Statesmen and the Turkish Question by Percy T. Magan

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Oct 14, 1909

Statesmen and the Turkish Question

By Percy T. Magan

PERCY T. MAGAN

In a previous number of the REVIEW I showed that the sixth plague is the great sign plague,—the only one of the seven last plagues which can be seen shaping up,—the one which gives warning of the coming of all the plagues, and of the close of probation.

In the last issue of this paper it was made clear that the opening scene in the drama of this scourge is laid by the waters of “the great river, the river Euphrates,” which expression was shown to refer to the nation having for its domain the territory adjacent to this stream—the Ottoman empire.

Then from these premises it was established that when the “water” of “the great river, the river Euphrates,” is “dried up,” i. e., when the passing of the Turk comes, this is the signal for a tremendous movement on the part of “the kings that come from the sunrising,” viz., the Oriental powers, who join in battle with “the kings of the whole world” at a place called in the Hebrew tongue, Armageddon.

Thus the settlement of the “Turkish question” is, according to the Scripture, the pivot around which the universal war program revolves. It is, as indicated by the Word of God, the flash-point of the situation.

Such is the prophecy of Sacred Writ, penned, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, two thousand years ago. And now it may properly be asked, Do the statesmen indorse the position of the Scripture? Do kings and prime ministers, chancellors and chief secretaries for foreign affairs, agree with the Bible writers that the Turkish question is the flash-point?

To state that they do seems almost unnecessary; for all the world, to say nothing of statesmen, is talking about the Eastern question, and has been talking about it for nearly two centuries. Any man who has paid any attention at all to the international history of the last two hundred years knows that this is so. Any living man of ordinary information and intelligence knows that the “Eastern question” in our day has proved itself almost perennial. The “Turkish” is, and has been for years, the one great international “question.” There is no British question, or German question, or French or United States question, but there is a Turkish question, and so much so that the expression has become a household phrase the world over. And in proof of all the above, if proof be needed, let me introduce the language of a great student and statesman—a noted figure in near-Eastern politics:—

“The Eastern question, which began with Constantine and Theodosius, stretches through the centuries. It is ever old and ever new, like a figure in mythology, or a siren who exercises a mysterious and irresistible attraction and destroys the victim she draws into her clutches. In vain it seems from time to time extinct like a volcano, or stifled by stratagem or brute force. After a rest, sometimes long and sometimes short, it comes to life again, often with greater vigor than before. Thereupon every one looks anxiously to the East; for the interests at stake are so important and complicated that Europe and Asia, and even America, can not stand by as unconcerned spectators of the struggle which recurs century after century for the possession of the Bosporus, the Hellespont, and the Ægean Sea. The East has been the goal of every ambition of the Christian and barbarian powers alike. The Eastern question gave the spur to the politics of the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries, as much as to those of the fifteenth, sixteenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth, and bids fair to provide plenty of material for the diplomatists of the twentieth century. . . .

“Frederick Barbarossa and Baudoin, Stefan Dochan and Mohomet, Soliman and Charles V. John Sobieski and Peter the Great, Joseph II and the Empress Catherine, Napoleon and Alexander I, Lord Palmerston, Napoleon III, and the Czar Nicholas, Prince Gortschakof and Lord Beaconsfield, each tried in his own way to find a solution for this dangerous problem, and, what is still more significant, each one failed, each one sacrificed in vain some of the best years of his life, and most of them the blood of valiant soldiers. When they thought they were on the point of reaching their goal, they fell on the way, and their work did not survive the influence of their political genius. Could there be more instructive lessons than these for the politicians of to-day if only they would allow themselves to be guided by the precedents of history?”—Mil. R. Ivanovitch Art. “The Future of the Balkans,” in London Fortnightly Review, June, 1909.

And there is a reason, a mighty reason, why the Eastern question is, like the poor, ever present with us. Not without reason is it “ever old and ever new.” Not without purpose is it a fact that “in vain it seems from time to time extinct like a volcano, or stifled by stratagem or brute force.” There can be no question over the statement that “after a rest, sometimes long and sometimes short, it comes to life again, often with greater vigor than before.” Magnificently has Ivanovitch stated the truth when he tells how the greatest statesmen of Europe, from Frederick Barbarossa at one end of the line through John Sobieski and Peter the Great to the Earl of Beaconsfield at the other, have “each tried in his own way to find a solution for this dangerous problem, and, what is still more significant, each one failed.”

Why, then, is the Eastern question, among all the great international complications, which from time to time have risen into prominence, the only one which, like the brook that turns the mill, goes on forever?

It is because God has set it for the great sign of the close of human probation and of the end of the world. He tells all mankind that it is the sign that the cases of all men living are soon to be decided, and their everlasting destiny sealed for weal or for woe.

God desires to warn all the world of this fact. He uses this sign to reveal to every man and woman on the earth where we are in the stream of time. He longs to save the children of men, and so he sets up and displays mighty, gigantic, and world-shaking events as signs, that men may know that now or never must they prepare to meet their God.

And this is why the Eastern question will not down. For years God has kept it ever before us. He has done this that by reading the Scriptures and watching the lining up of all the world powers around the Eastern question, which is the vortex of the whirlpool, we may know and realize that the unmixed wrath of heaven is about to fall; for when the Eastern question comes up for final settlement, events most vital to each individual soul will have been forever settled. But hear the historical authorities and the statesmen further:—

“During the war between Russia and Turkey in 1828-29 the Russian General Diebitsch marched his troops across the Balkans and proceeded straight to Adrianople. Here he was only one hundred twenty-five miles from Constantinople, the Ottoman capital. At the same time Paskerditch, another Russian commander, took Erzerum, in Asia; and a great authority says that “the two generals would doubtless have joined hands in Constantinople, but for the efforts of diplomacy, and the fear of a general conflagration.”—Historian’s History of the World, Vol. XVII, pages 544-545.

Prince Bismarck, chancellor of the German empire, speaking in the Reichstag in 1888, declared that it was only the

Congress of Berlin that prevented the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78 “from putting the whole of Europe in a blaze.”

In 1895, during the dark days of the Armenian massacres, the Emperor Franz Josef of Austria exclaimed, when a certain move was proposed: “No, that would set fire to the powder.”

On Nov. 9, 1895, the late Marquis of Salisbury, then prime minister of England, made a remarkable speech at the Mansion House in London. These Mansion House speeches by British prime ministers are always intended to give to the world the policy of the British government relative to questions of universal interest. The world had been on the tiptoe of expectancy for several days, watching eagerly for the summing up of the Eastern situation, and in the following remarkable language did the chief minister describe it:—

“Turkey is in that remarkable condition that it has now stood for half a century, mainly because the great powers of the world have resolved that for the peace of Christendom it is necessary that the Ottoman empire should stand. They came to that conclusion nearly half a century ago. I do not think they have altered it now. The danger, if the Ottoman empire fall, would not merely be the danger that would threaten the territories of which that empire consists, but that the fire there lighted would spread to other nations, and would involve all that is most powerful and civilized in Europe in a dangerous and calamitous contest. That was a danger which was present to the minds of our fathers when they resolved to make the integrity and independence of the Ottoman empire a matter of European treaty, and that is a danger which has not passed away.”—Published by the Armenian Information Bureau, London, 1895.

From all the above it is clear that statesmen of our own day realize very fully that the Turkish question is the flash-point. Their view of the situation tallies with the prophecy of the Scripture. And more than this, the emperor of Germany has publicly stated that when the Turk goes, it will be the signal for the Oriental nations to make their mighty move to try out conclusions at arms with the Western powers. Space will not permit of this quotation in this paper. Suffice to say that at least one European potentate sees in the destruction of the Turk the making ready of “the way of the kings that come from the sunrising.”

And more than this, the statesmen know that all the moves which have been made to stay off the evil day of settlement of the eternal Turkish question are altogether temporary and artificial.

This was made very clear by Lord Salisbury in a conversation with Chedo Mijatovich, one of Servia’s greatest statesmen. On this point he expressed the following opinion:—

“The Berlin treaty is altogether artificial. It created artificial conditions which probably, as you say, can not last very long. But what human work, and more especially what diplomatic work, is not artificial? Not only diplomacy, but history also creates artificial conditions. The Berlin Congress had to deal principally with Turkey in Europe,—not only an artificial, but an unnatural creation in itself,—complicated with the temporary results of the last war, and with the more permanent international jealousies. If you wish to know my personal opinion, I will tell you that the only natural, logical, and healthy Balkan policy for Great Britain would be that one formulated by Mr. Gladstone: ‘The Turks ought to be driven out of Europe with all their bag and baggage.’ Unfortunately, the Eastern question is so complicated, and the European system so artificial, that I as Her Majesty’s principal secretary of foreign affairs, can not apply the policy which I consider the only true and natural one.”—Chedo Mijatovich, in the Fortnightly Review, December, 1907.

A great prime minister of Medo-Persia,—Daniel, the author of that book in the Bible which bears his name,—five hundred years before the birth of Christ, had written of the time of the passing of the Turk: “And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.” Dan. 12:1. And John, the seer of Patmos, told how the passing of the Turk would be the signal for the long-looked-for coming of the kings from the rising of the sun to do battle with the kings of the earth and of the whole world.

Almost indeed do the words of Chancellor Bismarck of Germany; Emperor Franz Josef of Austria; and the Marquis of Salisbury, premier of Great Britain, seem to be but the answering echo of the prophetic utterance of the Hebrew Daniel, the chancellor of that empire of the elder day. The one said that when that time came, there would be a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation on the earth. The others said it would start the conflagration, set Europe in a blaze, set fire to the powder, and that the fire that is lighted by the demolition of the Turkish empire would spread to other nations, and involve all that is most powerful and most civilized in a dangerous and calamitous contest.

Madison, Tenn.