|
Post by raharris1973 on Jun 8, 2023 0:55:00 GMT
If somehow the Balkan League states are restrained or prevented from attacking the Ottomans in the Balkan War of 1912 [perhaps not forming the Balkan League in the first place], or if the Ottomans prevail in defending and holding their European territory against them, might the presence of sizeable territories in the Empire, with very large populations of ethnic Greeks, Bulgarians, Macedonians, and Albanians, of suspect loyalty in Turkish eyes and prone to rebellion or insurgency, tempt Ottoman Turkish authorities into genocidal campaigns against one or more of these groups, somewhat similar to what the Ottoman Turks did in OTL to the Armenians and Assyrians of the empire?
Yes or no, and why?
On the other hand, I would expect without a Balkan war, or with a successful Turkish defense, many fewer massacres of Turks and Muslims in erstwhile Ottoman Rumelia in 1912-1913, and less trauma to the Ottoman empire from having to settle Balkan Muslim and Turkish refugees (Muhacirs) in the remaining parts of the empire. Maybe the Armenian genocide never occurs in this alternate timeline, or if you consider pre-1914 anti-Armenian massacres as part of the genocide, at least it never escalates to what it became post 1914?
Inspired by an old late Ottoman/early Zionist thread where someone discussing outsiders' critique of the 'zero-sum mentality' of the peoples of the near east, and met it with the retort that objectively those peoples were living in a 'zero sum reality'.
|
|
|
Post by TheRomanSlayer on Jun 8, 2023 4:45:08 GMT
IOTL, the Thracian Bulgarian Genocide did occur around 1913. In a no Balkan War scenario, the persecution might actually intensify to the point where all of Thrace would actually undergo a significant demographic change in favor of the Muslim majority.
|
|