Gallipoli: Britain merely wanted something to trigger a war

IN his letter (April 12), Mark Cronin reasserts the British view that the Turks bear responsibility for being invaded at Gallipoli because “the pro-German faction within the Turkish government was the controlling party in the lead-up to the war”.

There was indeed someone within Ottoman ruling circles (Enver) who may have favoured a more substantial alliance with Germany.

However, the fact that the Turks remained neutral, despite various provocations such as the seizing of their battleships by Winston Churchill, and kept offering numerous alliances to the Entente powers up until the declarations of war on them suggests Enver was not such a “controlling” influence.

That Turkey ended up at war is more a testament to the successful policy of the Entente which made Enver’s policy the only viable option in the light of an inevitable attack on the Ottoman empire.

This was because, despite Mr Cronin’s assertion, it was not just Whitehall civil servants who made contingencies for war on the Ottomans in 1914.

A public offer was aired by Russia to England in 1903 for a division of the area around Constantinople whereby Britain would take the gateway to the straits at Gallipoli if the czar was permitted the Ottoman capital.

As early as 1906 the Committee for Imperial Defence, the most important strategic body in the British state, discussed and devised plans, in the form of a report, for an assault on the Dardanelles which provided the (misguided) template for operations in 1915.

Mr Cronin’s belief that “Britain had to remain true to its ally Russia when it declared war on Turkey and so, like the larger war itself, was sucked into a conflict not of its choosing” ignores two important facts. Firstly, there was no requirement for anyone to contest the war against every adversary just because they were part of an alliance. The Italians were in alliance with Germany but they remained neutral in 1914 and were successfully “turned” by British efforts in 1915 to the Entente side.

The US saw no necessity of declaring war on Turkey when it entered the conflict. Why? Because it had no imperial ambitions for territorial aggrandisement in the Middle East (whereas England did).

Secondly, there is a large amount of evidence contained in my book, The Rise and Fall of Imperial Ireland, that from around 1903/4 England determined to make war on Germany, in alliance with France and Russia. That was what the 1904 Entente Cordiale and the 1907 agreement with Russia were all about. Once Britain ceased its “the Russians shall not have Constantinople” policy and agreed to a division of Muslim lands in return for the czar’s army bearing down on Berlin, war on the Ottoman empire was inevitable. It just needed a trigger or excuse.

As Field Marshall Lord Carver noted in his book on Gallipoli, the obscure incident that occurred in the Black Sea was never justification for destabilising an entire region.

To paraphrase Mr Churchill, “history will be kind to me since I intend to write it myself”.

Again, Mr Cronin is too influenced by the English version of history to see anything wrong with how the British state operates in the world.

Dr Pat Walsh

Leyland Crescent

Ballycastle

Co Antrim BT54 6QW