Could a reactionary coup in Turkey restore the ottoman empire?

[Gukpard]

OTL Kemal Ataturk kept himself around until his death due the ever present threat of islamic extremism of the empire, especially present since he was doing his best to westernize Turkey

If such a extremist islamic take over happens, could they restore the monarchy, even it is shackled under a Iman?

 

[Mikey]

As far as I know, there really wasn't a lot of interest in Ottoman revivals; a religious extremist government would likely have little interest in bringing back that specific dynasty.

For one thing, the Osman heirs didn't spend their time in exile pursuing any real effort to press their claims; their predecessors who had actually reigned were also not particularly active advocates of imperial power anyway. It's hard to see where the energy would come from for this.

 

[Byzantion]

OTL Kemal Ataturk kept himself around until his death due the ever present threat of islamic extremism of the empire, especially present since he was doing his best to westernize Turkey

If such a extremist islamic take over happens, could they restore the monarchy, even it is shackled under a Iman?

Or a hardcore Turanist expansionist party with Islamist ambitions to unite all Turkic kin ?

 

[Gukpard]

Wither that or a hardcore Turanist expansionist party with Islamist ambitions ?

Wait what?

 

[Byzantion]

Tu

Wait what?

Turanic ideology that wants to unite all Turkic people. Enver Pasha died for this ideology against Red Army forces after his active service for Turkey. So this ideology is still around and nowadays also serves the Islamist narrative. So Turanic ideology want to all Turkic or Turkic speaking peoples even in China and Russia to be united.

 

[Linkwerk]

Or a hardcore Turanist expansionist party with Islamist ambitions to unite all Turkic kin ?

Post first world war this is actually more likely than an Ottoman revival. Although quite a lot of reactionaries around the end of the first world war and the 1920's were loyal to the institutions of the Ottoman Empire (the Caliphate, and the idea/principle of the Sultanate) the actual house of Osman hadn't produced a charismatic leader for quite some time. After the institution of the Republic, there was a sort of "soup" or political space of more Islamically-inclined, socially reactionary, religious political figures but their actual alignment and demands were all over the place. I mean, my God, the only uprising I can think of advocating a restoration of the Sultan and Caliph was the Sheykh Said rebellion in 1925 and that was a Kurdish uprising centered around Diyabakir which is seen in a lot of historiographies- even leftist ones- as a Kurdish national awakening.

Although there have been a scattered series of movements in Turkish history that have looked fondly on the Ottoman Empire, or are inspired by them, there's never been anything that ever came close to crystalizing around the idea of actually restoring a monarchy. Even the neo-Ottomanism of Erdogan's recent years doesn't really have much to do with the Ottomans at all. I would argue it is an extension and evolution of the "Turkish-Islamic synthesis" idea which emerged in the 1970's and was promoted by the ultranationalist right and the army as an anticommunist line. The idea that the Turkish people have a mythic history and a special connection to and relationship with the Islamic faith certainly leads to a glorification of the Ottomans, but alongside pre-Islamic Turkic kings and other national heroes.

 

[Linkwerk]

OTL Kemal Ataturk kept himself around until his death due the ever present threat of islamic extremism of the empire, especially present since he was doing his best to westernize Turkey

If such a extremist islamic take over happens, could they restore the monarchy, even it is shackled under a Iman?

I also don't agree with the characterization of the Ottoman Empire as Islamic extremists. They were Sunni chauvinists for most of the time of the empire, merciless towards Shi'a or Alevis or anybody who could be considered a heretical Muslim, but it was a force of conservatism and norms-enforcing, not a radical religiosity at all. When revolutionary Islamist movements began to become active in Turkey in the 1970's and 80's, they looked more towards domestic religious figures like Sayid Nursi or even the (Iranian, Shiite) Ayatollah Khomeini as models for an Islamic revolution, not any Ottoman figure.

 

[Gukpard]

I also don't agree with the characterization of the Ottoman Empire as Islamic extremists. They were Sunni chauvinists for most of the time of the empire, merciless towards Shi'a or Alevis or anybody who could be considered a heretical Muslim, but it was a force of conservatism and norms-enforcing, not a radical religiosity at all. When revolutionary Islamist movements began to become active in Turkey in the 1970's and 80's, they looked more towards domestic religious figures like Sayid Nursi or even the (Iranian, Shiite) Ayatollah Khomeini as models for an Islamic revolution, not any Ottoman figure.

That is not the characterization I'm adopting.

They are not islamists, it was a constitutional monarchy. What I'm asking is if any group that could remove ataturk could restore the monarchy, and since as far as I know the opposition to Ataturk was islamist, I asked if the islamists could restore it.

 

[Linkwerk]

That is not the characterization I'm adopting.

They are not islamists, it was a constitutional monarchy. What I'm asking is if any group that could remove ataturk could restore the monarchy, and since as far as I know the opposition to Ataturk was islamist, I asked if the islamists could restore it.

Ah! Okay. I guess I was confused.

I think restoring the monarchy once it is abolished is a long shot, BUT, the Ottoman monarchy could easily have survived the end of the first world war if they had just embraced the anti-Sevres nationalist resistance. It's not highlighted much today, but the first ever session of the Grand National Assembly in Ankara, what became the current Turkish parliament, opened with prayers for the health and safety of the Sultan. What led to the dissolution of the monarchy was exactly the same as what destroyed popular faith in the monarchy; an acceptance of a humiliating peace deal and a disavowal of the broadly popular nationalist resistance to the same.

 

[Pelranius]

Or a hardcore Turanist expansionist party with Islamist ambitions to unite all Turkic kin ?

A problem with Turanism (like other pan ethnic ideologies) is that even the most hard core Grey Wolf member doesn't like the idea of Istanbul being filled with hungry Azeris, Gauguzs, Kazakhs, Turkmen and Uyghurs driving down wages.

 

[Osman Aga]

OTL Kemal Ataturk kept himself around until his death due the ever present threat of islamic extremism of the empire, especially present since he was doing his best to westernize Turkey

If such a extremist islamic take over happens, could they restore the monarchy, even it is shackled under a Iman?

No. The army remained loyal to the Republic and any figures for a Royalist Coup were in Europe or Egypt. Ataturk was popular even with his secular policies.

 

[Osman Aga]

Or a hardcore Turanist expansionist party with Islamist ambitions to unite all Turkic kin ?

Unlikely.

 

[Osman Aga]

A problem with Turanism (like other pan ethnic ideologies) is that even the most hard core Grey Wolf member doesn't like the idea of Istanbul being filled with hungry Azeris, Gauguzs, Kazakhs, Turkmen and Uyghurs driving down wages.

But they won't come to Istanbul in large numbers anyway. Turkey of the 1920s and 1930s could not deal with large scale immigration. Besides, it is easier to get Kosovar Albanians to Turkey than Kazakhs.

 

[RMcD94]

Turanism was at least a little popular in Japan around the same period (as ever the lines of ethnic and linguistic distinctions are blurry) and the idea that Mongols, Turks and Japanese were all a kin of a kind was relatively common. So, Turko-Japanese alliance?

The first-ever Japanese Turanist organization, the Turanian National Alliance – Tsuran Minzoku Domei (ツラン民族同盟), was established in Tokyo in 1921, by Juichiro Imaoka (1888–1973) and the Hungarian Orientalist and ethnographer Benedek Baráthosi Balogh (1870–1945).

Mongolia, Turkestan (Chinese and Russian), Anatolia, the Manchus, Japan, Hungary and Finland.

Well there is interestingly one thing all of these disparate nations have in common, their geopolitical expansion aligns nicely with Russia's collapse and defeat.

The best way to do this seems to me to have the Russian revolution become a much more Slavic and ethnically driven campaign rather than the at least on the surface egalitarian movement.

 

[Seandineen]

Could a monarchist, pull a sadat, and make friends with Israel and atone to the Armenians?

 

[Pelranius]

But they won't come to Istanbul in large numbers anyway. Turkey of the 1920s and 1930s could not deal with large scale immigration. Besides, it is easier to get Kosovar Albanians to Turkey than Kazakhs.

I was think more of contemporary times.

 

[Osman Aga]

I was think more of contemporary times.

Even then... I'd see the Central Asians to migrate to Russia sooner than to Turkey.

 

[Osman Aga]

Could a monarchist, pull a sadat, and make friends with Israel and atone to the Armenians?

No. A monarchist state would be more friendly to a Palestinian cause considering the monarchist will still have ties to the Caliphate title. As long as Armenians make claims on Turkish territory atoning the Armenians is pointless for any Turkish State.