Prior to World War I, American involvement in Armenian affairs was limited to missionary and educational interests. This was contrary to Britain, which had played a key role in the diplomatic arena since the Treaty of Berlin in 1878, when the Armenian question had become a subject of great power diplomacy. However, by the end of the war the dynamics of the international system had undergone drastic change, with America emerging as one of the primary powers politically involved in the Armenian issue. Dismantling the Ottoman Empire explores this evolution of the United States’ role in the Near East, from politically distant and isolated power to assertive major player. Through careful analysis of the interaction of Anglo-American policies vis-à-vis the Ottoman Armenians, from the Great War through the Lausanne Peace Conference, it examines the change in British and American strategies towards the region in light of the tension between the notions of new diplomacy vs. old diplomacy. The book also highlights the conflict between humanitarianism and geostrategic interests, which was a particularly striking aspect of the Armenian question during the war and post war period. Using material drawn from public and personal archives and collections, it sheds light on the geopolitical dynamics and intricacies of great power politics with their long-lasting effects on the reshuffling of the Middle East. The book would be of interest to scholars and students of political & diplomatic history, Near Eastern affairs, American and British diplomacy in the beginning of the twentieth century, the history of the Ottoman Empire, the Middle East and the Caucasus.

This work focuses upon the military problems of the Ottoman Empire in the era 1839 to 1878. The author examines the Crimean War (1853 to 1856) from the perspective of the Ottoman army, using British and French sources, as well as the few available Ottoman materials. Scholarship on the war has ignored this aspect, but the high quality of work about the British, French, and Russian involvement in the war has enabled the present study to advance its own work. The inability of the Ottoman high command to learn the lessons of the Crimean War led to serious defeats in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878. Revolts occurring in this period also receive attention. While the book analyzes the nature of war in the Balkans and Anatolia, its primary objective is the study of the war's social and psychological influences. This perspective runs as a theme throughout the book, but the author focuses on the psychological aspects in the final chapter using comparative perspectives. .

Like England's Charles II, the Ottoman Empire took "an unconscionable time dying." Since the seventeenth century, observers had been predicting the collapse of this so-called Sick Man of Europe, yet it survived all its rivals. As late as 1910, the Ottoman Empire straddled three continents. Unlike the Romanovs, Habsburgs, or Hohenzollerns, the House of Osman, which had allied itself with the Kaiser, was still recognized as an imperial dynasty during the peace conference following World War I. "The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire" offers a provocative view of the empire's decline, from the failure to take Vienna in 1683 to the abolition of the Sultanate by Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) in 1922 during a revolutionary upsurge in Turkish national pride. The narrative contains instances of violent revolt and bloody reprisals, such as the massacres of Armenians in 1896, and other "ethnic episodes" in Crete and Macedonia. More generally, it emphasizes recurring problems: competition between religious and secular authority; the acceptance or rejection of Western ideas; and the strength or weakness of successive Sultans. The book also highlights the special challenges of the early twentieth century, when railways and oilfields gave new importance to Ottoman lands in the Middle East. Events of the past few years have placed the problems that faced the last Sultans back on the world agenda. The old empire's outposts in the Balkans and in Iraq are still considered trouble spots. Alan Palmer offers considerable insight into the historical roots of many contemporary problems: the Kurdish struggle for survival, the sad continuity of conflict in Lebanon, and the centuries-old Muslim presence in Sarajevo. He also recounts the Ottoman Empire's lingering interests in their oil-rich Libyan provinces. By exploring that legacy over the past three centuries, "The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire" examines a past whose effect on the present may go a long way toward explaining the future. Praise for "The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire" "Alan Palmer writes the sort of history that dons did before 'accessible' became an academic insult. It is cool, rational, scholarly, literate."--John Keegan "A scholarly, readable and balanced history."--"The Independent on Sunday" "A marvellously readable book based on massive research."--Robert Blake

The collapse of the Ottoman Empire is a key event in the shaping of our own times. From its ruins rose a whole map of new countries including Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the perennially troubled area of Palestine as well as the Balkan lands - states which were to remain flashpoints of international tension. This thoughtful and lucid volume considers the reasons for the end of the Ottoman Empire; explains the course of it; and examines the aftermath.

*Includes pictures *Includes a bibliography for further reading In January 2011, the Turkish television channel "Show TV" released A Magnificent Century (Muhtesem Yuzyıl), which would become one of Turkey's most popular TV shows for the coming years. The show, which takes place during the years of the Ottoman Empire's longest reigning Sultan, Suleiman the Magnificent, was popular even outside of Turkey, including in countries such as Bosnia, Macedonia and Greece. At the same time, Muhtesem Yuzyil's success prompted concerns over Turkish attempts to use what some perceived as a form of nostalgia for the Ottoman Empire, and this led to criticism from various local figures (including the Bishop of Thessalonica in Greece as well as a ban on Turkish soap operas in Macedonia) . Nonetheless, the success of A Magnificent Century is a testament to the vivid influence the multi-secular empire still has in the Middle East and the Balkans almost 100 years after its dissolution. The long agony of the "sick man of Europe," an expression used by the Tsar of Russia to depict the falling empire, could almost blind people to its incredible power and history. Preserving its mixed heritage, coming from both its geographic position rising above the ashes of the Byzantine Empire and the tradition inherited from the Muslim Conquests, the Ottoman Empire lasted more than six centuries. Its soldiers fought, died, and conquered lands on three different continents, making it one of the few stable multi-ethnic empires in history - and likely one of the last. Thus, it's somewhat inevitable that the history of its dissolution is at the heart of complex geopolitical disputes, as well as sectarian tensions that are still key to understanding the Middle East, North Africa and the Balkans. Looking at the events of the empire's last two centuries, and interpreting the fall of the Ottoman Empire as a slow but long decline is what could be called the "accepted narrative." At the start of World War I, the Ottoman Empire was often described as a dwindling power, mired by administrative corruption, using inferior technology, and plagued by poor leadership. The general idea is that the Ottoman Empire was "lagging behind," likely coming from the clear stagnation of the Empire between 1683 and 1826. Yet it can be argued that this portrayal is often misleading and fails to give a fuller picture of the state of the Ottoman Empire. The fact that the other existing multicultural Empire, namely the Austro-Hungarian Empire, also did not survive World War I should put into question this "accepted narrative." Looking at the reforms, technological advances and modernization efforts made by the Ottoman elite between 1826 and the beginning of World War I, one could really wonder why such a thirst for change failed to save the Ottomans when similar measures taken by other nations, such as Japan during the Meiji era, did in fact result in the rise of a global power in the 20th century. Overall, the history of the dissolution can be defined as a race between the Empire's growing "illness" on one side (the Ottoman's inability to appease and federate the various people within its territory), and constant attempts to find a cure in the form of broad reforms. These questions are often presented together, but that tends to shift the focus outward, onto the various peoples and their aspirations, along with Europe's growing influence over the fate of the Ottoman Empire. To consider both the "illness" and the cure, it's necessary to separate them, before moving on to the direct cause of the empire's dissolution (World War I) and its heritage. The Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire: The History and Legacy of the Ottoman Turks' Decline and the Creation of the Modern Middle East chronicles the end of one of history's most influential empires, and the aftermath.

An unprecedented scholarly effort surveying the very important, but neglected role of and consequences for the Ottoman state of World War I