Turkish press: ‘Revolutionary’ Young Turks under influence of Italy

A lithograph of the opening ceremony of the first Ottoman Parliament at the Dolmabahçe Palace in Istanbul in 1876.

The Venetian state, led by merchant aristocrats, is the birthplace of today’s modern world. Opening its doors to Jews expelled from Spain and founding Europe’s first ghetto, Venice pioneered the fundamental ideas that shaped the New World that spread across Europe. Thanks to the power of money, the printing press, intelligence and, of course, the contribution of Machiavellian politics as well as the freemasonry and sects such as the Jesuits, the Venetians paved the way first for Europe and then for the world’s politics, economy and science.

Toward the end of the 16th century, the Giovani (Young) society was founded in Venice by patriotic nobility such as Leonardo Dona, Nicolo Contarini and Antonio Querini. These “Young” members wanted Venice to play a more active role in the international arena. They held no belief in the Roman Church and had strong ties with England and the Netherlands. The spokesperson for the group was Paolo Sarpi, an atheist priest. Since they use to gather in the house of the noble Venetian Morosini family, this society was also known as Ridotto Morosini and dominated the administration of the state.

An engraving of Paolo Sarpi by English engraver George Vertue.

The modern ideas spread by this society made their first revolution in England, where Venice has been involved in political dynamics since Henry VIII. Following the execution of King Charles I in 1649, the Commonwealth was established in England. English poet John Milton, who was a firm enemy of the monarchy, took office in this new state after visiting Sarpi in Venice. In his book “Paradise Lost,” he praises Satan and asserts that every dethroned king is the revenge the devil took on God and Adam.

The revolutionary youth movement was put into a system in the 19th century with the efforts of Italian politician Giuseppe Mazzini. Masonic Young Italy (Giovine Italia) was founded by him with the slogan “Union, Progress and Freedom.” This movement gained momentum across all Europe and infiltrated the Ottoman lands through Pera-Beyoğlu in Istanbul and Thessaloniki, where Italian influence was abundant. Likewise, this particular trend drew great interest throughout the Balkans. People who internalized these new ideas in Ottoman lands called themselves Young (Jeune) Ottomans/Turks.

“Milton Dictating to His Daughter” by Swiss painter Henry Fuseli.

The Young Turks had carried out activities to transform the Ottoman Empire into a constitutional system. Sultan Abdulaziz, who repudiated the constitutionalism, was eliminated by the team that included Sultan Abdulmecid’s son Şehzade Murad V’s Italian doctor Capoleone. Instead, his nephew Şehzade Abdülhamid II was ascended to the throne, on the condition that he would declare constitutionalism.

Sultan Albülhamid II took over a state that had collapsed due to extensive foreign debts. He was well aware of the intentions of creditors’ behind the Young Turks. Therefore, he put constitutionalism aside, by using the war with Russians as an excuse to do so. Moreover, he closed down the assembly and took over the administration. He also allowed the establishment of the Ottoman Public Debt Administration (Düyun-u Umumiye) for the collection of debts. Italy was one of six states that had taken part in this administration.

Facing off with Sultan Abdülhamid II, some of the Young Turks fled abroad and others were pulled underground. Some of the Young Turks like Midhat Pasha, who had a role in the murder of Sultan Abdülaziz, were imprisoned. However, European powers, led by Italy, were yet to act out. They were pressuring the Ottoman economy, along with sending their navy to the Bosporus, when the sultan persisted. In the meantime, those European agencies continued to stir up the Balkans and reorganized the Young. Ettore Ferrari, the assistant of the master mason Ernesto Nathan, came to Istanbul via the Orient Express in July 1900 and revived the masonic lodges in dormancy.

An official portrait of Şehzade Abdülhamid at Balmoral Castle, Scotland, taken in 1867. (Archive Photo)

In 1904, European powers established an international gendarmerie in Macedonia, under the pretext of controlling the fuss there. The gendarmerie was managed by the Italian General Emilio Degiorgis. The Young were reorganized in secret meetings in Thessaloniki, where the general also participated. Emmanuele Carasso, an Italian Jew, opened the door of the masonic lodge that he managed to The Young and took them under the wing of Italy. Here, they were given training on Italian Carbonari, the informal network of secret revolutionary societies active in Italy from about 1800 to 1831, and Risorgimento, a 19th-century political and social movement in Italy.

Lawyer Emmanuel Carasso, the master of the lodge, was one of the business partners of the Jewish Bernardino Nogara, who would become the Vatican’s safe in the future. Nogara was the Italian representative of Düyun-u Umumiye, which was established to collect debts given to the Ottoman Empire. He was working for the Venetian businessperson Giuseppe Volpi. Volpi was married to Nerina Pisani, a member of Venice’s aristocratic family Pisani. They were in business with another nobleman: Piero Foscari.

The Young Turks in Thessaloniki established the Committee of Union and Progress, based on the slogan of Young Italy. Young Ottoman officers from the Second and Third Army were also included in this committee. With the support of the Italian navy, they rose up in Macedonia in the summer of 1908. They shot all of the pashas that the sultan sent to them for negotiation. Sultan Abdülhamid II, upon realizing that counseling was inefficient, wanted to attack with the army yet he soon realized that the army was no longer obeying him. After meeting with his ministers, there was only one thing left to do; he declared constitutionalism again with a telegram he sent to Macedonia on the night of July 23. Thereafter, the Muslim-majority peninsula was silent whilst celebrations were held for days in Beyoğlu and Thessaloniki.

Photograph of Giuseppe Mazzini by Domenico Lama.

As soon as the Young Turks came to power, they recruited many British advisors to the government. They entrusted the Ottoman navy to England, the army to Germany and the finances to France. The uprisings that started against the constitutional monarchy in Anatolia were harshly suppressed. Officers loyal to Sultan Abdülhamid II were promptly purged from the army, replaced by the Young unionists. However, the sultan was still in charge. The old wolf could pull in the administration again thanks to his high genius and politics. Thus, he had to be dethroned as soon as possible.

On April 13, 1909, the unionist youth and some provocateurs hired by the foreign consulates started a rebellion among hunter battalions brought to Istanbul after the constitutional monarchy. Some Young members of the Committee of Union and Progress fueled the fire with the articles they wrote in newspapers against the Committee of Union and Progress. Among the rebels gathered in Sultanahmet Square, spies dressed as mullahs were strolling around and cheering against the constitutional monarchy and the Union and Progress. The crowd, provoked by the spies, began to shoot the liberal-minded Young Turks.

Long before the rebellion in Istanbul, the Young Turks gathered in Thessaloniki and rolled up their sleeves to form an army of Balkan bandits. Having completed its preparations, the army seemingly aimed to suppress the rebellion, but actually set out on April 16 to take down Sultan Abdülhamid II. The Ikdam newspaper wrote about this army marching to Istanbul with the headline “Call to Arms!”

A Greek lithograph celebrating the Young Turk revolt in 1908 and the re-introduction of a constitutional regime in the Ottoman Empire.

In the editorial it was written: “Thessaloniki proves today what kind of a source of freedom it is. As soon as the redif soldiers (reserves of the active soldiers) were recruited, all the Young and volunteers (Albanian, Bulgarian, Greek, Serbian, Armenian, Jew) flied off to buy weapons.”

Mahmut Şevket Pasha was the head of the army, which used the trains of the German Jewish Oriental Railway Company (Compagnie des Chemins de fer Orientaux). Mahmut Şevket Pasha, who trained by Mithat Pasha, graduated from the Alliance ( Alyans) school established by modernist Jews and had a Jewish battalion of 700 volunteers under his command.

When the army came around Hadımköy, the representatives of the Dashnaksutyun Society, including the Armenian deputy Vartakes Efendi, came to meet them. The unionist youth, especially Major Enver Bey, thanked the Armenian delegation for their actions. Soldiers said, “Long live the Dashnaksutyun Association!” and applauded. Taking a break in Yeşilköy, the army arrived in Istanbul on April 22.

The European navies were waiting on the Ottoman shores to support the army. In the telegrams sent from the vilayets, it was written that the Italian, British and French fleets were sailing off Antalya and Mersin. The British navy was anchored in Beşike Bay, which is located in front of Bozcaada (Tenedos). The Russian navy also sailed from Sevastopol to the Black Sea. The ambassadors of these states in Istanbul also sent a memorandum to the cabinet. They declared that if blood is shed between the two armies, they will intervene via navy power.

A postal stamp shows Slemalık yard of the Yıldız Palace in Istanbul. (Archive Photo)

The army entered the city on the night of April 23 and led to small clashes in Taksim, Maçka and Pangaltı, where the barracks were located. The Sublime Porte was set on fire. Committee opponents were quickly executed. Some teachers and students who were completely unrelated to the rebellion took shelter in mosques and were also massacred by Bulgarian committee members. In a short time, the city was subdued. What came next was the main target. The Young surrounded Yıldız Palace, Sultan Abdülhamid II’s accommodation, with the operation they embarked on the night of April 26. The water and electricity of the palace were cut off. The guards and janitors were taken prisoners. Later, the Young, with the Bulgarian commander Sandanski and his gang, plundered the palace.

The delegation led by lawyer Carasso went to the palace the next day and informed Sultan Abdülhamid II about its decision. The sultan of the Turks was captured and taken to Thessaloniki by train. He was confined to the villa of the Italian Jew Allatini. Carasso, who distributed four tin of gold coins that he bought from an Italian bank to the youth of the union for the initiation of the 1908 revolution, later said, “We led the unionists to do this revolution for 400,000 liras, which we could not make Sultan Abdülhamid II do for 25 million liras.”

An old photo fo spy Mark Sykes.

With the removal of Sultan Abdülhamid II, the 600-year-old Ottoman Empire became history and a new state of Turkey was founded instead. The following events such as The Balkan War, World War I, the Armenian exile and so on are not associated with the Ottoman Empire’s governance. Indeed, the spy Mark Sykes, who previously worked at the British consulate in Istanbul, wrote about this issue in his book “The Caliphs’ Last Heritage: A Short History of the Turkish Empire.”

“The fall of Abdülhamid has been the fall, not of a despot or tyrant, but of a people and an idea.. In the place of theocracy, Imperial prestige and tradition, came atheism, Jacobinism, materialism and licence… In an hour, Constantinople changed; Islam, as understood by the theologians, as preached in the mosques, as the moral support of the people, as the inspiration of the army, died in a moment; the Caliphate, the clergy, the Quran, ceased to hold or inspire..”

Ukraine sees new record high of daily COVID-19 deaths

Save

Share

 11:35, 7 April, 2021

YEREVAN, APRIL 7, ARMENPRESS. Ukraine has registered a new record high of 481 deaths from COVID-19, Health Minister Maxim Stepanov said on April 7, reports TASS.

“Some 15,415 new cases of the COVID-19 coronavirus infection were registered in Ukraine as of April 7, 2021. In particular, 636 children and 437 health workers were ill”, Stepanov wrote on his Facebook page. According to the minister, over the past day 5,587 people with a suspected coronavirus infection were sent to hospitals in the country, 481 people died from complications and another 11,472 recovered.

Ukraine was Europe’s last country to launch COVID-19 vaccination on February 24. Ukraine has registered a total of three vaccines – India’s Covidshield, Pfizer’s BioNTech and China’s Sinovac Biotech. The first two vaccines have arrived in the country, but vaccination is now carried out only with Covishield. Kiev has refused to receive Russia’s Sputnik V jab.

Since the start of the vaccination campaign, a total of 320,265 people have been vaccinated in Ukraine with one dose, and just two people have been inoculated with two doses.

Pashinyan’s upcoming resignation does not require immediate conversation with Putin, Peskov says

Panorama, Armenia
March 29 2021

“The decision of the Prime Minister of Armenia Nikola Pashinyan to resign in April does not require an immediate conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin,” The Kremlin Spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told TASS news agency when asked to comment on the matter. 

To remind, Pashinyan announced about upcoming resignation on Sunday, saying he would resign next month while staying in office until snap parliamentary elections. 

“He [Pashinyan] would stay in charge of the Prime Minister’s duties, so the decision that was announced does not require an immediate discussion,” said Peskov, as quoted by the source. 

He added that the leaders of the two countries “communicated quite recently, and the contacts continue.” 

From Armenia and Azerbaijan, what can Australia learn?

Australia

The nature of warfare is dynamic. It endlessly renews itself to overcome the challenges presented by different terrains, enemies, situations, ideologies and technologies.

Let’s focus on just one of these key areas: technological change. Put simply, the rate of technological change in the 21st century has created dozens of new axes of warfare, many of which are insurmountable by conventional fighting forces.

Barring the cyber and information spheres, there few examples of where technology counts more than in the air. Nowadays, air-fighting is on the brink of a once in a lifetime strategic and technological transformation due to the symbiosis of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles, including suicide craft.

In a conventional sense, this was arguably observed for the first time during the recent Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict, in which Armenia’s conventional fighting forces were challenged – and considerably overwhelmed – by the technologically superior Azeris.

Indeed, Armenia’s expensive conventional weaponry was simply unable to compete on a different military axis, and was thus beaten by cheaper and more replaceable Azeri UAVs. The lesson is simple: no matter how robust one’s conventional army may be, the rate of technological change ensures that units, hardware and strategies are being superseded at an increasing rate – and that it is imperative for modern militaries to diversify their portfolio of resources. So how can Australia learn from this case study?

Firstly, let’s compare the ADF to the military of one of our closest neighbours to provide some perspective. While Australia counts some 80,000 active and reserve defence force personnel, Indonesia (for the sake of comparison) has 400,000 active military personnel bolstered by 400,000 reservists. Meanwhile, Australia’s arsenal of 59 tanks pale in the face of Indonesia’s 300-500 (numbers vary due to source).

Unfortunately for Australia, we are not only numerically disadvantaged, but also technologically. Indonesia acquired their first armed UAVs in 2019, and President Joko Widodo has already expressed his desire to expedite the domestic production of long-range military drones to 2022. While our wheels are in motion, we lag behind our competitors.

Armenian FM says international structures becoming convinced that Artsakh cannot be part of Azerbaijan

Save

Share

 14:20,

YEREVAN, MARCH 29, ARMENPRESS. Foreign Minister of Armenia Ara Aivazian says the international organizations, countries, after seeing the destruction of the Armenian historical-cultural heritage by Azerbaijan in Artsakh, the Azerbaijani inhuman treatment against the Armenian prisoners of war, are becoming more and more convinced that Artsakh cannot be a part of Azerbaijan.

During the session of the parliamentary standing committee on foreign affairs, the minister stated that after the recent aggression against Artsakh, it was clear to those countries and persons, who wanted to understand what had happened, that the Nagorno Karabakh conflict is not just a territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

“This is about the prevention of a new genocidal program. Now when different international structures, countries are witnessing how our cultural-historical heritage is being destructed in the territories which have come under the Azerbaijani control, what inhuman treatment is shown to the Armenian prisoners of war, I think they gradually are becoming convinced that Artsakh cannot be a part of Azerbaijan”, he said.

As for the upcoming activities and pushing forward the state and national agenda, the minister stated that regardless of the domestic political developments the foreign ministry and the whole system have continued their normal operation.

 

Editing and Translating by Aneta Harutyunyan

CivilNet: The Great Diaspora Divide

CIVILNET.AM

27 Mar, 2021 04:03

Just like most societies around the world, the Armenian diaspora is transforming in ways not seen for a century and in some ways unimaginable only a few years ago.  

These transformations have just been exasperated by the defeat of Armenia in the 2020 Artsakh war.  As unpleasant as divisions might be, we must accept them as a sign of a healthy society challenging its basic assumptions and the birth pains of a new conception and understanding of what it means to be an Armenian in the 21st century.

While many will argue that the divisions outlined are simply political in nature, they are in fact indicative of a far wider cultural divide regarding the acceptance or the rejection of a new conception of what it means to be an Armenian in the diaspora. These cultural divisions are also the lens by which the current Armenian political struggle is seen by the diaspora.  

The most consistent worldwide trend today is that all forms of authority are being challenged. This includes religious institutions, political parties, cultural organizations, the military, big business, and “traditional” family structures. There are many reasons for this, but the primary drives are that large numbers of people especially among the younger generations across the world have come to believe that these traditional institutions do not have answers to the crisis facing our contemporary world.  Many actually see traditional sources of authority as having betrayed the current generation of young people. 

In the case of the Western diaspora many among the younger generation, like their non-Armenian cohorts, have come to understand that they will have less economic security and prospects than their parents’ generation.ll around them they observe the systems of authority as being incompetent and inept, recently exemplified by the disastrous response to the Covid crisis in almost every western country. The traditional leadership is perceived to be unable or unwilling to deal with catastrophic challenges like climate change, mass migration, failing education systems and lack of middle class jobs. 

This great transformation has reached the front door of our Armenian communities all over the world, especially in the West where people enjoy greater political freedoms. The younger generation of politically active Armenians in the diaspora does not see any of our traditional institutions either speaking for them or being responsive to their needs and their ideas. 

This detachment, however, does not mean they do not care about their community or what happens in Armenia.  They see being Armenian as part of a larger struggle of rights, and they are in solidarity with other persecuted groups from around the world. They see Armenians as just another one of the crucified peoples of history and not Europeans that happen to live in the wrong part of the world.  In ideological terms, they identify far more with the Armenian flavored internationalism of a Monte Melkonian than the blood and land nationalism of a Garegin Njdeh. 

Unsurprisingly, the progressive younger Armenian diaspora was the strongest supporter of the 2018 revolution abroad.  All the while the traditional diaspora organizations were busy trying to save the old regime until its end became inevitable. 

A fact that went unnoticed last year was that during that summer’s anti-police violence uprising/riots in the United States, young Armenians were active in the front lines of both the Black Lives Matter protests and in the Covid period “Cancel The Rent” movements.  All the while, the older generations were very much identifying with the other sides of these struggles. 

What was seen as contradictions for the diaspora of the past generations is now the lens in which younger generations perceive their own identity as Armenians. 

The push back against this generational divide by the diaspora that is more traditionally minded has been very harsh. Traditionalists correctly see the new generation and their progressive ideas as an existential threat to the traditional concepts of what it means to be Armenian. 

Prior to the war this reaction manifested itself in attacks or complaints about the perceived Western-style liberalism of the Pashinyan’s government in its support for women’s rights and tolerance for LGBT Armenians.  In reality, these positions were being greatly exaggerated.  Regardless, traditional minded Armenians saw these ideas as anti-Armenian and pushed by nefarious foreign funded NGOs to destroy traditional Armenian institutions and traditional moralities. 

What eventually made these divisions into a chasm was the defeat in the 2020 Artsakh War — an event which until the signing of the ceasefire deal had actually for 44 days united Armenians across all these ideological divisions. 

Since then the war has become the symbolic tool used in our communities’ current culture war used by each side to advance their arguments and to make their case as to why theirs is the correct path to follow. 

The traditional minded diaspora Armenians blame the defeat on either the incompetence or treasonous actions of the current government. They claim that the Pashinyan government is too western and liberal and was moving the country dangerously out of the Russian orbit while supporting movements that undermined traditional Armenian values. In some extreme cases, they actually blame the democratization process of the country itself as a reason for our defeat. Most importantly they ideologically place the reasons for the defeat as a lack of fidelity to the older conceptions of patriotism and Armenianness.

A prime example of the disconnect between the traditionalist diaspora leadership and the progressives was the collaboration of the traditionalists among the diaspora’s different religious, political and civic leadership in asking for the resignation of the Pashinyan government. These calls  were met with indifference in Armenia itself and seen by the progressive diaspora as an attempt by reactionary forces to use the war to undo the post revolution democratization of the Armenian state and society.

The younger or more progressive-minded Armenians in the diaspora  blame the defeat on 25 years of incompetence and corruption. In their view the corrupt political class did not allow Armenia to build a competent and just economy, a real working state or a functional military.  In many cases they blamed the leadership of our traditional diaspora institutions as being complicit in the corrupt regimes of Armenia.

There is little doubt which side is likely to win this culture war.  The forces of social liberalism have, in the long run, always crushed their traditionalist opponents in almost every western country in the world. 

It is important for all of us to understand that these kinds of culture wars are luxuries only larger nations can afford. It is imperative for our diaspora institutions to begin asking the hard questions as to how they can engage the younger generation in ways that are responsive to their needs and ideas.  At the same time they should become real partners in the process of democratic state building in Armenia and avoid being used as the handmaidens of an Armenia based kakistocracy. 

Reformers have to understand that however our nation is to be transformed it needs to be done our way.  We do not need to become a copy of a copy. We can become more tolerant, open minded and work in solidarity with others while preserving the uniqueness of our cultural traditions.

Our collective task is to create this synthesis where the fresh ideas of the new generation are married to the best of our cultural traditions.  This is the only way to ensure the long term survival of the Armenian diaspora, at the same time establishing real partnerships to build a functional, democratic and prosperous Armenia of which   we can all be proud. 

MEPs urge Azerbaijan to immediately release all Armenian captives

Panorama, Armenia
March 24 2021
See also Armenian POWs abused in Azerbaijani custody – HRW

Chair of the Delegation for relations with the South Caucasus, MEP Marina Kaljurand, the European Parliament’s Standing Rapporteur on Armenia, MEP Andrey Kovatchev, and the European Parliament’s Standing Rapporteur on Azerbaijan, MEP Željana Zovko, on Tuesday issued a joint statement urging Azerbaijan to immediately release all remaining Armenian prisoners. The full text of the statement is provided below.

“We are gravely concerned by numerous allegations of abuse of Armenian captives by Azerbaijan, as documented in particular in a recent Human Rights Watch report. We urge the Azerbaijani authorities to investigate all such allegations and to bring those responsible to justice. Full respect of international humanitarian law and the prohibition of torture and other degrading or inhuman treatment must be ensured.

We also deplore the fact that the Azerbaijani government has failed to comply with the interim measures of the European Court of Human Rights which ordered Azerbaijan to provide information on the conditions of detention of the detainees, their state of health, as well as the measures taken to return them.

Once again, we call on Azerbaijan to release without delay all remaining Armenian detainees, in line with the provisions of the ceasefire agreement of 9 November 2020.”

Nikol Pashinyan plans to again replace NSS chief – Mediaport –

Panorama, Armenia

Armenia’s Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan reportedly plans to dismiss Director of the National Security Service Armen Abazyan next week for his “failure to o fulfill Pashinyan’s political orders and create grounds to isolate those who have created problems for him.”

“Judge of Lori Province Andranik Simonyan, whom Nikol Pashinyan appointed Deputy Director of the Investigative Committee yesterday, will be named as new Director of the National Security Service,” the Telegram channel Mediaport reported on Saturday, citing its sources.

According to the report, Simonyan is set to be appointed Deputy Director of the National Security Service on Monday and then assume the post of NSS Director.

“After Andranik Simonyan’s appointment, a new round of political pressure will probably begin in Armenia,” Mediaport said

“This marks the 5th replacement of the National Security Service head during the three years of Nikol Pashinyan’s premiership,” it added.