Eastern Question: Rise and it’s Development | History Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

The Eastern Question

The Eastern Question, also known as the Near Eastern Question, was a significant diplomatic issue during the 19th and early 20th centuries. It emerged from the rise of national consciousness among the Balkan peoples, the decline of the Turkish (Ottoman) Empire, and the differing interests of the Great Powers in the region.

Central Problem:

• The core of the Eastern Question was the uncertainty regarding what would replace the Turkish Empire if it were to disintegrate. It became an international concern due to the involvement of various global powers, each with their own interests.

European Tensions:

• Any internal changes within the Turkish domains sparked tensions among European powers. Each nation feared that others might exploit the political chaos to expand their own influence. This led to periodic crises and conflicts, such as the Greek revolution in the 1820s, the Crimean War (1853–56), the Balkan crisis of 1875–78, the Bosnian crisis of 1908, and the Balkan Wars of 1912–13.

Lord Morley’s Description:

• As described by Lord Morley, the Eastern Question was a complex and shifting tangle of conflicting interests, rival peoples, and antagonistic faiths. It reflected the intricate web of nationalistic aspirations, imperial decline, and the strategic calculations of the Great Powers.

Background and Rise of the Eastern Question

Turkish Empire in the 19th Century:

• During the 19th century, the Turkish Empire, also known as the Ottoman Empire, included the entire Balkan Peninsula in Europe.
• The Balkans is a region of mountainous countries situated between the Danube and Aegean Seas, primarily inhabited by Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians, and Albanians. Although Romania is located north of the Danube River, it is also considered part of the Balkan states.
• The majority of the Balkan inhabitants were Christians, with only a small number of Muslim Turkish rulers.
• While Turkish rule was not intolerant in many respects, it was marked by incompetence and a lack of progress. At times, it could also be quite cruel.

Decline of Turkish Power:

• In the 18th century, the power of the Ottoman Empire in Europe began to noticeably decline.
• Turkey had lost Hungary in 1699, and Russia started to push southward, driving back the Turks. By the Treaty of Bucharest in 1812, Russia acquired Bessarabia, extending its territory to the River Pruth on the west side of the Black Sea.

Increased Interest in the Eastern Question:

• The decline of Turkey and the southward advance of Russia piqued the interest of European powers, particularly Austria and Russia, though it did not immediately become a matter of European diplomacy.

Napoleon and the Eastern Question:

• Napoleon played a significant role in bringing the Eastern Question to the forefront of European attention.
• His attempts to seize Egypt and Syria, along with his repeated assertions that controlling Constantinople was crucial for global dominance, made European statesmen aware of the importance of the Eastern Question.

Fear of Russian Expansion:

• There was a widespread concern that the balance of power in Europe would be severely disrupted if Turkey, due to its weakening position, were completely absorbed by the expanding Russian Empire.
• Russia's proximity to the Balkans, shared Slavic heritage with most of Turkey's subjects, and common membership in the Orthodox Greek Church with many Christian subjects of Turkey heightened these fears.
• Additionally, Russia's ambition to control the Black Sea and the Straits for access to the Mediterranean further fueled concerns about Russian expansion.
• This fear of Russian expansionism at Turkey's expense became a significant aspect of the Eastern Question.

New Factors in the Eastern Question in the 19th Century:

• As the attitudes of the European powers shifted, new developments in the Eastern Question emerged, presenting Europe with fresh challenges.
• The weakness of Turkey not only invited external aggression but also encouraged subject nationalities and powerful vassals to seek independence.
• The 19th-century ideal of nationalism began to influence the Balkan Peninsula, causing Christian nations under Turkish rule to become increasingly restless and eager to free themselves from Turkish control.
• This desire for independence led to frequent wars and atrocities in the Balkan region.

Threats to the Ottoman Empire:

• The Ottoman Empire faced threats from both external and internal forces. It was under threat from Russian aggression as well as from its own Christian subjects seeking independence.
• This dual threat of aggression and disintegration introduced new factors into what became known as the Eastern Question.
• While the Eastern Question evolved over time, a constant factor was Russia's ambition at the expense of Turkey.

Interest and Attitude of Major Powers in the Eastern Question

Russian Interest in the Balkans:

• Russia had a long-standing ambition to expand at the expense of Turkey, which was a constant factor in the Eastern Question.
• Russia was closely tied to the peoples of the Balkans by religion and ethnic ties. It claimed the right to protect these peoples from Turkish misrule.
• Additionally, Russia aimed to secure access to the Mediterranean Sea by seizing Constantinople from Turkey.
• Russian policy in the Near East had two main goals:
• Dismember Turkey and seize Constantinople.
• If that proved impossible, Russia sought to dominate Turkey by imposing a series of unequal treaties, keeping Turkey in a state of vassalage under Russian control.

England’s Interest:

• England’s policy was primarily driven by suspicion of Russian ambitions in Turkey.
• Britain viewed Russian expansion as a threat to its interests in the East, fearing that Russian control over Constantinople would weaken British hold on India.
• This led to chronic antagonism between Britain and Russia over the Eastern Question.
• Throughout the 19th century, England positioned itself as the defender of Turkey against Russian aggression.
• British policy aimed to check Russian advance by preserving the integrity of the Ottoman Empire.
• While England was successful in restraining Russia, it could not prevent the dismemberment of Turkey.
• Ironically, in its role as champion of Turkey’s integrity, England managed to secure a valuable share of Turkish spoils for itself.

Austrian Interest:

• Austria's interests in the Balkans were perhaps even more vital than those of Russia and Great Britain.
• Austria saw itself as Russia's rival in the Balkans because:
• Being landlocked with a limited coastline at the head of the Adriatic, Austria needed a seacoast for strategic and economic reasons, particularly for seaborne trade.
• She sought to expand towards ports in the Balkans and to stop Russian influence in the region.
• The majority of her trade passed along the Danube Valley, and it was in her interest to prevent Russian supremacy at the mouth of the Danube, which would have been a consequence of Russian expansion towards Constantinople.
• Austria also feared the rise of the Pan-Slavic movement in the Balkans, which was encouraged by Russia. This movement threatened the loyalty of her Slav subjects and could potentially destabilize the Austrian Empire.
• To counter this, Austria aimed to weaken and contain Serbia, the leading Slav state in the Balkans, whose increasing nationalism posed a threat to the integrity of the Austrian Empire.
• In the first half of the 19th century, Austria did not actively engage in Eastern affairs but monitored Russia's movements closely.
• Metternich attempted to counter Russia's Balkan ambitions using the doctrine of legitimate dynasties.
• However, following Austria's expulsion from Italy and Germany, she turned her attention to the Southeast, seeking compensation at the expense of Turkey.

French Interest:

• France's interest in the East was primarily commercial and religious rather than political.
• France was a traditional ally of Turkey, having developed special trading privileges and being mainly interested in expanding these, particularly in Syria and Egypt.
• France was also the traditional protector of Roman Catholic Christians in the East under the Turkish Empire.
• Despite this traditional friendship, France was never a consistent or enthusiastic champion of Turkey.
• For France, the Eastern Question was mainly about protecting her naval and commercial position in the Mediterranean.

German Interest:

• Germany did not show significant interest in Eastern affairs until the last quarter of the 19th century.
• Bismarck had previously distanced himself from the Eastern Question, famously stating that it was not worth the sacrifice of a single Pomeranian grenadier.
• However, in 1878, during the Congress of Berlin aimed at resolving the Eastern Question, Bismarck positioned himself as an "honest broker" and checked Russian expansion to gain favor with Austria.
• After this, Germany increased its diplomatic activities in the East, strengthened ties with Turkey, trained the Turkish army, and secured permission to build the Baghdad-Berlin Railway.

Factors Contributing to the Decay and Decline of the Turkish Empire

Administrative Inefficiency:

• The Turkish Empire suffered from administrative inefficiency, with widespread insubordination and corruption paralyzing the administration.
• The government's control over provincial governors and other officials was severely lacking.
• Sultan's representatives in outlying provinces such as Egypt, Algiers, and Tunis often acted more like tributary princes than effective administrators.
• As a result, the process of dismemberment was already underway in Turkey even before the rise of Christian nations in the Balkans.

Inability to Unite Diverse Peoples:

• Turkey had subdued many races in southeastern Europe but made little effort to assimilate or fuse them into a cohesive body politic.
• With a contempt for the conquered peoples, the Turks exploited these groups without attempting to integrate them, leaving them in a state of semi-independence administratively.

Decline of Military Power:

• The Turkish Empire was originally built on military power, and as this power declined, the empire began to fragment in the face of aggressive nationalism from the Balkan peoples.

Factors Delaying the Dismemberment of European Turkey

Military Strength:

• Despite being a declining power, the Turks retained their military capability and could still defeat formidable opponents, as evidenced by their victory over the Habsburg forces as late as 1788.

Geographical Position:

• Turkey's geographical position kept it remote from the center of European politics, making it a lower priority for European powers.
• Europe was not initially concerned with Turkey, and it was only in the 19th century that the Eastern Question gained prominence as an international issue.

Conflicting Interests of European Powers:

• The conflicting interests and rivalries among European powers complicated the resolution of the Eastern Question and prevented a unified settlement.
• Turkey was adept at exploiting the rivalries among the powers to prolong its existence.

British Policy:

• British policy was driven by the suspicion of Russian ambitions in Turkey and the fear that Russian control over Constantinople would undermine British influence in India.
• This led Britain to closely monitor Russian activities and aim to preserve the integrity of the Turkish Empire, which ultimately helped prolong the longevity of the Turkish Empire.

Development of the Eastern Question

The Development of the Eastern Question marks the beginning of the disintegration of the Turkish Empire.

Revolt of Serbia:

• The first national uprising in the Balkan Peninsula occurred in Serbia in 1804.
• For a time, the Turks were expelled from Serbia, but they regained control in 1815.
• Europe, preoccupied with the Napoleonic wars, paid little attention to this movement, leaving the Serbs to fight on their own.
• After many years of warfare and negotiations, Serbia, strongly backed by Russia, obtained a degree of autonomy from Turkey.
• Though still a tributary to Turkey, Serbia became autonomous with a hereditary princely house.
• Before long, Serbia came under Russian protection.

Turkey and Greece:

• The second step in the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire was taken by the Greeks.
• Among the subject races of the Turkish Empire, the Greeks had been treated with marked favor and toleration. They had been entrusted with high administrative posts and were allowed to control a large share of trade and commerce.
• In the islands and on the coasts of the Aegean they enjoyed practical autonomy. Their religion was fully tolerated.
• But towards the end of the eighteenth century the national consciousness of the Greeks was stimulated by an intellectual revival which recalled the glories of the ancient times.
• French Revolution had flung broadcast the seeds of new ideas Which awakened aspirations for national independence.
• A secret society was founded in 1814 with objective to disseminate nationalist doctrines, to expel the Turks from Europe and to revive the old Greek empire of the East.
• The society expected Russian support because the Greeks and the Russians belonged to the same branch of Christianity, and because the downfall of Turkey would contribute to Russian aggrandizement. Relying upon Russian support, and stimulated by the example of Serbia, the secret society began armed preparation for a revolt at the earliest opportunity.

The War of Greek Independence:

• The much-anticipated opportunity came in 1821 when Ali Pasha, a Turkish Governor, quarreled with the Sultan and went to war with him.
• Insurrections broke out in Greece. The Greeks expected Russian help but overlooked the fact that Czar Alexander, as the founder of the Holy Alliance, would not support a revolution.
• The Greeks began the war with a wholesale massacre of the Turks. This brutal example was soon mirrored by the Turks, leading to a war characterized by mutual extermination and atrocities on both sides.

Attitude of Powers:

• For the first six years (1821-27), the Great Powers did not intervene, leaving the Greeks to their own devices.
• Their concern was less for the Greeks and more for the potential actions of Russia, who might exploit the situation for her own purposes.
• Metternich, fearing insurrections against legitimate authority, viewed the Greeks as rebels who should be left to their fate, advocating for the revolt to extinguish itself beyond the pale of civilization.
• The King of Prussia and the Czar of Russia were persuaded by Metternich to share this view.
• Great Britain, adhering to a doctrine of non-intervention and respecting the integrity of Turkey, also followed a policy of inactivity.

Intervention:

• By 1827, circumstances changed, making foreign intervention inevitable.
• The Sultan had called upon his vassal, Mehemet Ali of Egypt, for assistance, which significantly weakened Greek resistance.
• The Greek cause was on the verge of collapse, and a wave of sympathy swept across Europe for a people with such a rich cultural heritage. Protests against the ruthless subjugation of a country that was the cradle of European civilization grew louder.
• Public sympathy was coupled with the fear among the Powers that Russia might act independently.
• The wavering Czar Alexander died in 1825 and was succeeded by his more resolute brother, Nicholas I, who was determined to pursue his own agenda.
• Canning, who succeeded Castlereagh in the British foreign office, was a strong advocate of liberty abroad. His policy aimed to support the Greek cause without alienating Turkey.
• To prevent Russia from acting unilaterally, Canning persuaded France and Czar Nicholas to join England in forcing an armistice on Turkey and compelling her to accept the joint mediation of the Powers.
• A joint note was sent to Turkey, but the Sultan refused to agree to the armistice proposals.
• In response, the allied fleets of France and England destroyed several Turkish ships.
• However, Russia reaped most of the benefits from the joint intervention.
• After Canning's death, his policy was reversed by Wellington, who became British Prime Minister. Wellington apologized to Turkey and withdrew England from further involvement in the Greek issue, leaving Russia with a free hand.
• Taking matters into her own hands, Russia declared war on Turkey and forced her to come to terms.
• By the Treaty of Adrianople (1829):
• Turkey recognized the independence of Greece.
• Turkey granted practical autonomy to the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia.
• Turkey ceded increased territory in Asia to Russia, along with enhanced commercial and political rights.
• By the Convention of London in 1832, the new Kingdom of Greece was placed under the joint guarantee of the Powers.

The Treaty of Adrianople:

• Marked a significant victory for Russia.
• Granted Russia increased rights and privileges.
• Initiated the process of dismembering Turkey, in line with Russian interests.
• Enhanced Russia's prestige, as it was seen as the nation that introduced an independent Greece under its protection.
• Contrasted with England's cloudy and inconsistent policy.
• England's support for Greece was at odds with its general policy of maintaining Turkey.
• England allowed matters to drift, enabling Russia’s advance, which it feared.

Importance of the Greek Question:

• Significant as it was the first instance of nationalism triumphing since the Congress of Vienna, striking a blow to Metternich’s system.
• Demonstrated the common interest of the Powers in the Near East and the potential for the revival of Christian States.
• Turkey's reliance on Mehemet Ali for assistance, along with her defeat by Russia, exposed her weakness.
• This weakness set the stage for the next phase of the Eastern Question.

Mehemet Ali of Egypt:

• The next chapter in the Eastern Question was initiated by the ambitions of Mehemet Ali, the Pasha of Egypt.
• He aimed to capitalize on the vulnerability of Turkey, which had been revealed during the War of Greek Independence.
• Having rendered significant services to the Sultan against the Greeks, Mehemet Ali was rewarded with the governorship of the island of Crete.
• However, he deemed this reward insufficient.
• In 1831, he sought to seize Syria from his suzerain and threatened to advance on Constantinople.
• The Sultan appealed to the Great Powers for assistance.
• Only Russia responded, offering help, which the Sultan reluctantly accepted.
• The sight of Russian troops entering Turkish territories alarmed the Western Powers.
• Consequently, England, France, and Austria pressured Turkey to placate Mehemet Ali by ceding Syria, rendering Russian assistance unnecessary.

Treaty of Unkier Skelessi (1833):

• Russia was not to be thwarted in her ambitions.
• She demanded and secured her objectives in the Treaty of Unkier Skelessi in 1833.
• Turkey consented to allow Russian warships free passage through the Straits.
• The Dardanelles were to be closed to warships of all nations, except for Russia, during wartime.
• This arrangement effectively made the Black Sea a Russian lake and granted Russia a de facto protectorate over Turkey.
• The Treaty represented the peak of Russian influence in Constantinople.

British Concerns:

• The Treaty sparked great concern in England.
• Historically opposed to Russian influence in the East and wary of Russian ambitions, England was determined to overturn the treaty.
• Opportunity arose when the Sultan faced a second defeat in his attempt to reclaim Syria from his Egyptian vassal.
• At this juncture, the Great Powers intervened.
• France sought to support Mehemet Ali, providing him with secret aid to strengthen his position in Egypt and Syria, while simultaneously aiming to weaken British influence in the Mediterranean.
• Britain viewed the potential for French dominance in Egypt as equally dangerous as the recent Russian dominance in Constantinople.
• Consequently, Britain aimed to uphold the integrity of Turkey and prevent any single Power from dominating the region.

Russia's Position:

• Russia found herself in a peculiar situation.
• She realized that a successful Mehemet Ali would replace a weak ruler in Constantinople with a strong one, jeopardizing her Eastern ambitions.
• Conversely, if she supported the Sultan against his powerful vassal, she would need to cooperate with England and the other Powers.
• This cooperation would mean relinquishing some of the advantages she had already secured from Turkey.
• To counter the threats posed by France and Mehemet Ali, Russia sought closer ties with England, offering to renounce her special position in Turkey and agreeing to collective intervention.
• This led to the Convention of London.

Convention of London:

• In this agreement, Great Britain, Russia, Austria, and Prussia, without France's knowledge, consented to impose terms on Mehemet Ali.
• France, under Louis Philippe, was outraged by the slight and threatened war against England but eventually backed down.
• The successful operations of the allied fleet compelled Mehemet Ali to submit and accept the Treaty of London (1840).
• By this treaty, Mehemet Ali renounced his claim to Syria.
• The Dardanelles were to be closed to warships of all nations during wartime, nullifying the advantage granted to Russia and freeing Turkey from dangerous dependence on Russia.
• The Treaty of London was a significant victory for Britain.
• It dealt a blow to France and checked Russia, clarifying that England would not tolerate either a Russian or a French protectorate over Turkey.
• The treaty also preserved the integrity of the Ottoman Empire, which was under threat from Mehemet Ali's ambitions.

Reopening of the Eastern Question: The Crimean War

• The Crimean War (1853–1856) involved Russia against Britain, France, Turkey, and Sardinia Piedmont.
• The conflict stemmed from Russian demands for protection over Orthodox subjects of the Ottoman Sultan and a dispute between Russia and France over privileges in holy places within the Ottoman Empire.
• The war reawakened the Eastern Question and significantly disturbed the system established by the Congress of Vienna.
• It is often considered a pivotal moment in European history.

Quarrel over the Holy Places:

• For a decade following the Convention of London, there was peace in the Turkish Empire.
• However, this tranquility was disrupted by a dispute between Latin and Greek monks over custody of the Holy Places in Jerusalem.
• Though seemingly minor, this quarrel led to significant developments, reopening a new chapter in the Eastern Question.
• France supported the Latin monks, while Russia backed the Greek monks.
• Turkey had, through an old treaty, granted France the right to protect the Latin monks and bestowed special privileges upon them, including guardianship of the Holy Places.
• During France's preoccupation with internal matters during the Revolution, the Greek monks had gradually encroached upon the rights of their Latin counterparts.
• In the ensuing dispute, Napoleon III of France revived France's claims and demanded a full restoration of the rights of the Latin monks.
• Czar Nicholas championed the cause of the Greek monks.
• Initially, Turkey conceded to Napoleon's demands, but the Czar insisted on the withdrawal of this concession.
• Caught between the two Powers, Turkey attempted a compromise, which ultimately failed.
• In reality, neither France nor the Greek monks desired a compromise.
• Both Napoleon and Nicholas had ulterior motives they sought to achieve under the guise of the struggle over the Holy Places.

Motives of Napoleon III:

• Napoleon III, aware of the fragility of his position, sought to strengthen his legitimacy through a vigorous foreign policy that would win the French people's support.
• A war with Russia in defense of the Latin monks would serve this purpose.
• It would please the clerical faction in France.