 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Occupation of Istanbul" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(March 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
| Occupation of Istanbul | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part of thepartition of the Ottoman Empire and theTurkish War of Independence | ||||||||||
 Louis Franchet d'Espèrey marching inBeyoğlu, 8 February 1919 | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
| Belligerents | ||||||||||
 Japan |  Ottoman Empire | Turkish National Movement | ||||||||
| Commanders and leaders | ||||||||||
 Charalambos Simopoulos (1921–1923) | Ali Sait Pasha¹ | Selâhattin Âdil Pasha2 | ||||||||
| Strength | ||||||||||
Land forces on 13 November 1918:[3] | ||||||||||
| 1: Commander of theXXV Corps and the Constantinople's Guard (6 October 1919 – 16 March 1920[9]) 2: Commander of the Istanbul Command (10 December 1922 – 29 September 1923[10]) | ||||||||||
Theoccupation of Istanbul (12 November 1918 – 4 October 1923), the capital of theOttoman Empire, byBritish,French,Italian, andGreek,Japan forces, took place in accordance with theArmistice of Mudros, which ended Ottoman participation in theFirst World War. The first French troops entered the city on 12 November 1918, followed by British troops the next day. The Italian troops landed inGalata on 7 February 1919.[2]
Allied troops occupied zones based on the existing divisions ofIstanbul (Constantinople) and set up an Allied military administration early in December 1918. The occupation had two stages: the initial phase in accordance with the Armistice gave way in 1920 to a more formal arrangement on the eve of the signing of theTreaty of Sèvres.[11] Ultimately, theTreaty of Lausanne, signed on 24 July 1923, led to the end of the occupation. The last troops of theAllies departed from the city on 4 October 1923, and the first troops of theAnkara government, commanded byŞükrü Naili Pasha (3rd Corps), entered the city with a ceremony on 6 October 1923, which has been marked as theLiberation Day of Istanbul (Turkish:İstanbul'un Kurtuluşu) and is commemorated every year on its anniversary.[12]
1918 was the first time the city had changed hands since thefall of Constantinople in 1453. Along with theoccupation of Smyrna, it spurred the establishment of theTurkish National Movement, leading to theTurkish War of Independence.[13]
The Ottomans estimated that the population of Istanbul in 1920 was between 800,000 and 1,200,000 inhabitants, having collectedpopulation statistics from variousreligious bodies. The uncertainty in the figure reflects the uncounted population of war refugees and disagreements as to the boundaries of the city. Half or less wereMuslim, with the rest being largelyGreek Orthodox,Armenian Apostolic, andJewish; there had been a substantial Western European population before the war.[14]
TheArmistice of Mudros of 30 October 1918, which ended Ottoman involvement in WorldWar I, mentions the occupation of theBosporus fort and theDardanelles fort. That day, AdmiralSomerset Gough-Calthorpe, the British signatory, stated theTriple Entente's position that they had no intention to dismantle the government or to place it undermilitary occupation by "occupying Constantinople".[15] This verbal promise and lack of mention of the occupation of Istanbul in the armistice proper did not change the realities for the Ottoman Empire.[citation needed] Calthorpe put the British position as "No kind of favour whatsoever to any Turk and to hold out no hope for them".[16] The Ottoman side returned to the capital with a personal letter from Calthorpe, intended forRauf Orbay, in which he promised on behalf of the British government that only British and French troops would be used in the occupation of the Straits fortifications. A small number of Ottoman troops could be allowed to stay on in the occupied areas as a symbol of sovereignty.[17]
Unlike Berlin, Vienna, or Sofia, Constantinople was to be the only Central Power capital to be occupied.Lord Curzon ordered the city occupied. Motivations included anti-Communism -securing a life line of support for theWhite Russians, settling the score of theGallipoli campaign, and weaken the image of Islamist movements in India.[18]
The Allies began to occupyOttoman territory soon after theArmistice of Mudros; on 12 November 1918, a French brigade entered Istanbul. The first British troops entered the city on the following day. Early in December 1918, Allied troops occupied sections of Istanbul and set up an Allied military administration. The Military Command of the Allied Forces of Occupation dispensed the following services: passport control, police), inter-Allied tribunals and courts martial (1920), and prisons.[18]
On 7 February 1919, an Italian battalion with 19 officers and 740 soldiers landed at theGalata pier; one day later they were joined by 283Carabinieri, commanded by Colonel Balduino Caprini. The Carabinieri assumed police tasks.[2]
On 10 February 1919, the commission divided the city into three zones for police matters: Stambul (the old city) was assigned to the French,Pera-Galata to the British andKadıköy andScutari to the Italians.[2] French had one prison inKumkapı and the British had five:Galata Tower, Arabian Han, Sansarian Han, Hotel Kroecker and Shahin Pasha Hotel.[18]High Commissioner AdmiralSomerset Gough-Calthorpe was assigned as the military adviser to Istanbul.
The British rounded up a number of members of the old establishment and interned them inMalta, awaiting their trial for alleged crimes during WorldWar I. Calthorpe included only Turkish members of the Government ofAhmet Tevfik Pasha and the military/political personalities. He wanted to send a message that a military occupation was in effect and failure to comply would end with harsh punishment. His position was not shared with other partners. The French Government's response to those accused was "distinction to disadvantage of Muslim-Turks while Bulgarian, Austrian and German offenders were as yet neither arrested nor molested".[20] However, the government and the Sultan understood the message. In February 1919, Allies were informed that the Ottoman Empire was in compliance with its full apparatus to the occupation forces. Any source of conflict (includingArmenian questions) would be investigated by a commission, to which neutral governments could attach two legal superintendents.[20] Calthorpe's correspondence to Foreign Office was "The action undertaken for the arrests was very satisfactory, and has, I think, intimidated theCommittee of Union and Progress of Constantinople".[21]
Calthorpe's message was fully noted by the Sultan. There was an eastern tradition of presenting gifts to the authority during serious conflicts, sometimes "falling of heads". There was no higher goal than preserving the integrity of the Ottoman Institution. If Calthorpe's anger could be calmed down by foisting the blame on a few members of theCommittee of Union and Progress, the Ottoman Empire could thereby receive more lenient treatment at theParis peace conference.[22] The trials began in Istanbul on 28 April 1919. The prosecution presented "forty-two authenticated documents substantiating the charges therein, many bearing dates, identification of senders of the cipher telegrams and letters, and names of recipients."[23] On 22 July, the court-martial found several defendants guilty of subverting constitutionalism by force and found them responsible for massacres.[24] During its whole existence from 28 April 1919, to 29 March 1920, Ottoman trials were performed very poorly and with increasing inefficiency, as presumed guilty people were already intended as a sacrifice to save the Empire. However, as an occupation authority, the historical rightfulness of the Allies was at stake. Calthorpe wrote to London: "proving to be a farce and injurious to our own prestige and to that of the Turkish government".[25] The Allies considered Ottoman trials as a travesty of justice, so Ottoman justice had to be replaced withWestern justice by moving the trials to Malta as "International" trials. The "International" trials declined to use any evidence developed by the Ottoman tribunals. When the International trials were staged, Calthorpe was replaced byJohn de Robeck. De Robeck said regarding the trials "that its findings cannot be held of any account at all."[26] All of theMalta exiles were released.
Calthorpe was alarmed when he learned that the victor ofGallipoli had become the inspector general for Anatolia, andMustafa Kemal's behavior during this period did nothing to improve matters. Calthorpe urged that Kemal be recalled. Thanks to friends and sympathizers of Kemal in government circles, a 'compromise' was developed whereby the power of the inspector general was curbed, at least on paper. "Inspector General" became a title that had no power to command. On 23 June 1919, Somerset Arthur Gough-Calthorpe began to understand Kemal and his role in theestablishment of the Turkish national movement. He sent a report about Kemal to the Foreign Office. His remarks were downplayed by George Kidson of the Eastern Department. Captain Hurst (British army) inSamsun warned Calthorpe one more time about the Turkish national movement, but his units were replaced with abrigade of Gurkhas.
Calthorpe was assigned to another position on 5 August 1919, and left Istanbul.
In August 1919John de Robeck replacedCalthorpe with the title of "Commander-in-Chief, Mediterranean, and High Commissioner at Constantinople". He was responsible for activities regarding Russia and Turkey (Ottoman Empire-Turkish national movement).
De Robeck was very worried by the defiant mood of the Ottoman parliament. When 1920 arrived, he was concerned by reports that substantial stocks of arms were reachingTurkish National Movement, some from French and Italian sources. In one of his letters to London, he asked: "Against whom would these sources be employed?"
In London, theConference of London (February 1920) took place; it featured discussions about settling the treaty terms to be offered in San Remo. De Robeck reminded participants that Anatolia was moving into a resistance stage. There were arguments of "National Pact" (Misak-ı Milli) circulating, and if these were solidified, it would take a longer time and more resources to handle the case (partitioning of the Ottoman Empire). He tried to persuade the leaders to take quick action to control the Sultan and pressure the rebels from both directions. This request posed awkward problems at the highest level: promises fornational sovereignty were on the table and the United States was fast withdrawing into isolation.
| This sectiondoes notcite anysources. Please helpimprove this section byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged andremoved.(July 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
The newly elected Ottoman parliament in Istanbul did not recognize the occupation; they developed aNational Pact (Misak-ı Milli). They adopted six principles, which called forself-determination, the security of Istanbul, the opening of the Straits, and the abolition of the capitulations. While in Istanbul self-determination and protection of the Ottoman Empire were voiced, the Khilafat Movement in India tried to influence the British government to protect thecaliphate of the Ottoman Empire, and though it was primarily a Muslim religious movement, the Khilafat struggle was becoming a part of the widerIndian independence movement. Both movements (Misak-ı Milli and the Khilafat Movement) shared similar notions on ideology; at the Conference of London (February 1920) Allies concentrated on these issues.
The Ottoman Empire lost WorldWar I, but Misak-ı Milli with the local Khilafat Movement was still fighting the Allies.
The plans forpartitioning of the Ottoman Empire needed to be solidified. At theConference of London on 4 March 1920, the Triple Entente decided to implement its previous (secret) agreements and form what would be theTreaty of Sèvres. In doing so, all forms of resistance originating from the Ottoman Empire (rebellions, Sultan, etc.) were to be dismantled. The Allies' military forces in Istanbul ordered that the necessary actions be taken; while the political side increased efforts to put the Treaty of Sèvres into writing.
Negotiations for the Treaty of Sèvres presumed a Greek, French-Armenian, Wilsonian Armenia and Italian occupation region being Christian administrations, as opposed to the prior Muslim administration of the Ottoman Empire. Muslim citizens of the Ottoman Empire perceived this plan as depriving them of sovereignty. British intelligence registered the Turkish national movement as a movement of the Muslim citizens of Anatolia. The Muslim unrest in Anatolia brought two arguments to the British government regarding the new establishments: the Muslim administration was not safe for Christians; that the Treaty of Sèvres was the only way that Christians could be safe. Enforcing the Treaty of Sèvres could not happen without repressing Kemal'snational movement.
The British claimed that if the Allies could not controlAnatolia at that time, they could at least control Istanbul. The plan was to begin with methodically dismantling organizations within Istanbul and to then slowly advance into Anatolia. The British foreign department was asked to devise a plan to ease this path, and developed the same plan that they had used during theArab revolt. The aim was to break down authority by separating the Sultan from his government, and working differentmillets against each other, such as the Christian millet against the Muslim millet, to use the minimum force to achieve their goals.
| This sectiondoes notcite anysources. Please helpimprove this section byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged andremoved.(July 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
The Telegram House was occupied by Allied troops on 14 March. On the morning of 16 March, British forces, including theBritish Indian Army, began to occupy the key buildings and arrest nationalist politicians and journalists. A British Indian Army operation, theŞehzadebaşı raid, resulted in 5Ottoman Army soldiers from the10th Infantry Division being killed when troops raided their barracks. On 18 March, the Ottoman parliamentarians came together in a last meeting. A black cloth covered the pulpit of the Parliament as reminder of its absent members and the Parliament sent a letter of protest to the Allies, declaring the arrest of five of its members as unacceptable.[27]
The dissolution of the Ottoman Parliament left the Sultan as the sole legal authority of the Empire; in line with British aims to isolate the Sultan. Beginning with 18 March, the Sultan followed the directives of the BritishForeign Secretary, saying, "There would be no one left to blame for what will be coming soon"; the Sultan revealed his own version of the declaration of dissolution on 11 April, after approximately 150 Turkish politicians accused ofwar crimes were interned in Malta. The dissolution of the parliament was followed by the raid and closing of the journalYeni Gün (New Day).Yeni Gün was owned byYunus Nadi Abalıoğlu, an influential journalist, and was the main media organ in Turkey publishing Turkish news to global audiences.[citation needed]
On 16 March 1920, the third day of hostilities, the Allied forces declared the occupation:
In an effort to prevent the spread of Turkish nationalism, General Sir George Milne and an Allied force occupied İstanbul.
- The Allies gave assurances that they had no intention of taking over the government.
- The Allies sought to keep the Straits open and to protect the Armenians.
- The Allies persuaded the Ottoman government to denounce the Turkish nationalists and sent many into exile.
- The Sultan had established aDamad Ferid government.[28]
The British argued that the insurgency of theTurkish National Movement should be suppressed by local forces in Anatolia, with the help of British training and arms. In response to a formal British request, the Istanbul government appointed an Anatolian general inspectorSüleyman Şefik Pasha and a new Security Army,Kuva-i Inzibatiye, to enforce central government control with British support. The British also supported localguerrilla groups in the Anatolian heartland (officially called 'independent armies') with money and arms.
Despite this, combined attempts by British and local forces proved unsuccessful in quelling the nationalist movement. A clash outsideİzmit quickly escalated, with British forces opening fire on the nationalists, and bombing them from the air. Although the attack forced the nationalists to retreat, the weakness of the British position had been made apparent. The British commander, GeneralGeorge Milne, asked for reinforcements of at least twenty-seven divisions. The British were unwilling to agree to a deployment of this size, as it could have political consequences that were beyond the British government's capacity to handle.[citation needed]
SomeCircassian exiles, who had emigrated to the Empire after theCircassian genocide may have supported the British—notablyAhmet Anzavur, who led theKuva-i Inzibatiye and ravaged the countryside.[29] Others, such asHüseyin Rauf Orbay, who was ofUbykh descent, remained loyal toKemal, and was exiled to Malta in 1920 when British forces took the city.[30][self-published source] The British were quick to accept the fact that the nationalistic movement, which had solidified during WorldWar I, could not be faced without the deployment of reliable and well-trained forces. On 25 June theKuva-i Inzibatiye was dismantled on the advice of the British, as they were becoming a liability.[citation needed]
The treaty terms were presented to the Sultan in the middle of June. The treaty was harsher than the Ottomans expected, because of the military pressure placed on the insurgency from April to June 1920, the Allies did not expect that there would be any serious opposition.[citation needed]
Concurrently,Mustafa Kemal had set up a rival government inAnkara, theGrand National Assembly of Turkey. On 18 October, the government ofDamat Ferid Pasha was replaced by a provisional ministry underAhmed Tevfik Pasha asGrand Vizier, who announced the intention to convoke the Senate for the purpose of ratification of the Treaty, provided that national unity be achieved. This required seeking cooperation with Kemal. The latter expressed disdain to the Treaty and started a military assault. As a result, the Turkish Government issued a note to the Entente that the ratification of the Treaty was impossible at that time.[31]
The success of theTurkish National Movement against the French and Greeks was followed by their forces threatening the Allied forces atChanak. The British decided to resist any attempt to penetrate the neutral zone of the Straits. Kemal was persuaded by the French to order his forces to avoid any incident at Chanak. Nevertheless, theChanak Crisis nearly resulted in hostilities, these being avoided on 11 October 1922, when theArmistice of Mudanya was signed, bringing theTurkish War of Independence to an end.[32][33] The handling of this crisis caused the collapse ofDavid Lloyd George'sMinistry on 19 October 1922.[34]
Following theTurkish War of Independence (1919–1922), theGrand National Assembly of Turkey inAnkara abolished theSultanate on 1 November 1922, and the lastOttoman Sultan,Mehmed VI, was expelled from the city. Leaving aboard theBritishwarshipHMSMalaya on 17 November 1922, he went into exile and died inSanremo,Italy, on 16 May 1926.
Negotiations for a new peace treaty with Turkey began at theConference of Lausanne on 20 November 1922 and reopened after a break on 23 April 1923. This led to the signing of theTreaty of Lausanne on 24 July 1923. Under the terms of the treaty, Allied forces started evacuating Istanbul on 23 August 1923 and completed the task on 4 October 1923 – British, Italian, and French troops departingpari passu.[12][better source needed]
Turkish forces of the Ankara government, commanded byŞükrü Naili Pasha (3rd Corps), entered the city with a ceremony on 6 October 1923, which has been marked as theLiberation Day of Istanbul (Turkish:İstanbul'un Kurtuluşu) and is commemorated every year on its anniversary.[12] On 29 October 1923, the Grand National Assembly of Turkey declared the establishment of theTurkish Republic, with Ankara as its capital.Mustafa Kemal Atatürk became the Republic's firstPresident.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of September 2025 (link)
Media related toOccupation of Constantinople at Wikimedia Commons