Unit 4: Ottoman Diplomacy and Diplomatic Letters

Introduction

Diplomacy can be broadly defined as “an instrument of solving problems between the states before going into an armed conflict.” However, it’s not limited to the solution of inter-state problems in peace. The Ottoman Empire conducted its foreign relations via ad hoc diplomacy until the end of 18th century. It was one of the dominant powers until the end of 17th century and carried out its diplomatic relations on the basis of superior-inferior dichotomy. They carried out their diplomatic relations on the basis of unilateralism and there was no room in the Ottoman diplomacy for relations on the basis of equality and mutuality.

Ad Hoc Diplomacy : It was the diplomatic system adapted by the states before the establishment of modern, permanent diplomacy in the 14th and 15th centuries. States were sending temporary representatives or missionaries to each other for specific missions. For the solution of problems, signing treaties, declaring their war or peace decisions, etc. rulers were sending their representatives. After the formation of modern diplomacy, states began to adapt professional and permanent institutions and instruments. The Ottoman Empire used ad hoc diplomacy until the end of 18th century. The reign of Selim III, who was closely following the developments in Europe, was a turning point in the adaptation of modern diplomacy. Especially with Mahmud II, the Ottoman Empire began to adapt the rules and institutions of modern diplomacy despite some shortcomings.

Ad Hoc Ottoman Diplomacy 1299-1793

Although it was an expansionist power with imperial claims, the Ottoman Empire did not neglect diplomacy in the period between 15th and 18th centuries and conducted diplomatic relations with Venice, Genoa, Poland, Russia, Iran, Hungary,Austria, France, Transylvania, Bogdan, Walachia, Ragusa, Georgia, Algeria, Tripoli, Morocco and Marrakech. The sense of superiority and powerfulness were important factors in Ottomans’ diplomatic relations in its heydays. Some scholars argue that the empire conducted unilateral diplomacy with these states due to the perception of its dominance over others.

Ottomans did not have bilateral relations with the Europeanor Christian states because the Quran orders not establishing relations with infidels and fighting against them (Tuncer, 11), Ottoman rulers were more pragmatic than argued. From the beginning, they established close relations not only with Beyliks (tribes) in Anatolia, but also with the Byzantine Empire. The Ottoman system was not only ruled by religious laws, but also by customary laws. Such a legal system provided flexibility and pragmatism to the policies of the empire.

Major instruments of Ottoman diplomacy until the 18th century were Âmans (mercies) or Ahidnames (treaties) and capitulations which granted certain privileges and immunities to non-Muslims states and subjects.

Despite their unilateral nature, the Ottoman rulers made long-lasting agreements with nonMuslims. These treaties were renewed regularly so there was an intention to establish state of peace except several wars in the Ottoman foreign policy.

The main objective of the Ottoman rulers through conducting these pragmatic relations with foreign states was to be an influential actor in the European system. The Sultans carried out cautious diplomatic relations with the European states with considering balance of power in the European states system.

The role of the Ottoman Empire in the European states system facilitated the preservation of status quo. Ottoman diplomacy was not heavily influenced by the strict laws of Islam. More importantly, the empire was an integral part and important factor in European states system and diplomacy. In their calculations, European states or statelike entities had to consider the Ottoman Empire up until the 18th century.

With the end of Dark Ages after the 15th century the Ottoman empire stared to decline because of Renaissance and reformation movements, weak rulers, discovery of new routes, and the Ottomon army’s losing discipline.

Instruments and Institutions

The Ottoman Empire’s relations with foreign states were not based on mutuality, but on unilaterality. This system was known as the Âman (Mercy) System. Âman was the privilege or immunity granted by the sultan to foreigners or non-Muslims. This system which protected the rights of non-Muslims within the boundaries of the empire was unilaterally granted by the Ottomans. In addition, Âman system constituted the basis of treaties and agreements signed between the Ottomans and foreign states.

Ottoman rulers granted certain privileges and rights to non-Muslim states and citizens called capitulations on the basis of Âman system. Capitulations were political, economic and legal privileges benefitted by non-Muslims.

Institutionally, Ottoman sultans were sending agents or envoys to carry out their specific missions in the ad hoc diplomacy period. Although they did not establish permanent embassies in foreign states before the 18th century, the Ottomans allowed foreign states to establish diplomatic missions in the empire.

Permanent Diplomacy : It is the diplomatic system began to be adapted by the Italian city states in the 14th and 15th centuries. This system evolved in time and institutions and instruments of modern diplomacy took shape. With this system, ministries of foreign affairs and diplomatic missions were established, diplomats were recruited and trained. Today, instruments and institutions of modern diplomacy are the core elements of inter-state relations. However, with the acceleration of globalization process, tools and actors of diplomacy diversified.

In the ad hoc diplomacy period, agents or envoys were sent to foreign states for different purposes. They were assigned by the sultan for

• signing peace treaties or trade agreements, peace proposals,
• carrying out peace negotiations or mediating between two states,
• negotiating the clauses of treaties,
• establishing or consolidating friendly relations,
• collecting debts of Ottomans,
• learning the opinions and policies of the states about the empire,
• declaring the change of throne,
• giving presents of the sultan,
• delivering letters from the sultan,
• declaring an Ottoman victory,
• congratulating a new monarch on behalf of the sultan,
• joining coronations of European monarchs,
• inviting European monarchs to certain ceremonies
• claiming taxes

Ottoman envoys were appointed to temporary positions in the bureaucracy such as Defterdar (Financial Officer), Nişancı (Head of Kalemiyye), Beylerbeyi (Governor) and Kazasker (Military Judge) to promote them in the eyes of rulers of the receiving state. Extraordinary Envoys were appointed as Defterdar, Nişancı or Governor of Mecca, ambassadors were appointed as the Governor of Rumelia or Anatolia and envoys from the ulema sent to Iran were appointed as Military Judge of Anatolia. Ottoman envoys assigned by the sultan to carry out specific diplomatic activities were evaluating their missions in the reports called Sefaretname (Diplomatic Letters). Diplomatic letters were rich sources for the Ottoman diplomacy and diplomatic missions.

Diplomatic Letters : The reports prepared by the representative of the Ottoman sultan on behalf of other states. In these reports, they evaluated their observations and impressions in the state they were assigned. Rather than political issues, they were closely observing scientific, technological and cultural developments of these countries. Moreover, they were assessing the protocol prepared for them by the rulers and diplomats of the country they visited. The number of Diplomatic Letters in the Ottoman Empire is about forty

Assessment of Ad Hoc Ottoman Diplomacy

Diplomacy was as crucial as warfare for the Ottomans from the beginning. At the apex of its power, Ottoman rulers conducted unilateral diplomacy because bilateral diplomacy needed mutuality, but the Ottomans had a sense of superiority and there was no room for mutuality until the 19th century. Despite the impact of Islam in the formulation and implementation of foreign relations and diplomacy to the limited extent, the Ottoman Empire cannot be regarded as an orthodox Islamic state. Customary laws or qanunnames were constituting a significant part of Ottoman administration system. Therefore, the empire was a crucial part of the balance of power strategy and they did not hesitate to align with nonMuslim states as a part of their pragmatic strategy.

As a politically, economically and militarily strong state especially until the late 18th century, they granted Âmans or capitulations to the states they perceived inferior to the empire as diplomatic instruments. On the other hand, Ottoman rulers did not need to open embassies in return for the embassies established by European states in the Ottoman capital due to the sense of superiority and selfsufficiency.

As the power pendulum moved from the Ottoman Empire to Europe, diplomacy became more important than warfare. However, the Ottoman rulers waited until the end of 18th century to adapt the instruments and institutions of modern diplomacy. They began to replace their unilateral, ad hoc diplomacy with bilateral and permanent diplomacy. Temporary diplomatic missions and envoys were replaced.

Permanent Ottoman Diplomacy 1793-1922

Dynamics of Permanent Ottoman Diplomacy (1793- 1922):

With the effects of French Revolution (1789) spreading the ideas of nationalism, nation-state, equality, fraternity, liberty and justice Ottoman started to disintegrated because of its millet (community ) system. In order to save the empire from disintegrating and prevent foreign countries claiming protectorate over the Slavs in the Balkans, from intervening in domestic policies, the Ottoman rulers had to take some serious measures. In 1839 Tanzimat Edict and in 1856 Islahat (Reform). The main actors of this process were the Ottoman diplomats Mustafa Reşid Pasha, Ali Pasha and Fuad Pasha who were formulating and implementing Ottoman foreign policy in this period. The first Ottoman Embassy was established in London in 1793 and this was a turning point in Ottoman diplomacy.

The Industrial Revolution also played a serious role in the erosion of Ottoman power. Ottoman Empire could not keep up pace with these developments and began to collapse due to the lack of initiative to adapt new rules and developments in technology, science, military and economy.

Ottomans became a part of Concert of Europe system, which had been established in Vienna Congress of 1815 after Napoleonic Wars, after the Crimea War against Russia between 1853 and 1856.

The inability of the Ottomans to protect their sovereignty and territorial integrity resulted in their perception as the Sick Man of Europe in the eyes of European powers that connoted the Eastern Question. Ottoman diplomats tried to establish friendly and close relations with the European states and they granted more privileges to Europeans in order to solve their problems in a peaceful way due to the weakness and backwardness of their army to protect their territorial integrity and sovereignty.

During WWI (1914-1918) the Ottoman Empire allied with Germany. Ottomans and Germans had to form an alliance and all these processes were carried out through diplomatic channels.

At the end of WWI, the Ottoman Empire had to seek an armistice and with the Mudros Armistice signed on October 30, 1918 and Sevres Peace Treaty signed on July 10, 1920 territories of the empire were divided and invaded by the Allies. After the invasion of the country, National Movement appeared and the process of National Struggle started. Throughout the National Struggle, Sultan Vahdettin and Istanbul government endeavored to save the empire through diplomacy and negotiations with the Allies. However, with the success of National Struggle and Anara government, Istanbul government and the sultan lost their prestige and after Ankara government was invited by the Allies to Lausanne for peace negotiations together with Istanbul government, the dynasty was abolished on November 1, 1922 and the Ottoman Empire came to an end. In order to fill this power vacuum, Republican regime was established on October 29, 1923.

Instruments and Institutions of Permanent Ottoman Diplomacy:

As a result of the change of power balance with Europe, Ottoman approach to diplomacy faced new challenges after the 18th century.

• Westphalia Treaty in 1648
• French and Industrial Revolutions
• Capitulations

seriously influenced the process of leaving the Aman system and implementing the modern diplomacy.

Ottoman diplomacy had to adapt the rules and instruments of modern diplomacy flourished and consolidated in Europe from the 15th century onwards. The empire became a part of bilateral diplomacy on the basis of mutuality and equality, on the one hand, and multilateral diplomacy, on the other. As a result of the balance of power strategy established in Europe with the Vienna Congress, multilateral diplomacy was the major diplomatic instrument in the 19th century. Ottoman rulers did not hesitate to join multilateral conferences to solve their problems in the international arena. For example; Paris Treaty after Crimea War and Ayastefanos after Truco-Russian War.

The Ottoman empire which was considered as the Sick Man of Europe utilized the strategy of finding allies against the enemies to the last minute as seen in the WWI; German alliance.

Consequently in 19 ^th century with Selim III the Ottoman Empire adapted the rules and instruments of modern diplomacy because modernization of the Ottoman system was crucial for the survival of the empire.

The first Ottoman embassy was established in London in 1793 and Yusuf Agah Efendi was appointed as the first permanent Ottoman ambassador. Ottoman ambassadors were chosen among the families acting in the bureaucracy. Most of them were coming from the higher echelons of the society. First Ottoman ambassadors were self-trained people due to the lack of a recruitment system for diplomatic missions. Some of these ambassadors graduated from schools in Istanbul such as Soğukçeşme Askeri Rüşdiyesi (Military High School), Mahreç-i Aklam and Bab-ı Âli Lisan Mektebi (Language School). On the other hand, with the establishment of Mektebi Sultani (Palace School) and Mülkiye (Civil Service School), late Ottoman ambassadors graduated from these schools. (İskit, 164-165).

Minorities were significant actors in the Ottoman diplomacy because of their language skills. Greek and Armenian minorities were recruited as translators and also they were employed in foreign missions as charge d’affaires and envoys. Greek uprisings during the reign of Mahmud II, training Turkish-Muslim translators and diplomats became a priority for the Ottomans. To this end, Tercüme Odası (Translation Room) was established in 1821 and Muslim-Turkish translators began to be trained in this institution and they replaced Dragomans who were the translators during the ad hoc period.

Translation Room : It was the office in the Ottoman diplomatic system where translation of reports, treaties and documents were carried out. Translation Room was a significant part of the Ottoman diplomacy because officials who knew foreign languages were working in this office. Initially, German, Polish, Greek and Armenian translators were working in the office.

Dragoman : Dragomans were responsible for the translation of reports, documents and treaties in the Ottoman Empire especially in the classical age. Dragomans were selected among the people who knew foreign languages. After the Ottoman Empire had begun to modernize and professionalize its diplomacy, translators in the Translation Room and Ministry of Foreign Affairs replaced Dragomans.

Missions of the Ottoman ambassadors in the permanent diplomacy period were similar to the ad hoc period. Ottoman ambassadors

• were responsible for observing, following and reporting thedevelopments in the states that they were accredited to. they were closely following the press and translating and sending the news to the capital regularly.
• Ottoman ambassadors were the main element of the communication between the empire and the receiving state.
• They werereporting the events and the developments as well as the policies of the receiving state.
• They were the intermediaries between two states during peace negotiations and signing of peace treaties.
• Ottoman ambassadors were observing and analyzing social, economic and military structure of the receiving state as well as technological and scientific developments.

All-in-all, missions of Ottoman ambassadors played an important role in the modernization and Westernization of the empire in this period. Their observations and analyses inspired the rulers to make necessary changes and reforms.

Diplomatic protocol was an important element of permanent Ottoman diplomacy. (leaving and returning with a letter)

Until the II. Constitutional Monarchy in 1908, Muslim diplomats could not take their wives with them to their mission and this rule caused some family problems.

Expenses of permanent ambassadors were paid by the state and they were paid regular salaries.

In the late Ottoman period, modernization of diplomatic service was followed by the professionalization of ministry of foreign affairs. Before the 19th century, Reis-ül Küttap (Head of Secretaries) was mainly responsible for diplomatic correspondence. This body was established during the reign of Suleyman I and working subject to the Grand Vizier.

Reis-ül Küttap: The head of secretaries in the Ottoman diplomatic system. Initially, they were responsible for conducting Ottoman diplomatic correspondence until the end of 18th century. After the modernization and professionalization of Ottoman diplomacy with Selim III, they began to act as the minister of foreign affairs. However, these people were not professional diplomats eligible for conducting diplomatic relations due to the lack of their knowledge about diplomatic rules and instruments.

Mahmud II established Hariciye Nezareti (Minister of Foreign Affairs) in 1836 as the first step of the establishment of a modern and professional body for conducting foreign relations. (Tuncer, 30-31) It can be regarded as the beginning of today’s Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

After Abdulmecit (1839-1861) had come to throne, power was shifted from the palace to the Bab-ı Âli (government) due to the dominance of the men of Tanzimat: Mustafa Reşid Pasha, Âli Pasha and Fuad Pasha. They were professional diplomats and ardent supporters of modernization and Westernization.

The system established and institutions created in the early 19th century remained as the instruments and institutions of permanent Ottoman diplomacy until the collapse of the empire.

Assessment of Permanent Ottoman Diplomacy:

Modernization and Westernization of the Ottoman Empire coincided with the transition from ad hoc diplomacy to permanent diplomacy.

The rules, instruments and institutions of Ottoman diplomacy after the 18th century needed to be totally different from those of ad hoc period because the empire was not in a hegemonic position to dictate its bilateral diplomacy and its rules and interests. Westernization of diplomacy brought the professionalization of diplomatic missions and diplomats.

With the adaptation of modern diplomacy, the Ottoman Empire became a part of Concert of Europe whose system based on balance of power strategy and it delayed the collapse of the Ottoman Empire until the end of WWI.

More importantly, modernization and Westernization efforts in the Ottoman Empire besides the professionalization of diplomacy heavily influenced the Turkish Republic following the war of independence regarding the dynamics and mentality shaped Turkish foreign policy, instruments and institutions of Turkish diplomacy.

Ottoman Heritage in the Republican Diplomacy

Altough there were influential reforms that shook the country and society from its roots to cut the ties with the Ottoman Empire, with regard to foreign policy and diplomacy, there are certain commonalities between the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic.

• First of all, the Turkish Republic was established on the same geography despite shrinkage of Ottoman territories after the 18th century.
• Secondly, the mindset of the Republican rulers and diplomats have been shaped by the Ottoman balance of power strategy especially after the 19th century.
• Thirdly, rulers of the Turkish Republic similar to the Ottoman sultans and the statesmen especially during the decline and collapse periods have refrained from wars and they have attached great importance to the solution of problems through diplomacy. In this vein, Turkey became a member of League of Nations (LoN) in 1932 upon its invitation and joined the United Nations (UN) after WWII and NATO in 1952. Protection of regional and global status quo as well as Turkey’s sovereignty and territorial integrity have been the priorities of Turkish statesmen.

Institutionally, the roots of Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs date back to the Translation Room established in 1821 by Mahmud II. In time, Hariciye Nezareti (Foreign Ministry) was established and professional diplomats began to be trained. When the Republican regime was established, rulers of the state faced the problem of shortage of well-trained diplomats. Starting with the early years of the republic, professionalization of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and diplomats have been prioritized by the state.

All-in-all, when the dynamics and institutions of Turkish foreign policy and diplomacy are considered, the heritage of Ottoman diplomacy can be clearly seen. In terms of mindset, objectives, instruments and institutions, Turkish diplomacy can be regarded as a continuation of Ottoman diplomacy.