WI: The Ottoman Empire joined the allies in WW1?

So I'll be the first to admit that I'm not much of an expert on the Ottoman Empire, but from my readings, I've gathered that they were friendly with the British for a while before WW1. So my question is: What if the Ottomans chose to side with the Allies in WW1 and how could we get to this point? How much action would they see? Would the middle east be a better place if the Allies won with the Ottomans on their side? Would Russia fare better without the black sea being closed off? And so on and so forth?
 
From what I remember the Aliies were planning on dividing the Ottoman Empire, which is why the Ottomans fought for the Central Powers.
 
From what I remember the Aliies were planning on dividing the Ottoman Empire, which is why the Ottomans fought for the Central Powers.
I think you are thinking of Sykes Picot agreement, that happened after they were fighting the Ottomans, they had no similar plan before this.
So I'll be the first to admit that I'm not much of an expert on the Ottoman Empire, but from my readings, I've gathered that they were friendly with the British for a while before WW1. So my question is: What if the Ottomans chose to side with the Allies in WW1 and how could we get to this point? How much action would they see? Would the middle east be a better place if the Allies won with the Ottomans on their side? Would Russia fare better without the black sea being closed off? And so on and so forth?
It depends what time they join the war, if they join after Bulgarian entry (if it still happens) they will have to fight against them. If they join before it could influence the Bulgarians not to join which will have large effects on Serbian campaign. It will also influence Greek entry, maybe it can help argument to join as there will be less threat of joining. IOTL Ottomans sent armies to the Eastern front against the Russians they will likely send some there still but on the other side, they will also have a lot more soldiers to be able to send due to not fighting in Caucaus, Dardenelles and Southern fronts. However they might not send too many as they will not care so much. Having the starights open will help Russian supplies a lot it can make food situation much better maybe even stopping revolutions. Overall middle east will be more united but they will be ruled by empire famous for genociding, in this time period. There is also the question of why they would join the entente, there is not much to gain accept maybe some things from Bulgaria and entente agreeing to abolish capitulations, also Italians can give Agean possessions back and Russia agreeing to not aggress against Ottomans, but I do not think this is enough or if it would be realistic for more to be offered. (maybe British can give some Trucial states)
 
If you're referring to the Armenian genocide, would that even still happen if the Ottomans didn't go to war with the Russians?
No, I am just making the point that the government had to capacity to do things like that. They will still have a lot of massacres against them just on a smaller scale and not co ordinated by central government, and it will depend on government who is ruling as it changed a lot in this period. However a victory in joining the entente could help to cement the young turks who were very racist against armenians.
 
How? Russia and the Ottomans signed an alliance before the war. The Ottomans insisted that it should include the French and British as well. The latter two would not guarantee the Ottomans against the Balkan states while Russia would.

The effect would be obvious. Freed from fighting the Ottomans and able to import what she needed, the Russians would be far more powerful. The Italians and Romanians far more likely to join the allies and Bulgaria sit it out.

Probably cuts at least about two years off the war
 
Russia and the Ottomans signed an alliance before the war.
Signed? When? Source?

The Ottomans insisted that it should include the French and British as well. The latter two would not guarantee the Ottomans against the Balkan states while Russia would.
That was rather dumb of them, especially if the alliance was after the two Balkan Wars that ended in 1913. The Balkan states weren't likely to make any more gains at Ottoman expense.
 
Signed? When? Source?


That was rather dumb of them, especially if the alliance was after the two Balkan Wars that ended in 1913. The Balkan states weren't likely to make any more gains at Ottoman expense.
On the top of my head, the only source that comes to mind would be Lord Kinross' The Ottoman Centuries. He discusses several last minute alliance negotiations in the last chapter or two

We're talking Spring 1914.

Greece and the Ottomans we're headed for war, the Ottomans might get into another Italian war and British and French public opinion was very much anti Ottoman.

Certainly carried political risk. Russia comes out the worse but that might have been ok for the British.

Diplomacy is such a game
 

Osman Aga

Banned
So I'll be the first to admit that I'm not much of an expert on the Ottoman Empire, but from my readings, I've gathered that they were friendly with the British for a while before WW1. So my question is: What if the Ottomans chose to side with the Allies in WW1 and how could we get to this point? How much action would they see? Would the middle east be a better place if the Allies won with the Ottomans on their side? Would Russia fare better without the black sea being closed off? And so on and so forth?
I will avoid how it happens but solely look on "what happens"
- No blockade of the straits means the Russians get full supplies to the Crimea which will affect their performance for the best. The Black Sea Ports being close to the Austro-Hungarian Front especially is a big boost.
- No British and Russian troops tied to the Ottoman Empire which means many more can be used against Germany and Austria-Hungary
- No Bulgaria on the side of the Central Powers. Bulgaria leaned where the Ottomans went at this point, knowing that they are the only neighbor of the Ottoman Empire in Europe and the Ottomans will strike against them if they see the chance considering that there is majority Muslim region in Western Thrace and Bulgarian Rhodopes by 1914.
- No Bulgaria means no attack on Serbian Macedonia. Serbia may still fall to the Austro-Hungarians but not so easily, though they may even hold out if the Russians can start an offensive on Austria-Hungary South and West of the Carpathian Mountains
- Better Russian performance would most likely result in an earlier Romanian participation on the Entente side. No later than mid 1915.
- Italy may join as late as December 1914, which is bad news for Austria-Hungary with Russia, Italy and Romania ganging up on them

Ottoman Alliance for the Entente in 1914 is pointless from a military standpoint as the Ottomans are not bordering Germany nor Austria-Hungary, nor will Bulgaria join the Central Powers. It will guarantee passage to Russia which would keep the Russians going on in the War. A Greco-Ottoman War could happen, which could help the Greeks to side with the Central Powers (IIRC there was a side in Greece that wanted to join the Central Powers). If that was to happen there is a very likely guaranteed possibility of Bulgaria joining the Entente, expanding at the cost of Greece in Greek Macedonia (up to the Vardar River), while the Ottomans secure the Islands on the Coast of Anatolia (which was very likely considered but WW1 happened and no dreadnoughts arrived). The dreadnoughts are in the Ottoman Navy, tipping the balance in their favor in the Aegean.

That's about it...

But then again, the British may pressure the Ottomans to refrain from declaring war against the Greeks. I
 

Osman Aga

Banned
From what I remember the Aliies were planning on dividing the Ottoman Empire, which is why the Ottomans fought for the Central Powers.

The Entente had plans about the "Armenian Reforms" which would mean giving the control of certain provinces in Central and Eastern Anatolia to Ottoman Armenians in both government and military within the Ottoman Empire. This pretty much would mean the exodus of Muslims in those "Armenian Provinces" and create a situation of a New Bulgaria.
 

Osman Aga

Banned
On the top of my head, the only source that comes to mind would be Lord Kinross' The Ottoman Centuries. He discusses several last minute alliance negotiations in the last chapter or two

We're talking Spring 1914.

Greece and the Ottomans we're headed for war, the Ottomans might get into another Italian war and British and French public opinion was very much anti Ottoman.

Certainly carried political risk. Russia comes out the worse but that might have been ok for the British.

Diplomacy is such a game

Greece is the most likely target in 1914, especially considering the Dreadnoughts being purchased. A war with Italy is really out of question by then.
 
the only source that comes to mind would be Lord Kinross' The Ottoman Centuries. He discusses several last minute alliance negotiations in the last chapter or two

We're talking Spring 1914
There were some discussions, but they never came to anything.
According to 'The Late Ottomans’ path to allliance with Germany in 1914, Revisited, E. Tufan, 1998, https://www.academia.edu/7206615/The_Late_Ottomans_path_to_allliance_with_Germany_in_1914_Revisited' p27-28:
A noticeable offshoot of the rapprochement was the founding of the “Ottoman-Russian Society” with the aim of achieving ideological, economical and political understanding in March 1914. It was in this milieu that an Ottoman mission led by Talât, now Minister of the Interior, and the former War Minister, İzzet Paşa, was despatched to Livadia in Crimea in May 1914. The Russian Foreign Minister, Sazonov came from St. Petersburg for the occasion.M. de Giers, the Russian Ambassador in Istanbul, was also present. If Sazanov is to be believed Giers warned him “not to believe a word of anything Talaat might say”. In the last day of their visit Talat approached Sazanov: “I have to make you a very serious proposal:would the Russian Government care to conclude an alliance with Turkey?” Sazanov did not reject the idea in principle. He later informed his ambassadors in Paris, London, Vienna andBerlin that at the audience Talât Bey had made it unmistakably clear that Turkey wished forthe closest possible links with Russia. Sazonov emphasised that Talât twice used the word “alliance” to which he (Sazonov) had replied “that this question naturally needed to be examined but that we were ready from now on to work for a mutual rapprochement.” In the larger perspective, however, the idea of an alliance with the Ottomans was incompatible withthe current concepts of Russian policy, which had long been coveting the Straits. A rapprochement with the Porte would necessarily have implied the abandonment of suchschemes. The end result of the Ottoman initiation was unsurprisingly a rebuff.
 
From what I remember the Aliies were planning on dividing the Ottoman Empire, which is why the Ottomans fought for the Central Powers.
That, and to be blunt, you have Russia, who the Ottomans weren't exactly fans of, Britain who was holding up their already bought and paid for dreadnoughts, and France, who I don't know too much about....

The Ottomans would've been better suited remaining neutral, but trying for the Allies might be very unpopular domestically among the Ottoman citizens, and they know it.

Which kinda is the issue, what exactly would the Ottomans be promised from the Allies enough to entice them into a meatgrinder, on the same side as the Russians of all people?
 
That, and to be blunt, you have Russia, who the Ottomans weren't exactly fans of, Britain who was holding up their already bought and paid for dreadnoughts, and France, who I don't know too much about....

The Ottomans would've been better suited remaining neutral, but trying for the Allies might be very unpopular domestically among the Ottoman citizens, and they know it.

Which kinda is the issue, what exactly would the Ottomans be promised from the Allies enough to entice them into a meatgrinder, on the same side as the Russians of all people?
The Russians and Ottomans had much better relations than people realize. Under Alexander III, Nicholas and Abdul Hamid, they were very close with the Russians frustrating all Armenian relief efforts.

Even during the Balkan wars it was the Russians who threatened war with Bulgaria if they got any closer to Constantinople.

Nor were Anglo Ottoman relations very close at all. See for example, British occupation of Egypt, Kuwait and Cyprus for example.

Ottoman demands were very much directed at France and Britain as much as Russia. See for example the ending of the capitulations.

@FriendlyGhost
Sources differ on how far along the negotiations had gotten. That they took place means they were possible
 
The posts above about obstacles to Britain signing onto a deal seem to reveal a good bit of silly British favoritism towards little Greece.

Reminiscent of their prior silly favoritism toward Piedmont-Sardinia.
 
The posts above about obstacles to Britain signing onto a deal seem to reveal a good bit of silly British favoritism towards little Greece.

Reminiscent of their prior silly favoritism toward Piedmont-Sardinia.
There's more to it than that. First, domestic pressures will always come first. If it will cost you election, no one will do it.

But the Entente wasn't a formal alliance for a reason-. Russia and Britain despised each other and cooperated only because because they both needed France.

Britain would have sold out Russia in 1914 but France wouldn't. Only then did Grey seek cabinet approval for war.

Britain didn't want Russia as the dominant partner to the Entente and control over the straits would do that.

There's also the possibility of the Bulgarians attacking and the British historical refusal to enter binding agreements.
 
The Russians and Ottomans had much better relations than people realize. Under Alexander III, Nicholas and Abdul Hamid, they were very close with the Russians frustrating all Armenian relief efforts.

Even during the Balkan wars it was the Russians who threatened war with Bulgaria if they got any closer to Constantinople.

Nor were Anglo Ottoman relations very close at all. See for example, British occupation of Egypt, Kuwait and Cyprus for example.

Ottoman demands were very much directed at France and Britain as much as Russia. See for example the ending of the capitulations.

@FriendlyGhost
Sources differ on how far along the negotiations had gotten. That they took place means they were possible
Huh, always thought it was the other way around. News to me.
 
Huh, always thought it was the other way around. News to me.
In 1896, Salisbury suggested to Nicholas that they jointly depose Abdul Hamid. Naturally, the Sultan was not pleased with the British.

Basically under Alexander III, the Russians and the Ottomans concluded that their rivalry hurt both of them while their mutual enemies played the two off against each other.
 
Top