At the first of the C.U.P. meetings convened to discuss the staging of
the coup the moderate wing, led by Kemal and Fethi, succeeded in negotiating a
delay while means were sought to oust the Government constitutionally. Fethi
then innocently returned to his post at Gallipoli; no sooner had he done so than
Enver returned to Constantinople and, at the second meeting, was able to
overturn the decision to act within the law.
In the meantime, Nazim Pasha, the Minister of War, was urged to continue the
fight. Whether Nazim arrived at some kind of pact with the C.U.P. is unclear,
though later evidence suggests a deal of sorts was struck, yet, once the
collective note was delivered on 17 January, the future of Adrianople as a
Turkish city appeared academic.
Kiamil, making sure that responsibility for the loss of Adrianople would
not rest on his shoulders alone, called a Grand Council which met on the morning
on 23 January to draw up the Turkish reply to the Powers’ note; by noon the
text, which was in French, had been agreed upon. It was thought, however, that
the subsequent Turkish translation was unsatisfactory so, while a more accurate
rendition was made, the Council adjourned for lunch. At 3 p.m., just as the new
version had been produced, Enver, Talaat and forty armed men ‘followed by a
small rabble’ appeared at the entrance of the Sublime Porte ‘demanding the
overthrow of a Cabinet which was preparing to make so ignominious a peace.’
What happened next was the subject of some confusion: the earliest report had
the Minister of War, Nazim, coming out of the Cabinet room to ascertain the
cause of the commotion. Seeing Enver and his group he told them to go to hell
– ‘a euphemism for the Turkish expression he is said to have used’ – at
which point Nafiz Bey, the ‘hot headed’ young Albanian aide-de-camp to the
Grand Vizier, aimed a shot at Enver whose men promptly returned fire with a hail
of bullets.
The second, and slightly more reliable, account had Nafiz going to see
the cause of the disturbance and, realizing that Enver’s was not a social
call, fired a shot at the Bey which missed. Nafiz was immediately seized by
Enver’s bodyguard but continued to struggle to try to regain the use of his
revolver and put it to more telling effect. Other shots rang out and the
unfortunate Nazim Pasha emerged from the Council Chamber to ascertain what the
commotion was about; upon seeing Enver he was said to have declared, ‘You have
deceived me: is this what you promised?’ before being ‘met by a bullet in
the head, which was not, however, intended for him.’
Nazim’s A.D.C. was also killed in the mêlée while Nafiz, too, fell, mortally
wounded.
Forcing his way into the Council Chamber, Enver ordered the Cabinet, at
gunpoint, to resign. Kiamil, with the insouciance of age, refused to hand over
the seals of office without express orders from the Sultan. Momentarily thrown
by this futile act of defiance Enver soon recovered his composure and promptly
dictated a form of resignation which the Grand Vizier was forced to sign; while
Enver motored over to the palace with the document to lay before the Sultan and
obtain the necessary authorization, outside the Porte paid agitators worked to
instil some enthusiasm in the curious crowd of onlookers that had collected but
who refused to enter into the spirit of the occasion. Enver duly returned with
one of the Imperial Chamberlains to whom Kiamil handed over his insignia as
Grand Vizier. Shortly before 8 p.m. none other than Shevket Pasha, Nazim’s
predecessor as Minister of War, arrived in answer to a pre-arranged summons and
the Imperial Decree appointing him Grand Vizier was read. Shevket also assumed
his previous duties as War Minister. Lowther pointed out the following day that
the new Cabinet had ‘a distinctly German colouring’ and that it was being
said that Enver Bey had been ‘in communication with the German Embassy, and
Mahmoud Shevket Pasha called upon the German Ambassador late last night’ —
directly after assuming office.
His luck having run out in both life and death, Nazim was hastily buried,
within 24 hours and with a remarkable lack of ‘pomp and ceremony’, whereas
the rebellious soldier generally supposed to have fired the fatal shot, and who
himself was killed, was given a martyr’s funeral on 25 January.
Lowther was convinced that he was able to divine the motivation behind the
actions of the C.U.P., believed the coup came about because the leading members
of the party had got wind of the fact that the dossiers against them were all
but complete and arrests would soon be made; it was ‘difficult to find any
explanation other than this for the folly of taking office, knowing as they must
have done that they would not get better peace terms than their predecessors.’
The British Military Attaché came closer to the truth with his appreciation
that Enver’s actions ‘were probably prompted just as much by what he
considered to be the interests of his country as by any personal ambition.’
Where the plan had gone wrong was in the question of timing: it had succeeded
too quickly. Enver and Talaat found themselves ‘dictators no doubt but with
the surrender of Adrianople as yet uncovenanted, so that they were under the
necessity of either continuing a hopeless contest or making an unpopular
peace.’
The coup had brought to the fore once again the complex personality of
Enver. The thirty-year-old officer had only recently returned from Cyrenaica at
the conclusion of the Turco-Italian war and was nominally appointed to the staff
of the Tenth Army Corps. To the charge that, by his latest action, he had
clearly contravened the order forbidding officers to meddle in politics his
admirers would argue that – as he was away in Tripoli at the time – he
never, personally, took the oath imposed on all officers. Impulsive, autocratic
and fatalistic, Enver’s particular brand of opportunism rested on an outward
show of confidence which was only occasionally undermined by a lack of nerve; as
he once explained, ‘The Government knows what it is going to do, I don’t.’
Enver left differing impressions with those who met him depending, in the main,
on the outlook of the observer. Léon Ostrorog, the legal adviser to the Porte,
described him as
a
dark little man with a dull complexion…His intelligence is mediocre. His
speech is hesitating. In society he easily becomes confused, blushes and looks
down…In morals he is a Puritan. He neither drinks nor smokes: his mentality is
like a gun’s barrel; not many ideas enter his narrow brain, but once entered
they stick there, and on the rare occasions when they come forth it is like a
flash, with a well-fired bullet’s hardness and directness of aim. At
Constantinople his courage and perfect honesty have not been called in question,
not even by his worst enemies, and he has many mortal ones.
On
the other hand Aubrey Herbert, having been warned by Embassy friends of
Enver’s posturing vanity, was ‘Very agreeably surprised…He certainly
strikes me as one of the most statesmanlike of the Turks. He has no desire
whatever to put himself forward.’
In the British Embassy’s 1913 Report (written during the first months of 1914)
the authors, if less openly hostile than Ostrorog, followed the more usual line:
Enver was just as daring as Talaat but even more unscrupulous. He was described
as small, with regular features,
and
a pale clear complexion, with flashing eyes, gentle and peculiarly attractive
when he smiles, but with an occasional gleam suggestive of hardness or even
cruelty. He is quiet and reserved. For a long time he was content to remain in
the background, though his influence as one of the secret group which has
governed Turkey since the revolution has been powerful…He is thought to wish
to play the part of Napoleon whom he considers he resembles…Though without
private means, he lives in a palace on a scale which contrasts with the
simplicity of the habits of his other colleagues, except the Grand Vizier. He
never moves except accompanied by 4 or 5 general officers and A.D.C’s, with a
second motor car always in attendance. On more than one occasion, when giving a
banquet to the Ambassadors of the Great Powers, instead of receiving his guests,
he waited until they were all assembled, when he made his entry in semi-royal
state, accompanied by his suite. His sympathies, education and methods are
German, and his residence in Berlin as military attaché has had a strong
influence on his character and career. It is more than possible that he is
subventioned by the German Government.
Opinion
was more uniform regarding the imposing figure of Talaat, the humble minor
official from Salonica who had worked his way up by sheer strength of character
(backed up by his imposing bulk, which verged on ‘corpulence’). Talaat was
‘a man of high capacity and great energy, unscrupulous and absolutely
fearless. He is intensely patriotic, and the main object of his ambition, which
can hardly be called personal, since with many opportunities he has not enriched
himself, is the regeneration of his country.’
Ostrorog agreed, but felt obliged to add that Talaat imagined affairs of State
could be ‘conducted by means of the tricks and guiles of a horsedealer.’
Immediately
following the coup Kiamil was held under house arrest, which did not stop him
complaining that he had nothing to eat, was not allowed to keep his fire going,
and ‘when he wanted to go to the W.C. it was occupied.’
This torment did not last long for, on 4 February, Kiamil went into temporary
exile in Cairo where he would scheme and plot for his return. Before this, in
London, as Churchill debated whether, in view of the revolution, the Third
Battle Squadron of King Edward class pre-dreadnoughts (which were on temporary service
in the Mediterranean) should still be recalled,
negotiations between the delegates at the St James’s conference had been
broken off on 29 January. The following day the new Cabinet in Constantinople
forwarded the redrafted reply to the collective note: the Turks would now agree
to cede only that part of Adrianople on the right bank of the Maritza; the
remainder, containing the mosques, tombs and places of special historic and
religious association would not be given up. In addition, the Powers could, in
general, decide the fate of the islands, but those closest to the Straits were
necessary for the defence of Constantinople, whiles others were no less
indispensable for the security of Asia Minor.
If Enver seriously entertained any hope that his opponents would submit to these
terms in deference to the new hardline administration at the Porte the delusion
was short-lived; on 3 February, when the two month time limit on the armistice
had expired, the Balkan artillery opened up on Adrianople once more.
Having failed to forestall the coup Kemal and Fethi (at Gallipoli) argued
that, to try to break the military deadlock which now ensued, a simultaneous
offensive should be launched immediately from Gallipoli and the Tchatalja lines,
both to relieve the pressure on Constantinople and prevent the situation where,
if Adrianople fell, additional Bulgarian troops would then be freed to join the
main attack at the gates of Constantinople. Accepting this advice, Enver
travelled to Gallipoli to take charge of that part of the offensive. He planned
to launch a two-pronged attack against the Bulgarians, a plan which included an
ambitious amphibious landing. This operation, scheduled for 8 February, was
however a débâcle due to poor weather conditions; worse followed when the
other part of the Turkish force, not knowing that the landings had failed,
attacked on schedule and were beaten back with heavy casualties. To complete the
Turks’ frustration, the previous day Ferik Isset Pasha, commanding almost
200,000 troops behind the Tchatalja lines, had led a general assault against the
Bulgarians but had not been able to make any headway.
Following this disaster the Turkish delegates in London appealed once more for
Great Power intervention only to be rebuffed as they refused to give up
Adrianople. The most the Turks would do was to accept a frontier line from San
Stefano on the Black Sea to the Maritza — but only on condition that the
fortifications at Adrianople be dismantled and the garrison be allowed to march
out with all honours, taking with them their arms and war material.
On 19 February, after having set off as soon as word reached him of the
coup, Aubrey Herbert arrived at Stamboul once more but this time to a Bosphorus
‘bleak and cold’. Staying at the Pera Palace Hotel he was able to renew many
acquaintances, his joy being tempered by the overall impression sustained that,
at last, Constantinople may be lost. The visit also marked the final falling out
with Fitzmaurice who opposed the coup as much as Aubrey supported it. The
latter’s diary and reports are filled with diatribes against the dragoman:
‘Fitzmaurice loathes Turkey and after that England. He is the Irish Catholic
of the really bitter Dillon-Lynch type, cunning as a weasel and as
savage…Fitzmaurice cannot be loyal to any chief. He hates Lowther alive now as
much as he hates O’Conor dead…Fitz [sic]
will catch a cold whispering behind doors and die the death.’
It would appear that only the wife of Admiral Limpus had much good to say about
the dragoman: ‘We like Mr Fitzmaurice very much’, she wrote uncritically,
‘and quite readily forgave him being late for lunch he is such an interesting
man — so engrossing in his work that he has no time to avoid treading on other
people’s toes. He knows his Turkey well…’
In contrast Lowther, now in his fifth year at the Porte, was growing weary of it
all, his disenchantment best summed up by his limp comment after the renewal of
hostilities: ‘I fear the Powers will have lots of trouble eventually with the
Balkan States and will live to regret the departure of the Turks.’
Of the remaining three Turkish outposts in Europe the first to fall –
Janina – capitulated to the Greeks on 6 March; then, twelve days later, a
general assault on the Tchatalja lines commenced which was to herald two weeks
of continuous fighting. While this assault was in progress to the north-west a
Bulgarian force, assisted by the Serbs, began the last battle for Adrianople.
The two month armistice that had extended from December 1912 to early February
1913 had given the defenders of Adrianople a breathing space. When the armistice
expired at 7 p.m. on 3 February the Bulgarian batteries on the east of the town
prepared themselves for action though on the southern, Serbian, sector
everything remained quiet; earlier that afternoon two Serb officers, under a
flag of truce, had announced officially to the Turks opposite that the armistice
would be prolonged for four days. It was a feature of the siege that the Serbs
played little active part — indeed, the first shots were not exchanged until
11 March. This was very different to the Bulgarian front where fire was opened
soon after the time limit expired on 3 February, at first on the eastern
defences and, half an hour later, on the town itself with a bombardment that was
described as being of a ‘somewhat severe nature’ and which continued for
five days.
In an early form of psychological warfare, on 5 February a Bulgarian
aeroplane swooped low over the city to rain down leaflets purporting to describe
the situation at Constantinople and Tchatalja; detailing Bulgarian successes;
and calling on the garrison and civilian population to surrender. In case this
did not have the desired effect, the following day’s propaganda shower
contained ‘slighting references to the Young Turkish party’. Major Samson,
the British consul who remained in Adrianople throughout the siege, noted that
although the C.U.P. was completely in the ascendant in the town, ‘the
popularity which this party had enjoyed amongst the garrison consequent upon
their decision to continue the war waned with the hopes of the relief of the
town.’ To try to even the odds, when the Bulgarians began to concentrate their
siege artillery to the north and east of the town by moving pieces from the
western sector, the Turkish military commander, Shukri Pasha, saw his chance and
ordered a sortie on 9 February against a battery of 15 cm guns. Sadly, this
failed, with heavy Turkish casualties.
The onset of severe weather on 13 February, which lasted a fortnight,
limited operations; however, rather than alleviate the city’s suffering, the
populace now had to contend with low temperatures instead of high explosive.
Then came a partial thaw only to be followed by a period of intense cold early
in March which caused many cases of frostbite and exposure. All the horses,
except those belonging to the cavalry and artillery, were slaughtered for food.
Morale had sunk dangerously low by the middle of March, by which time all the
Bulgarian batteries had been moved to their new locations opposite the weakest
part of the Turkish defences, described by Major Samson as ‘mere earthworks,
not capable of withstanding the fire poured into them.’ The Bulgarian
commander waited till 24 March, when he was satisfied all was in place, before
launching the attack with a diversionary bombardment to the south and west,
which convinced the Turkish General that the main attack would come from the
south. Instead, the main assault, on the northern and eastern sectors, commenced
at 1 a.m. on 25 March and was quickly successful: within five hours all the
objectives had been obtained and Turkish resistance had crumbled. By 9.30 a.m.
on the 26th the eastern sector was in Bulgarian hands and, within hours, they
controlled the centre of the city. The end had come; Shukri Pasha surrendered
his garrison of 50,000 unconditionally. Turkish losses were put at 10,000 killed
and wounded while Bulgarian and Serbian casualties amounted to about 7,000.
Janina gone; Adrianople gone; only Scutari now held out, and this only
until 23 April when, it was rumoured, the Turkish commander, realizing the
inevitable could no longer be forestalled, decided to capitalize on the
situation by ‘selling’ the city to Montenegro for £80,000.
Nevertheless it was the fall of Adrianople that signalled the end of the war
which had only been continued by the Turks in the forlorn hope that, somehow,
the fortress might be retained. The spectre was raised once more of a renewed
Bulgarian advance on Constantinople, a possibility which was discussed by the
meeting of Ambassadors on 11 April with the predictable suggestion being made to
send an international fleet to maintain order in the capital and secure the
freedom of navigation of the Straits. Although this suggestion was, naturally,
supported by the Russians, the other Ambassadors reserved their position. There
was no need to force the issue; the Turks had had enough. On 17 April Lowther
telegraphed en clair that the
suspension of hostilities between the Ottoman and Bulgarian armies had been
agreed verbally, on certain conditions.
A peace formula had already been on the agenda in London during April, as
military events took their course, so that, by 5 May, a draft treaty was ready
for submission to the delegates. Yet, despite the fact that the proposals were
hardly new, the representatives now could not reach full agreement until, his
patience wearing paper thin, Grey summoned them to his room at the Foreign
Office on 27 May to explain the need to sign the treaty without further ado. In
a scene later recorded by the son of Sir Arthur Nicolson:
The
delegates of Serbia, Bulgaria, Greece, Montenegro and Turkey, somewhat sheepish
in their frock-coats, were ranged one by one upon the carpet. Sir Edward Grey
advanced towards them and fixed them with his eagle eye: he pointed towards them
with an outstretched and imperative finger: he summoned to his assistance the
total resources of his Wykhamist French. “Ou signer,” he shouted at them,
“ou partir!”
Grey’s
uncharacteristic display of petulance did the trick and the Treaty of London was
signed on 30 May 1913! By Article 2 the Sultan ceded ‘all the territories of
his Empire on the continent of Europe west of a line drawn from Enos on the
Aegean to Midia on the Black Sea, with the exception of Albania’ whose
frontiers would be determined under the auspices of the Great Powers. Crete was
ceded to the Balkan allies, while the Powers would also decide ‘the matter of
passing upon the title to all the Ottoman Islands in the Aegean’ except Crete.
Even before he had the signatures on the treaty Grey was still able to report to
the Cabinet ‘the satisfactory development of the international situation…The
most serious point of possible difficulty in the near future appears to be the
question of the Aegean Islands.’ While the Cabinet agreed that no Great Power
could permanently retain any of the islands, the Turks – as reported by
Lowther – looked to their own resources to hold the islands rather than vainly
hoping for a beneficent response from the Concert of Europe.
Turkey now looked to her Navy.
Lowther had warned in November 1912 that the Turks were allegedly
attempting to purchase two Argentine dreadnoughts being built in America. He
followed that up with a report in January 1913 that they were trying to buy two
battleships being built in England for Brazil (there was, in fact, only one).
Then, in March 1913, he warned Nicolson that ‘the Turks’ great idea now is
to buy ships once peace is declared for they realise that it is the intention of
the Powers to deprive them of their islands and they will want to take them
back.’
Following the departure of Admiral Williams after his contract expired in April
1912 and, despite fears in London that they would turn to Germany, the Turkish
Government requested another British admiral; specifically, they would have
liked Admiral Gamble, the first head of the Naval Mission, to return.
Understandably, at the time, Gamble was less than keen.
Instead Rear-Admiral Arthur Limpus was nominated to head the Mission of 72
personnel. Churchill was able to inform the Turks that he had taken ‘the
greatest personal trouble’ in selecting Limpus as he was ‘anxious that you
should have at your disposal an officer who would do credit to the reputation of
the British Navy, and would confer the greatest amount of benefit upon the
Turkish fleet.’
Limpus and his wife found life pleasant in Constantinople to begin with:
the Admiralty building looked ‘like a cool white Palace set in a green
garden’
and Limpus got on better with the Turks than his predecessors though with the
same over-riding problem. Whatever his advice, the Turks wanted battleships! In
September 1910, as a stopgap until their own overseas building programme reached
fruition, Turkey had purchased from Germany two antiquated pre-dreadnoughts of
the 1891 Brandenburg class.
Brazenly, early in 1913, Berlin had approached the Turks with an offer to sell
them the remaining two ships of the class at a knock down price of between £120,000
and £160,000. The two ships already in Turkish possession had performed
inauspiciously in the major naval action of the Balkan wars: on 18 January 1913,
in a running battle with a Greek fleet headed by the modern, Italian-built,
cruiser Averoff, the two Turkish battleships had sustained serious damage
— enough to warrant their retirement inside the Straits and for the Greek
Admiral to proclaim victory. The Turks were therefore hardly likely to be
impressed if their two ‘battleships’ could not scrap with a cruiser.
Nevertheless, Limpus wrote to Churchill on 12 March that, unless Britain sold
the Turks two pre-dreadnoughts (for example, Triumph
and a Royal Sovereign or two Royal
Sovereigns) at a competitive price, and allowed the Turks to send thirty
officers for training in Britain after the Balkan war had ended, there would be
a ‘much more decided leaning towards Germany’ in Constantinople with the
possible consequent elimination of the British Naval Mission.
However, this was not the message passed back to the Foreign Office by
Lowther the next day, when he informed Nicolson of his opinion that ‘it seems
to me a silly idea to buy two antiquated Germans but Limpus rather approves as
they cannot buy anything good. The worst of it is, if the Navy here is to be
full of German ships, our argument that the officers should be English falls to
the ground.’
Whether Lowther misunderstood, or whether Limpus thought the Turks were not
entirely serious, was immaterial as the reaction by Battenberg at the Admiralty
was scathing: he would sell the Turks nothing. The officers of the British Naval
Mission, Battenberg declared,
have
twice in a short time passed through the humiliating position of being
associated in war with a fleet whose exploits have been beneath contempt…From
a Naval point of view it must be realized that the Turkish Navy is hopeless.
They are welcome to buy worn-out German ships. They will never make any use of
them. The rising Sea Power of Greece is much more worthy of our care and
assistance, and I earnestly hope that the Naval Mission will be definitely
withdrawn from Constantinople and that a Naval Mission of specially selected
Active Service Officers will be offered to Greece in the place of the handful of
retired Officers now in the pay of the Athens Admiralty and which carry little
weight in their councils.
The
First Sea Lord would soon get his way, at least as far as Greece was concerned:
during the summer he pushed successfully for his close personal friend,
Rear-Admiral Mark Kerr, to be sent to Athens. That Battenberg should have let
his ties with the Greek Royal Family, and his general sympathy for the Greek
cause, dictate the harsh treatment he wished to mete out to the Turks is a sorry
indictment of his strategic judgement; besides, the Turks would be getting no
bargain. Churchill, at the time less of a Turcophobe than his Admiralty or
Cabinet colleagues, believed there was no reason why the Mission should not be
continued. ‘Surely’, he minuted, ‘we could sell the Royal
Sovereigns at £100,000 apiece, and buy airships with the money.’
Churchill’s counsel prevailed and Limpus was duly informed early in April that
the two old ships would be offered to the Turks, once peace had been concluded,
but that nothing more modern was available.
As the Turks had not been interested in the Royal
Sovereigns some years previously, when Admiral Williams had been in charge,
there was little likelihood they would be more disposed this time and nothing
further came of the British offer. Yet this apparently did Limpus little harm
for it is clear that he had established a close working relationship with the
Grand Vizier, Mahmoud Shevket, sufficient at least for Wangenheim, the German
Ambassador, to wire Berlin that Shevket was ‘turning his thoughts a great deal
towards England [Wilhelm’s marginal note: “Far too much!”] and if the
Grand Vizier’s ideas are to be realised, she will acquire far reaching
influence in Turkey.’ This included, so Wangenheim believed, the adoption of
Limpus’ proposal that retired British officers would be retained to command
Turkish ships, which the Emperor thought ‘Very regrettable and unpractical.’
Even so, the Ambassador was not entirely despondent: ‘The Power which is in
control of the Army will always be the strongest one in Turkey! There cannot be
an anti-German Government if the Army is controlled by us…!’ But Wilhelm had
his doubts: this was ‘Well meant but fanciful!’ to which he added a perhaps
unconsciously prophetic indictment, ‘In truth this detailing of various
European nations for work in Turkey is a splendid bridge for mutual intrigues
and partition of Turkey!’
When Lowther reported once more on 24 April that, through the auspices of
the Deutsche Orient Bank, the Turks were now negotiating for the purchase of
“two” Brazilian ships (which he continued to maintain were being built in
England) and five French destroyers, costing £3.5 million, he felt the need to
add that ‘No folly seems to be too great for these poor Turks but they imagine
they will get better terms over the islands if they have the ships.’
In fact, of the two Turkish dreadnoughts ordered in England in the summer of
1911, work on one (Reshad-i-Hamiss) had been halted at an early stage when the
builders, Armstrong’s, demanded a better guarantee regarding payment. The
other ship (Reshad V), ordered from
Vickers, had been built well up to the protective deck, while ‘considerable
progress had been made with the turbine engines and auxiliary machinery’ when
Vickers, presumably catching the same cold as Armstrong after the outbreak of
the Balkan Wars, ‘decided to stop work pending further developments.’
Nevertheless, despite all the evidence that their attempts to regenerate their
fleet amounted to so much wishful thinking, the idea – prompted by the recent
defeats on land – that ‘Turkey must henceforth devote her energies and
expense to reform her Navy and become a Naval Power’ had become ingrained in
leading circles in Constantinople. It was given official imprimatur when the
heir apparent left a suitably exhortative inscription in the visitors book at
the Admiralty Museum, ending ‘The future of our country depends on our fleet
alone.’
Lowther’s warnings concerning the Brazilian dreadnoughts continued into
May though, by that time, he no longer seemed to believe that the various
Turkish schemes were designed simply to be used as a bargaining ploy to
influence the Powers over the fate of the Aegean Islands. Instead he reported
that, after the peace had been agreed, the Turks wanted to have ‘a navy
superior to that of Greece in the Eastern Mediterranean, if not to that of
Russia in the Black Sea.’
If true, this would have had profound implications for the Entente. However
whether Lowther’s many warnings continued to be heeded is problematical; his
days at the Porte where numbered.
|