According to Martin Bunton and David Fromkin the Ottoman Empire’s entry WW1 was not inevitable and had a significant impact on the length of the war. However, they disagree if this decision was pivotal in the empire collapse. Further, Margaret MacMillan and Martin Bunton share similar views on the connection between the present conflict in Syria and WW1.
The Ottoman Empire lacked an alliance at the outbreak of war in 1914. While, the Ottoman Empire’s would eventually align with Germany, both Bunton and Fromkin argue that this alliance was not a foregone conclusion, as the Ottoman Empire had approached France or Britain about an alliance, but both turned them down. However, Bunton argues that the Ottoman Empire considered staying out of the war, whereas Fromkin believes that the Ottoman’s entry into the …show more content…
With this additional place of conflict, Bunton argues that the war was lengthen considerably, as numerous troops and supplies were sent to defend these vital supply passages rather then to the western front.
While, Bunton, argues the Ottoman’s Empire entry into WW1 was the major contributing factor for the collapse of the empire as Britain would not have made their wartime promises with regards to land claims in the Middle East and after the war would not have carved up the empire which would later lead into the modern territorial system.
However, Fromkin agues that “ramshackle Ottoman Regime [was] domed to disappear” because the empire had been losing territory to European nations for decades, was not ruled effetely and was living in the past. Further that the Europeans control and organization of the land more rationally was invariable For Fromkin the Ottoman Empire was the “sick man of Europe” and was collapsing regardless of the
The Ottoman Empire lacked an alliance at the outbreak of war in 1914. While, the Ottoman Empire’s would eventually align with Germany, both Bunton and Fromkin argue that this alliance was not a foregone conclusion, as the Ottoman Empire had approached France or Britain about an alliance, but both turned them down. However, Bunton argues that the Ottoman Empire considered staying out of the war, whereas Fromkin believes that the Ottoman’s entry into the …show more content…
With this additional place of conflict, Bunton argues that the war was lengthen considerably, as numerous troops and supplies were sent to defend these vital supply passages rather then to the western front.
While, Bunton, argues the Ottoman’s Empire entry into WW1 was the major contributing factor for the collapse of the empire as Britain would not have made their wartime promises with regards to land claims in the Middle East and after the war would not have carved up the empire which would later lead into the modern territorial system.
However, Fromkin agues that “ramshackle Ottoman Regime [was] domed to disappear” because the empire had been losing territory to European nations for decades, was not ruled effetely and was living in the past. Further that the Europeans control and organization of the land more rationally was invariable For Fromkin the Ottoman Empire was the “sick man of Europe” and was collapsing regardless of the