories in Greece, most of the weapons and ammunition used by the Greek army were supplied from English arms corporations. Before the Battle of Sakarya, the Bank of England opened a short-term credit to Greece. The British supplied the Greek army with 6 inch Howitzers in Second Battle of İnönü. The British Empire also supported Greeks with winter equipment.
Ottoman Empire/Kuva-yi Inzibatiye
During the Battle of Geyve (15–17 May 1920), Britain supported the creation of the Caliphate army, led by Ahmet Anzavur, against Turkish Kuva-yi Milliye which led by Ali Fuat Pasha. According to the Philip Jowett, the British supported the Caliphate Army with uniforms and guns.
Turkish diplomatic actions against the British Empire
Turkish–Armenian War
According to the Armistice of Mudros, the Ottoman Caucasian had to demobilize. The British supported the newly declared Armenian Republic in their military campaign to take Armenian-majority cities in the Ottoman Empire. 40,000 rifles were sent to the Armenian army.
According to the Treaty of Sèvres which the Ankara government did not recognize, the Armenians were awarded Kars, Ardahan, and Muş. The Turks launched a campaign against Armenia between 24 September and 2 December, which concluded with the Treaty of Alexandropol. According to the treaty, the Armenians had to hand over their arms and munitions, including the 40,000 British rifles. Mustafa Kemal Pasha wrote a gloating letter to Lloyd George, thanking him for the rifles.
Treaty of Moscow
The Ankara government were dealing with Armenians at east, French and French-backed Armenian legion in the south, Greeks in west, Pontic rebels in north, British in Southeastern Anatolia as well as uprisings instigated by Istanbul government. The Russian Bolsheviks were similarly fighting Allied interventions and uprisings across the former Russian Empire. As they were fighting common enemies, Ankara and Moscow reproached each other following the First Battle of İnönü. The Bolsheviks and Turkish Nationalists signed Treaty of Moscow. According to the treaty, the Bolsheviks supplied 10,000,000 Rubles and arms to Ankara for 800 tons of grain and diplomatic recognition. Thus, these two states supported each other against the British.
Afghanistan
The Turkish delegation in Moscow also encountered an Afghan delegation with a similar mission. The two states signed a defensive alliance and mutual assistance treaty against the British, which had just concluded a war with Afghanistan while supporting the Greeks in their war against the Turks.
Turkish and British propaganda campaigns
During the Turkish War of Independence, both British and Turks done propaganda against each other.
British propaganda against the Turks
The Turkish Nationalist–İttihadist conspiracy
According to Doğan Avcıoğlu, a central tension between the United Kingdom and the Ottoman Empire was Pan-Islamism and the Caliphate. The Turks declared a holy war in their jihad against the UK, and they launched a "crusade" against the Turks. British propaganda both during the First World War and after the Armistice of Mudros, primarily targeted the Committee of Union and Progress cadres, and described them as the enemy. The greatest support to Britain came from Damat Ferit Pasha, the Freedom and Accord Party, and elements in the Istanbul government.
At the end of the war, the Allies wanted to capture the leaders of the CUP to try them as war criminals for the Armenian genocide. In the first days of the occupation of Constantinople, some members of the CUP started an anti-British propaganda. British documents during the Turkish War of Independence conflated Bolshevism and İttihadism (Unionism). In an attempt to discredit the Turkish National Movement, British propaganda accused them as a new iteration of the CUP, a sentiment shared by the anti-Unionists.
 | This section may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. You can assist by editing it. (July 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
The British also accused the Turkish nationalists of being Bolsheviks. With this propaganda, the United Kingdom aimed to both remind Europe of the Bolshevik danger and to bolster support for their Turkish allies. This didn't stop Turkish nationalists from using Socialist geopolitical outlooks. According to an article without signatures in Hakimiyet-i Milliye, communism represented a war against the British Empire and their global hegemony. The world was divided into two great forces, represented on one side by oppressed nations and on the other side by capitalist nations such as Britain. The Russians were included in the category of oppressed nations.
The Turkish Nationalist–Bolshevism conspiracy
| This section may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. You can assist by editing it. (July 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Mustafa Kemal Pasha, in a 14 August 1920 speech to parliament, stated that he took into account the victimized classes of people, stating, "Our nation, as a whole, is the victim and the oppressed." In some reports in the British National Archives, military intelligence personally testified about the accuracy of this accusation. Units about this topic were reported to London. In the report of the British Military Intelligence Directorate dated 19–20 February 1920:
Bolshevism of Turkish politicians is a national danger. There is ample evidence to show that they understood that the successes of the Bolsheviks were mentioned in Turkish propaganda (…) by Great Britain. It is clear that this was done to emphasize that he was defeated. In this way, Turkish Pan-Islamists can hope to find additional material for anti-allied propaganda.
Turkish propaganda against the British
"The Caliph is Captured" narrative
American journalist Clarence K. Streit, who came to Ankara during the War of Independence and interviewed Mustafa Kemal Pasha, says that he did not see any effort to incite religious bigotry in Ankara's propaganda. Streit said that the only issue in which religious sentiment was invoked was to remind the villagers that "the Caliph is a prisoner in British hands and must be rescued as soon as possible".
"The Real Enemy of Our Struggle is the British" narrative
One of the important topics of the Ankara government's propaganda was to instill the idea of 'England as the Real Enemy' into society. This was an easy task, because, there was already anti-British sentiment because of the First World War. Since the day of the arrival of the Allied Navy to Constantinople, this reaction gradually increased. Sunata explains one of the reasons for this in his memoirs by saying that among the victorious states that occupied Istanbul, the British showed the most "hostility" towards the Turks.
Notes
- For further information, see United States during the Turkish War of Independence.
- The Mosul question couldn't solved in Lausanne, the problem continues until 1926.
- Irregular forces are not included.
References
- Güztoklusu 2008, p. 25
- Jewalich, Barbara. History of the Balkans-Twentieth Century, p. 131
- Archived, Camil Hasanlı.
- Atatürk, Nerimanov ve Kurtuluş Savaşımız- Hüseyin Adıgüzel
- Andican, A. Ahat (2007). Turkestan Struggle Abroad From Jadidism to Independence. SOTA Publications. p. 78–81. ISBN 908-0-740-365.
- Özbekistan'dan Gelen Bir Haber, 8 April 2017.
- Mustafa Kemal Paşa-Kont Sforza Görüşmesi, 19 January 2019.
- Sforza, Diario, November 28, 1920, page 61
- David Lloyd George, The Truth about the Peace Treaties, v. 2 (Gollancz, London: 1938), page 1348-1349
- Michael Smith, Ionian Vision: Greece in Asia Minor, 1919–1922, University of Michigan Press, 1999.
- Gingeras, Ryan (2022). The Last Days of the Ottoman Empire. Dublin: Random House. ISBN 978-0-241-44432-0
- Allies occupy Constantinople seize ministries Turkish and British..., 1920/03/18.
- ^ Güztoklusu 2008, pp. 120–125
- ^ Sarısakal, Baki (2002), Bir Kentin Tarihi: Samsun, Samsun: Samsun Valiliği İl Kültür Müdürlüğü Yayınları, p. 27
- ^ Western Society for French History. Meeting: Proceedings of the ... Annual Meeting of the Western Society for French History, New Mexico State University Press, 1996, page 206 Archived 9 June 2022 at the Wayback Machine.
- Meydan, Sinan. Cumhuriyet Tarihi Yalanları
- New York Times, Smyrna is taken away from Turkey, 17 May 1919
- Cevizoğlu, Hulki (2007). 1919'un Şifresi (Gizli ABD İşgalinin Belge ve Fotoğrafları). Ceviz Kabuğu Yayınları. pp. 66, 77. ISBN 9789756613238.
- Yalçın, Soner (19 March 2014). "ABD "Türkiye'nin paylaşılması"nda nasıl rol almıştı?". Odatv. Retrieved June 18, 2024.
- Türk İstiklal Harbi Serisi, 6th Volume, “İstiklal Harbinde Ayaklanmalar”, p. 126
- Kenan ESENGİN; “Millî Mücadelede Ayaklanmalar, pp.175–189,Kum Saati Yayınları, 2006
- M. Şevki YAZMAN, "Anadolu'nun İşgali", pp.83–84,Kum Saati Yayınları, 2006, Istanbul
- A. Nedim ÇAKMAK; “İşgal Günlerinde İşbirlikçiler Hüsnüyadis Hortladı”, s.54–55, Kum Saati Yayınları, 2006, İstanbul.
- The Forgotten Peace Treaty of World War One, July 24, 2023
- Türk-İngiliz Savaşı "From June 1922 to the end of September 1922, there were serious clashes in Mosul between the troops under the command of Özdemir Bey, personally appointed by Atatürk, and the British. On 31 August 1922, the Revandiz Detachment won the Derbent Victory against the British.", 4 May 2020.
- ^ Cebesoy, Milli Mücadele Hatıraları, pp. 357-358: "The second Eskişehir operation lasted a week... The British troops could not stand the violence and certainty of the national operation and retreated in haste. They lost very little in terms of people but a lot in terms of goods."
- Ercivan, Ahmet (March 1, 2022). "Operation Revanduz and Mr. Ali Şefik (Özdemir)". Tarih ve Gelecek Dergisi. Bolu: DergiPark. Retrieved June 11, 2024.
- ^ "Türk İstiklal Harbi Güney cephesi", Türk İstiklal Harbi Serisi, p. 43, Genelkurmay ATASE başkanlığı
- Genelkurmay Başkanlığı, Türk İstiklal Harbinde Batı Cephesi, C.II, 2. Kısım, Ankara 1999, page 225
- Celâl Erikan, Rıdvan Akın: Kurtuluş Savaşı tarihi, Türkiye İş̧ Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2008, ISBN 9944884472, sayfa 339 Archived 2 December 2013 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Özakman, Turgut. Cumhuriyet Türk mucizesi, p. 345
- British In Turkey May Be Increased, 1920/06/19
- Ronald L. Tarnstrom: Balkan battles, Trogen Books, 1999, ISBN 0922037140, p. 107.
- ^ Türkmen, Zekeriya. İstanbul'un İşgali ve İşgal Dönemindeki Uygulamalar (30 Kasım 1918-16 Mart 1920)
- Farajova, Turan. Istanbul'un İşgali (18 Kasım 1918-16 Mart 1920) İstanbul Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü, 16 January 2019.
- Harp Tarihi Vesikaları Dergisi, p. 22, and p. 557
- Salâhi R. Sonyel, Turkish War of Independence and Foreign Policy, Volume I, Ankara 1978, p. 205.
- Macfie, A. L. "The Chanak Affair (September–October 1922)", Balkan Studies 1979, Vol. 20 Issue 2, pp 309–341.
- Morgan, Kenneth O. (1979). "The Downfall of the Coalition: Foreign Policy". Consensus and Disunity: The Lloyd George Coalition Government 1918–1922. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Pp. 302–330. ISBN 0198224974.
- Güztoklusu 2008, p.91
- Güztoklusu 2008, pp. 101–103
- Güztoklusu 2008, pp. 41–42
- ^ David (1997). A Modern History of the Kurds. Bloomsbury Academic. pp. 155–160
- ATATÜRK, Kemal Mustafa(2015) 51. Vesika, Nutuk Vesikalar Cildi.
- Güztoklusu 2008, p. 37-45
- Güztoklusu 2008, p. 55
- ABOŞ, Kahtan Ahmet from Tal Afar, El Tavratul Tal Afar (Tal Afar revolution)
- Güztoklusu, 2008, p.69
- Atatürk’ün Söylev ve Demeçleri, Cilt I, Ankara 1989.
- Başbakanlık Cumhuriyet Arşivi.
- Başbakanlık Osmanlı Arşivi.
- Gnkur. ATASE Başkanlığı Arşivi.
- ÖKE, Mim Kemal, Musul Meselesi Kronolojisi (1918–1926), İstanbul 1987.
- Türk İstiklal Harbi, Güney Cephesi, Genelkurmay Basımevi, Ankara 1966.
- Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi Arşivi, Şefik Özdemir Bey Dosyası.
- TÜRKMEN, Zekeriya, “Özdemir Bey’in Musul Harekâtı ve İngilizlerin Karşı Tedbirleri (1922–1923)”, Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Dergisi, S 49, Ankara 2001.
- TÜRKMEN, Zekeriya, Musul Meselesi, Askerî Yönden Çözüm Arayışları (1922–1925), Ankara 2003.
- TÜRKMEN, Zekeriya, Yeni Devletin Şafağında Mustafa Kemal, Ankara 2002.
- ÜZEL, Sahir, İstiklal Savaşımız Esnasında Kürtlük Cereyanları ve Irak-Revandiz Harekâtı, Resmî Vesaike Müstenit Harp Tarihi (Daktilo Metin), ATASE Bşk.lığı Kütüphanesi, İstiklal nr: 215.
- Sarısakal, Baki (2002), Bir Kentin Tarihi: Samsun, Samsun: Samsun Valiliği İl Kültür Müdürlüğü Yayınları, p. 43
- Nutku, Emrullah (1962). "Giresunlu Osman Ağa". Yakın Tarihimiz. Volume 4. p. 85.
- Kurtuluş Savaşında Eskişehir, 5 April 2008
- The British Role In Greek Landing at Smyrna, 2019.
- Veremis, T. (1983). "Two letters – Memoranda of E. Venizelos to Winston Churchill", p. 347
- Greco-Turkish War (1919-1922)#Cite Note-17
- Turgut Özakman, Şu Çılgın Türkler (115th edition, September 2005), p. 23: Sevr Antlaşması'nı ve tabii Üçlü Anlaşma'yı milliyetçilere silah zoruyla kabul ettirmek görevi, İngilizlerin aracılığıyla Yunan ordusuna önerilir, o da kabul eder. Yunan hükümeti, bu hizmetine karşılık, İzmir ve Doğu Trakya'dan başka, İstanbul'un da Yunanistan'a verileceği ümidine kapılır. Fakat beklenilmeyen bir olay Yunanistan'ı karıştıracaktır. Kral Aleksandros ölür. Venizelos, Konstantin'in tahta geri dönmesini engellemek için seçimleri yenilemeye karar verir ve seçime "ya Konstantin, ya ben!" sloganıyla girer. Halk Konstantin'i ve onu destekleyen partiyi seçer. Venizelos yurtdışına kaçar. Vaktiyle Konstantin'in devrilmesine yardım etmiş olan Fransız hükümeti, Konstantin'e ve muhalefete oy veren Yunan halkına kızar ve yeni iktidara karşı tavır alır. İngilizler de tedirgin olurlar ama tavır almak için beklemeyi tercih ederler. Venizelos'un sürgüne yolladığı, hapse attırdığı siviller ve askerler, tıpkı Hürriyet ve İtilaf Partililer gibi, iktidar özlemi ve kinle tutuşmuş bir halde yeniden sahnede boy gösterirler. Kralcı General Papulas, Anadolu'daki Yunan ordusunun komutanlığa atanır. İktidar, Anadolu'yu boşalttığı takdirde, Yunanistan'ın Fransa ve İtalya'dan sonra, İngiltere'nin de desteğini kaybedip yalnız kalacağını anlar; azdırdıkları Anadolu Rumlarını yazgılarıyla baş başa bırakmayı da göze alamaz. Sonunda Venizelos'un yayılmacı politikasını ve İngilizlerin askeri olmayı kabul eder. Bu sebeple Anadolu olaylarını iyi bilen bazı Venizeloscu komutanlara dokunmaz. ("The task of forcing the nationalists to accept the Treaty of Sèvres and of course the Tripartite Agreement at gunpoint was offered to the Greek army through the British, and it accepted it. In return for this service, the Greek government hoped that, in addition to Izmir and Eastern Thrace, Istanbul would also be given to Greece. However, an unexpected event will confuse Greece. King Alexander dies. Venizelos decides to renew the elections in order to prevent Constantine's return to the throne and enters the elections with the slogan "Constantine or me!". The people elect Constantine and the party that supports him. Venizelos flees abroad. The French government, which had once helped overthrow Constantine, is angry with Constantine and the Greek people who voted for the opposition, and takes a stand against the new government. The British were also uneasy, but preferred to wait to take a stand. The civilians and soldiers exiled and imprisoned by Venizelos reappeared on the stage, just like the members of the Freedom and Accord Party, fuelled by a longing for power and a grudge. The royalist General Papoulas was appointed commander of the Greek army in Anatolia. The government realised that if it evacuated Anatolia, Greece would lose the support of Britain, after France and Italy, and would be left alone; it could not afford to leave the Anatolian Greeks, whom they had been inflaming, alone with their fate. In the end, he accepted Venizelos' expansionist policy and to become a soldier of the British. For this reason, he did not touch some of the Venizelist commanders who knew the Anatolian events well.")
- Philip Jowett-Armies of the Greek-Turkish War, page 206 "... British Airco DH.9 reconnaissance bombers and Sopwith Camel 1F.1 fighters. The Greeks are reported to have assigned 55 aircraft of all types to Asia Minor, in one Navy and four Army squadrons. The Turkish Nationalists began the war with ..."
- Armies of the Greek-Turkish War by Philip Jowett, "... British Airco DH.9 reconnaissance bombers and Sopwith Camel 1F.1 fighters. The Greeks are reported to have assigned ... working in Germany. A Naval Flying Service was also formed, with four Gotha WD.13 seaplanes that had been smuggled ...
- Ululeben,Turkey in the English secret documents, 2009, p.236
- Avcıoğlu 1979, p. 162
- Bilal Şimşir, Sakarya'dan İzmir'e, pp. 160, 197, 198
- Armies of the Greek-Turkish War,Philip Jowett, "... of armaments to the Nationalists; when one Italian supplier was asked why he was selling weapons to his country's former enemy, he replied candidly 'because they pay'. 1443 The Greek crew of an elderly British 6in howitzer."
- Armies of the Greek-Turkish War by Philip Jowett, "... British and US Army models. Greek officers wore both long and short models of double-breasted greatcoat. Some winter items like pullovers may have been supplied by the Entente powers from their surplus stores, and others would have been ... British to supply them with 200,000 pairs of woollen socks but, as with."
- Stavros T. Stavridis,Hail, Lloyd George!, 2019-07-09
- Hilafet Ordusu ve Kuva-yi Milliye ile çatışmaları
- Philip Jowett, Armies of The Greek-Turkish War ,... British officers. Caliphate Army uniforms, 1920–22 The ineffectual Caliphate Army continued to use pre – 1918 Ottoman Army uniforms and rank insignia. The majority of Caliphate soldiers continued to wear the kabalak (see Plate D1) ...
- ^ Kemal Laughs at Britain, Sends Thanks for 40000 Rifles the Armenians Surrendered, 6 January 1921
- Özakman, Turgut. Şu Çılgın Türkler, p. 27
- A. Şemsutdinov, A bad-day friend, p. 241
- Avcıoğlu, D. (1979). Millî Kurtuluş Tarihi 1838’den 1995’e. Birinci kitap. Emperyalizm karşısında Türk aydının aymazlığı ve tam bağımsızlık. Tekin Yayınevi, p. 71
- Kitsikis, D., Greek Propaganda, p. 211
- Uğur, M. (Ed.). (2018). Türk Basın Tarihi Uluslararası Sempozyumu, 19–21 October 2016, Elazığ. (2nd Volume). Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi, p. 1067
- TBMM Minutes, Circuit 1, Volume: 3, Year: 1, 48. Ijtima, 14 August 1920
- Avcıoğlu, 1979, pp. 651, 660, 690
- F. O 371, E340/262/44, NO: 94892 (M.2B), 19, 20 February 1920
- Streit, C. K., Lowry, H. W., & Öztürk, M. A. (2011). Unknown Turks: Mustafa Kemal Pasha, Nationalist Ankara and Regular Life in Anatolia, January–March 1921. Bahçeşehir University, p. 88
- Sunata, İ H. (2006). İstanbul’da işgal yılları. Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, p. 18
Sources
- Broadbent, Harvey (2005). Gallipoli: The Fatal Shore. Camberwell, VIC: Viking/Penguin. ISBN 978-0-670-04085-8.
- Carlyon, Les (2001). Gallipoli. Sydney: Pan Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-7329-1089-1.
- Fewster, Kevin; Basarin, Vecihi; Basarin, Hatice Hurmuz (2003) . Gallipoli: The Turkish Story. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin. ISBN 978-1-74114-045-3.
- Finkel, Caroline (2007). Osman's Dream: The History of the Ottoman Empire. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0-465-00850-6.
- Holmes, Richard, ed. (2001). The Oxford Companion to Military History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-866209-9.
- Keegan, John (1998). The First World War. London: Pimlico. ISBN 978-0-7126-6645-9.
- Strachan, Hew (2001). The First World War, Volume 1: To Arms. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-926191-1.
- Bibliography
- Avcıoğlu, Doğan. Milli Kurtuluş Tarihi, 1979.
- Murat Güztoklusu, Elcezire ve Özdemir Harekâtı, 2008
| Turkish War of Independence | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concepts | |||||||||||||||
| National awakening | |||||||||||||||
| Elections | |||||||||||||||
| Issues | |||||||||||||||
| Campaigns |
| ||||||||||||||
| Agreements |
| ||||||||||||||
| Timeline | |||||||||||||||
| List of modern conflicts in the Middle East | |
|---|---|
| 1910s | |
| 1920s | |
| 1930s | |
| 1940s | |
| 1950s | |
| 1960s | |
| 1970s |
|
| 1980s | |
| 1990s | |
| 2000s | |
| 2010s | |
| 2020s | |
| This list includes World War I and later conflicts (after 1914) of at least 100 fatalities each Prolonged conflicts are listed in the decade when initiated; ongoing conflicts are marked italic, and conflicts with +100,000 killed with bold. | |
- Wars involving Turkey
- Wars involving the United Kingdom
- Turkish War of Independence
- Modern history of Turkey
- 20th-century military history of the United Kingdom
- Turkey–United Kingdom relations
- 1918 in the Ottoman Empire
- 1919 in the Ottoman Empire
- 1920 in the Ottoman Empire
- 1921 in the Ottoman Empire
- 1922 in the Ottoman Empire
- 1923 in Turkey
- Conflicts in 1919
- Conflicts in 1920
- Conflicts in 1921
- Conflicts in 1922
- Conflicts in 1923
- David Lloyd George