United States Relations with the Young Turk Government

  • Simon Payaslian

Abstract

Turks and Armenians alike as well as policymakers in Washington welcomed the Young Turk revolution that overthrew Sultan Abdul Hamid II in July 1908. The revolution, which led to the reinstitution of the 1876 Constitution, promised a political system premised upon principles of constitutional government, equality among Muslim and non-Muslim citizens, greater political stability, and economic liberalization. Armenians hoped that the revolution would finally provide the long-awaited opportunity to improve conditions under a new regime by introducing the desperately needed reforms but never implemented under the sultan.1 Foreign and domestic problems, however, dashed all hopes for such reforms.

Keywords

Europe Transportation Marketing Assure Turkey 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 2.
    A.J.P. Taylor, The Struggle for Mastery in Europe, 1848–1918 ( Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1954 ), p. 451.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Haigazn G. Ghazarian, Tseghaspan Turke [The Genocidal Turk] (Beirut: Hamazkayin Press, 1968 ), pp. 13–14.Google Scholar
  3. 4.
    T.P. Conwell-Evans, Foreign Policy from a Back Bench, 1904–1918: A Study Based on the Papers of Lord Noel-Buxton ( London: Oxford University Press, 1932 ), pp. 21–22.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    Richard G. Hovannisian, Armenia on the Road to Independence, 1918 ( Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967 ), pp. 29–30;Google Scholar
  5. Christopher J. Walker, Armenia: The Survival of a Nation ( London: Croom Helm, 1980 ), pp. 182–88.Google Scholar
  6. 8.
    Thomas A. Bailey, A Diplomatic History of the American People, 2nd edn. (New York: F.S. Crofts, 1944 ), pp. 577–78. For a useful discussion on the foreign policy of the Taft administration, see Walter V. Scholes and Marie V. Scholes, The Foreign Policies of the Taft Administration ( Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1970 ).Google Scholar
  7. 17.
    Stephan Astourian, The Armenian Genocide: An Interpretation ( Glendale: ARF Shant Committee, 1995 );Google Scholar
  8. Jacob M. Landau, -Pan-Turkism: From Irredentism to Cooperation, 2nd rev. edn. ( Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995 );Google Scholar
  9. Taha Parla, The Social and Political Thought of Ziya Gökalp, 1876–1924 ( Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1985 ).Google Scholar
  10. 19.
    Thomas A. Bryson, American Diplomatic Relations with the Middle East, 1784–1975 ( Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 1977 ), p. 49.Google Scholar
  11. 24.
    M.S. Anderson, The Eastern Question, 1774–1923: A Study in International Relations (London: Macmillan, 1966), p. 291;Google Scholar
  12. 24.
    Taylor, Struggle, pp. 474, 489, 490; Bernard Lewis, The Emergence of Modern Turkey, 2nd edn. ( London: Oxford University Press, 1968 ), p. 214.Google Scholar
  13. 33.
    American Railway Enterprise, Levant Trade Review 1:1 (June 1911): 6;Google Scholar
  14. John A. DeNovo, “A Railroad for Turkey: The Chester Project, 1908–1913,” Business History Review 33:3 (Autumn 1959): 300–29;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Henry Woodhouse, “American Oil Claims in Turkey,” Current History 15: 6 (March 1922): 953–59.Google Scholar
  16. 36.
    F.M. Huntington Wilson, Memoirs of an Ex-Diplomat ( Boston: Bruce Humphries, 1945 ), pp. 223–24.Google Scholar
  17. 44.
    Ralph W. Hidy and Muriel E. Hidy, Pioneering in Big Business, 1882–1911 ( New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955 ), p. 586.Google Scholar
  18. 50.
    Anton Mohr, The Oil War ( New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1926 ), p. 34.Google Scholar
  19. 56.
    W.E.D. Allen and Paul Muratoff, Caucasian Battlefields: A History of the Wars on the Turco-Caucasian Border, 1828–1921 ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953 ), p. 228.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Simon Payaslian 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon Payaslian

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations