Did the Ottoman Empire ever make a claim on Central Asia?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,116
SoCal
#1
Did the Ottoman Empire ever make a claim on Central Asia?

I would think that this would have been extremely unlikely before 1918 due to the Ottoman Empire's weakened position; however, once Russia collapsed in 1918, a brief opportunity for the Ottomans and other Central Powers oepned up. I know that the Ottomans conquered Baku in late 1918 (before their loss in World War I compelled them to withdraw), but I was also wonder if the Ottomans ever made a claim to Central Asia as well. The logic behind such a claim would be Pan-Turkism--as in, an ideology with a belief that all Turkic peoples must unite. Indeed, Enver Pasha (one of the leaders of the Ottoman Empire during WWI) was a staunch believer in this ideology and even supported the Basmachi in Central Asia in their rebellion against Russian rule after the end of World War I:

Pan-Turkism - Wikipedia



Anyway, did the Ottoman Empire ever lay a claim to Central Asia? Logistics would certainly be a challenge, but the Ottomans could have traveled to Central Asia either by sea or through northern Persia/Iran.
 
Mar 2019
106
Victoria, Australia
#2
I can't quite remember where the source is but I do believe that their one of their main goals when they claim Baku was to expand further east as to gain some of the resources there. I don't quite remember exactly whether or not this included anything beyond Baku/the Caspian sea.

However, if World War 1 had turned out different I find it quite possible the concept that the Ottoman Empire would have tried to push eastwards, perhaps at a detriment to the Persians. But, I find the possibility of them "staying at home" and not conquering anyone a lot more likely. Ottoman Empire in 1910s had a lot of issues and a war with Persia or anyone else would have made it only worse.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,116
SoCal
#3
I can't quite remember where the source is but I do believe that their one of their main goals when they claim Baku was to expand further east as to gain some of the resources there. I don't quite remember exactly whether or not this included anything beyond Baku/the Caspian sea.
Yeah, they wanted Baku for its oil--but as you said, I don't know if their plans also included any territories east of Baku.

However, if World War 1 had turned out different I find it quite possible the concept that the Ottoman Empire would have tried to push eastwards, perhaps at a detriment to the Persians. But, I find the possibility of them "staying at home" and not conquering anyone a lot more likely. Ottoman Empire in 1910s had a lot of issues and a war with Persia or anyone else would have made it only worse.
The Persians were neutral and thus starting a war with them would be really, really stupid. However, the Ottomans were already at war with Russia and, once Russia was defeated, almost any peace terms could have been imposed on the Russians.

Plus, acquiring Central Asia would have given the Ottoman Empire good compensation for the loss of its Arab-majority provinces.
 
Mar 2019
106
Victoria, Australia
#4
Plus, acquiring Central Asia would have given the Ottoman Empire good compensation for the loss of its Arab-majority provinces.
I suspect that if WW1 had turned out different the ottoman would have wanted to re-acquire the "rebel" countries to the south. Their existance was very much tied to the fate of the great war and the peace treaty may well have demanded them to become once again under ottoman control.

I find that concept of turkey obtaining the "stans" as a lot more difficult to swallor then them simply acquiring Georgia, northern azerbaijan and parts of the nothern Caucasus. The problems of having such a large exclave would be significant.

Turkey making some kind of puppet-like state out of those new nations is a different story though.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,116
SoCal
#5
I suspect that if WW1 had turned out different the ottoman would have wanted to re-acquire the "rebel" countries to the south. Their existance was very much tied to the fate of the great war and the peace treaty may well have demanded them to become once again under ottoman control.
Britain is probably going to demand huge CP concessions elsewhere if the Ottomans want their Arab-majority provinces back, though. Would the CPs have actually been willing to pay the necessary price for this?

I find that concept of turkey obtaining the "stans" as a lot more difficult to swallor then them simply acquiring Georgia, northern azerbaijan and parts of the nothern Caucasus. The problems of having such a large exclave would be significant.
A land connection could be acquired through Persia, though. Plus, there would also be a sea connection through the Caspian Sea.

Turkey making some kind of puppet-like state out of those new nations is a different story though.
One giant Turkestan puppet state?
 
Nov 2018
11
Istanbul, Turkey
#6
Enver Pasha died while he was fighting for freedom of Turkestan in Central Asia.

There was no exact claim on Central Asia from Ottomans but the rulers were always conscious that their background date back to Central Asia and Central Asian people are their relatives.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
21,116
SoCal
#7
Enver Pasha died while he was fighting for freedom of Turkestan in Central Asia.

There was no exact claim on Central Asia from Ottomans but the rulers were always conscious that their background date back to Central Asia and Central Asian people are their relatives.
So, their views in regards to Central Asia were similar to Americans' views in regards to Britain--as in, a traditional homeland but not a territory that they want to subjugate?
 

Similar History Discussions