Religious Propaganda, Rhetoric and Intervention as Means of Policy Making and Molding Public Opinion against the Ottoman Empire in 19th and Early 20th Century
Panel 250, 2013 Annual Meeting
On Sunday, October 13 at 11:00 am
Panel Description
One of the main questions of the European politics in 19th century was developments regarding the Ottoman Empire or in other words the Eastern Question. The Ottoman Empire was in the center of innumerable international problems and treaties in that century. Because the imperial powers of Europe had many vital interests on the Ottoman Empire they closely followed the developments concerning the Empire and took necessary steeps in the frame of European balance of power. In order to get an advantageous position the European powers did not miss any opportunity to intervene to the Ottoman Empire. In this stage, the Christian subjects of the Empire were offering a proper excuse for such interventions. Although the roots of intervention to the Ottoman Empire related to religious matters had dated back in history this practice reached to the peak in 19th century and continued in early 20th century. Revolts and nationalist movements in the Balkans, the Armenian question in Anatolia, conflicts between Druzes-Muslims and Christians in Lebanon and Syria etc. were among the problems which caused serious reflections on the religious base. Various groups like politicians, churches, missionaries and intellectuals used such developments as a mean of molding public opinion and making political interventions against the Ottoman Empire. As it was indicated these were mainly subjects of the European politics but the United States must also be stressed in this stage. The United States, whose interest towards the Ottoman Empire was continually increasing, had a strong missionary organization in the Empire. The American missionaries played a significant role in circulation of developments concerning the Ottoman Empire and in policy making processes towards the region. This session will mainly focus on religious propaganda, rhetoric and intervention as means of policy making and molding public opinion in 19th and early 20th century. In this content, following subjects are planned to be presented: The British Prime Minister Gladstone's political rhetoric and policies based on evangelical understanding and the Great Britain's abandonment of the policy of protecting the Ottoman Empire's integrity; France's claims of protection over the Holy Places and Catholics namely the Maronites and use of these claims after the 1860 Events in Lebanon as a religious and political rhetoric in order to be influential in the Middle East; the American Missionaries' activities in the Ottoman Empire and their role in molding public opinion and their relations with the American diplomats in 19th and early 20th century; finally a paper will evaluate anti-Turkish propaganda in the US in late 19th and early 20th centuries and it will also focus on activities of a Turkish diplomat in US to discredit this anti-Turkish propaganda and to influence public opinion in favor of the Ottoman Empire.
The subject of religious protectorate has proceeded together with the claim of being a political and economic power for France. France created a strong link between their political and economic power and religious protectorate in Levant. This link had a potential of being very useful in 19th century politics when religious rhetoric and intervention became important elements of imperial struggle and means for the legitimization of imperial enterprises. To prevent international reactions against the imperial enterprises and to direct public opinion religious rhetoric was widely used and proved to be useful. France had previously used these means successfully but the French Revolution and continuous regime changes caused some deterioration in their use. Other powers began to test the strength of France. Louis Napoleon put an end to this situation for France. He assumed the title of emperor and began to follow an aggressive policy to increase France’s reputation and to make France an imperial power. He strongly supported religious protectorate understanding and the missionary efforts.
Eastern Mediterranean was a very crucial region for France’s imperialistic interests in the Ottoman Empire. Thus France was delicately approaching every development in the region. When France waged the Crimean War against Russia the French administration stressed religious reasons and France’s historical mission in the Holy Places to justify the war in the eyes of public opinion. After a short while France played the most active role in international intervention to Lebanon in 1860 that was a result of ethnic and religious conflict experienced in Lebanon and Syria between the Maronites and Druses and Muslims. In order to explain this intervention to French and European public opinion traditional French religious protectorate was repeatedly stressed. Also French missionaries played a significant role in providing attention and support of French people to the region. Being very active in the region, missionaries made effort to justify French intervention and to mold public opinion via publications and propaganda.
In this paper, the role of religious rhetoric in justifying French interventions to Eastern Mediterranean and in molding public opinion on behalf of them will be evaluated. In this context, activities and propagandas of both French officials and missionaries will be considered. In this study, documents from the French archives, particularly the Archives du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères; archives, journals and publications of missionaries will be used as main sources. The Ottoman and Protestant missionaries’ archives will also be consulted.
The aim of this paper is to discuss the relations between the American government and the American missionaries. The discussion is based on the relations between the missionaries of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions -the biggest Protestant missionary organization- and the American diplomats in the Ottoman Empire and Turkey in the Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries.
It is a well known fact that missionary activities were never only religious activities. Missionaries looked after interests of their own countries. The American Protestant missionaries were not exceptional. They were the tools of the American interests in the Middle East. First of all the missionary institutions were American institutions. Therefore missionaries and diplomats collaborated. The American diplomats in Anatolia were there to protect the missionaries. The missionaries, on the other hand, provided information to the American consuls, embassy and the government. However, sometimes the missionaries claimed that the American diplomats did not protect them and the American interests in Anatolia, and criticized the diplomats. And the diplomats, on the other hand, thought that the missionaries were not representing the facts, and discredited them. When there was a disagreement between the diplomats and the missionaries, the latter did not hesitate to complain to the government, and put any kind of pressure on them since they had access to the media and the Capitol. The missionaries sometimes managed to discharge them, and sometimes had to forget their claims and follow the American policy determined in Washington DC.
The relations of A.W.Terrell and Amiral Bristol with the American missionaries, and the positions of the American missionaries on the Lousanne Conference and Treaty will be highlighted. Apart from the relevant English and Turkish literature, correspondences and diaries of the missionaries and diplomats from the ABCFM and Library of Congress` archives will be used.
This paper utilizes a social biography approach to examine the professional efforts of a minor Ottoman diplomat, Mustafa Shekib Bey, who represented the Ottoman Empire in the United States at the end of the Hamidian era. Like most Ottoman ambassadors, Shekib Bey did not play a central role in formulating Ottoman-U.S. policy, which was handled through the Porte and the American ambassador in Istanbul, but he worked extensively trying to influence American public opinion, explain Ottoman views, and personally represent the empire in a positive light through the American press.
Shekib Bey’s work in the United States mainly focused on countering the efforts of American missionaries who were also trying to mold public opinion. He responded to missionaries' allegations through the press on numerous occasions, presenting an Ottoman point of view and using analogies drawn from American experiences in an attempt to persuade readers. During the Magelssen incident of 1903, which included American intervention in the form of warships sent to Beirut, he desperately tried to influence American diplomatic and public opinion through the press, eliciting a sharp public response from a missionary, Rev. Edward B. Haskell. Shekib Bey also attempted to counteract the flood of negative stories published about the empire during this period through personally representing the empire in a positive light; during his tenure in Washington, newspapers from San Francisco to Boston published numerous generally sympathetic stories about his professional and social activities.
This paper argues that Shekib Bey’s work in Washington was shaped by multiple diplomatic, political, and cultural developments including the growing importance of public opinion in diplomacy from the late nineteenth century, the increasing Ottoman integration into the Western dominated “community of nations” during the Hamidian era, increasing American interventionism from the late nineteenth century, and American (and Ottoman) Orientalism during reign of Sultan Abdülhamid. At the same time, the paper gives voice to an individual diplomat.
Through examining how an Ottoman diplomat attempted to counter the religious propaganda, rhetoric, and intervention discussed by the other scholars, this paper brings a comparative perspective to the panel. The research is largely drawn from articles and interviews with Shekib Bey published in American newspapers and as well as online and archival State Department records, memoirs, and Turkish biographical dictionaries.
