Abstract
In the preceding chapters it has been suggested that in certain limited but specifiable circumstances, the pursuit of strategies of co-operation — operationalised in this context as participation in the bilateral treaty-making process — appears to have a reductive impact upon (pairs of) nations’ propensities to engage in warfare; even when pre-existing patterns of antagonism are taken into account. A major problem associated with this conclusion, however, is that given the nature of the data-analytic approach adopted, it has not been possible to specify the precise mechanisms that might have generated the statistical relationships which have been repeatedly observed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
For a review of this debate, see Anthony R. DeLuca, ‘Montreux and Collective Security’, The Historian vol. 38, no.1 (1975), pp. 1–20. Documents cited in this chapter are taken from the F(oreign) O(ice) files at the Public Records Office, Kew Gardens, London.
W. L. Wright, ‘Truths about Turkey’, Foreign Affairs vol. 26 (1948), pp. 349— 50.
Aileen G. Cramer, ‘Turkey in search of a protector: 1918–1947’, Current History, vol. 13 (1947), p. 286.
Frank Marzori, ‘Western-Soviet rivalry in Turkey, 1939 —I’, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 7 (1971), pp. 63–4.
French notes in this context: ‘Given the Turks’ unpreparedness, the British … could only explain to themselves the Turks’ seeming perversity by reference to bitter internal divisions within … (the Turkish leadership) … and the machinations of a handful of German conspirators’ (p. 213). See David French, ‘The Origins of the Dardanelles Campaign Reconsidered’, History, vol. 68, no. 223 (June 1983), pp. 210–24.
H. Kuyacak, ‘Anglo-Turkish Economic Relations’, South Asian Review, vol. 37 (1941), pp. 92–3;
Werner E. Braatz, ‘Junkers Flugzeugwerke A. G. in Anatolia 1925–1926: an aspect of German-Turkish economic relations’, Tradition, vol. 20 (1975), pp. 24–39.
John R. Craf, ‘Turkey, Guardian of the Dardanelles’, Social Studies, vol. 36 (1945), pp. 157–8.
H. Edib, ‘Turkey and her Allies’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 18 (1940), p. 442.
R. R. Kasliwal, ‘The Foreign Policy of Turkey since 1919’, Indian Journal of Political Science vol. 7 (1946), pp. 387–8; Craf, ‘Turkey’, pp. 157–8.
A. L. MacFie, ‘The Chanak Affair (September—October 1922)’, Balkan Studies vol. 20, no. 2 (1979), pp. 309–41; Kasliwal, ‘The Foreign Policy’, p. 389.
Ahmed Emir Yalman, Turkey in My Time (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1956), pp. 68–71; cited in
Robert L. Daniel, ‘The United States and the Turkish Republic before World War II: the Cultural Dimension’, Middle East Journal, vol. 21 (1967), p. 53.
P. W. Ireland, ‘Turkish Foreign Policy after Munich’, Political Quarterly, vol. 10 (1939), pp. 191–2.
Geoffrey Lewis, Turkey (London: Ernest Benn, 1965), p. 116.
Metin Tamkoc, The Warrior Diplomats (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1976), p. 192.
Philip Graves, Briton and Turk (London: Hutchinson, 1941), p. 224.
Robert W. Olson and Nurhan Ince, ‘Turkish Foreign Policy from 1923–1960: Kemalism and its legacy, a review and a critique’, Oriente Moderno, vol. 57 (1977), p. 233.
Percy E. Corbett, Law in Diplomacy (Princeton University Press, 1959), p.205.
D. A. Routh, ‘The Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Black Sea Straits (20th July, 1936)’, in Royal Institute of International Affairs, Survey of International Affairs 1936 (Oxford University Press, 1937), p. 584.
A. L. MacFie, ‘The Straits Question: The Conference of Montreux (1936)’, Balkan Studies, vol. 13, no. 2 (1972), pp. 203–19.
Ludmilla Zhivkova, ‘Anglo-Turkish relations 1934–35’, Etudes Balkaniques vol. 7, no. 4 (1971), pp. 82–98; Olson and Ince, ‘Turkish Foreign Policy’, p. 232.
V. K. Volkov, ‘The Foreign Policy of Turkey and Greece on the eve of and in the period of the Munich Agreement’, Voprosy Istorii vol. 4 (1978), pp. 42–61; Ireland, ‘Turkish Foreign Policy’, p. 194.
David A. Alvarez, ‘The Embassy of Lawrence A. Steinhardt: aspects of Allied-Turkish relations 1942–45’, East European Quarterly, vol. 9, no. 1 (1975), pp. 39–52;
G. Jaeschke, ‘Turkey’s Foreign Policy in World Wars I and II’, Belletin vol. 41, no. 164 (1977), pp. 733–43; Tamkoc, The Warrior Diplomats pp. 205–6.
Maria Antonia Di Casola, ‘The problem of Turkey’s neutrality policy between the end of 1942 and the meeting at Adana’, Politico, vol. 40, no. 2 (1975), pp. 238–62.
Peter J. Beck, ‘A tedious and perilous controversy: Britain and the settlement of the Mosul dispute, 1918–1926’, Middle East Studies, vol. 17, no. 2 (1981), p. 256.
This interpretation has some parallels in the attempts by social psychologists to understand behaviour in terms of attribution theory. See, for example, D. Bem, ‘Self Perception. An Alternative Interpretation of Cognitive Dissonance Phenomena’, Psychological Review, vol. 64 (1967), pp. 183–200.
Copyright information
© 1986 David Sanders
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sanders, D. (1986). A Case-study: Anglo-Turkish Relations during the Interwar Years. In: Lawmaking and Co-operation in International Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-06885-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-06885-2_6
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-06887-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-06885-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)