This campaign is about one of the largest, greatest and long lasting empire of all time; The Ottoman Empire (1299-1923) and its succeeding country; Turkey (1923-Today). 'I am pretty sure many of you will find this epic 10-scenario campaign extremely enjoyable and nostalgia-inducing at the same time. Jun 25, 2016 Watch the entire series: If you enjoyed this video please hit the Like button, it he. When the Ottoman Empire exploded, the Entente imposed one of their signature devastating treaties on the Turkish people by carving up the new Ottoman state into a small rump state in Anatolia. This state of affairs didn’t sit too well with many of the Turkish people, so an alliance of revolutionaries set to work - the most prominent of which. The Neo Ottoman Empire was established on the 4th of February, 2032. Although the new nation eventually turned evil and was dissolved, It made a comeback a short time later. Origins The Ottoman state began as one of many small Turkish states that emerged in Asia Minor during the breakdown of the empire of the Seljuk Turks. The Ottoman Turks began to absorb the other states, and during the.

9 November, 2020 05:54

Building a Neo-Ottoman Empire

By Avedis Hadjian

Diana Muir Appelbaum published the article “Turkey, Past and Future: Islamic Supremacy Alive and Well in Ankara” in 2013. I read this in August 2020 and said to a group of friends that the president of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, was pursuing an expansion of the borders of his country.

In a wide narrative arc, Appelbaum explained everything from the treatment of the dhimmis to the invasion of Cyprus. In her piece, one could find prescient hints of what was going to happen to Hagia Sophia, which Erdoğan converted into a mosque last June. One is left with the feeling that the analysis serves as a predictor of Turkish policy, I warned. In the time-honored tradition of past and present dictators and autocrats, Erdoğan means what he says, I cautioned.

Three months ago, I ventured so far as to say, he is after a land grab, gambling on a massive redrawing of maps. That causes me a lot of concern; but history also teaches that those gambles often backfire.

This was the key passage in Appelbaum’s 2013 essay: “Since its foundation in 1923, Turkey has repeatedly enacted in policy, military conquest, and law the supersessionist conviction that as Muslims and Turks, the citizens of the republic were endowed with special rights to expand their territory by any means available, forcibly assimilate conquered peoples, eliminate non-Muslim populations, and erase pre-Muslim history.”

Based on these premises, we may draw the following observations:

• The Turkish regime does not disguise the racism inherent in its imperialist project because it does not have to. This historical moment is propitious for Erdoğan’s neo-Ottoman plans: democracies and the values upon which they are founded have become mere formalities devoid of any substance. Major democracies and international organizations, including the UN and the EU, reacted with the utmost indifference to the abundance of proof that Turkey shipped terrorists its army had trained in Syria to fight against Armenians in Artsakh, supporting Azerbaijan. NATO recently congratulated Turkey, its member with the second largest army, for its efforts in fighting terrorism.
• Azerbaijan is Turkey’s proxy in these plans. It has now become a de facto Turkish colony: its war effort is conducted by the Turkish government.
• This war is not about Artsakh, a 1,700 square-mile mountainous enclave. The war is part of a larger imperial design, the ultimate goal of which is, not in the very long term, the disappearance of Armenia itself.
• The Armenian Genocide was foundational for Turkey. Not only does Turkey not recognize it, but Erdoğan has begun to boast about it. Extermination is a legitimate policy tool for Turkey, something it has attempted with Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians and, more recently, Kurds.
• Armenia, with a population of barely 3 million, has lost more than 1,000 young soldiers in a month. That is the equivalent of 100,000 in a country with a population of 300 million, like the U.S. That, and the wanton destruction, is aimed at making Armenia unviable as an independent state. A much weakened Armenia could hardly withstand successive wars like this one.
• Armenia is on its own, as the passivity of the international community – including Russia – attests.
• Humans are inherently loath to entertain the possibility of catastrophe, for hope is what drives life. Yet time and again, history shows that catastrophes happen both in our private life as well as on a larger scale: Constantinople did fall in 1453; the 1915 Genocide did happen, as did two world wars and the Holocaust. At the moment, the only thing standing in the way of a second Armenian Genocide are the armies of Armenia and Artsakh. Armenia is on its own.

This piece is part of the Voices on Karabakh collection where a select group of scholars, intellectuals, and artists contribute observations on the war in and for Karabakh. It's an attempt to make sense of this time and this region.

In making his speeches on the on-going military conflict in the Caucasus between Azerbaijan and Armenia, Turkey’s Erdogan has not minced words in invoking the ‘Turkishness’ of the people of Azerbaijan and how protecting Azerbaijan falls within his definition of the revival Turkish glory of the Ottoman days. One crucial reason for why Turkey has started to jump in every conflict near and/or around its borders is the increasing appetite for reclaiming Turkey’s place in the world order as a strong state, capable of determining facts on the ground that no other state can change or deny. This is how Erdogan regime seems to rub aside the ‘sick man of Europe’ stigma attached to Turkey ever since its downfall after the first World War and the subsequent break up of the Ottoman empire into many countries. While Erdogan cannot recreate an empire today, he does want to reincarnate the same glory and place Ankara at the centre of regional geo-politics.

Instead of helping diffuse tensions, Ankara is actively sponsoring conflicts. Even while Azerbaijan may have legitimate concerns with regards to the disputed territory, Turkish active military sponsorship has already turned the dispute into a multi-lateral issue. Even before the conflict had started, Turkey was actively cultivating its military ties with Azerbaijan, taking it to new heights. It is not a simple coincidence that Turkey’s military exports to Azerbaijan rose six-fold this year, with sales of drones and other military equipment rising to US$77 million last month alone, just before fighting broke out over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. The figures compiled by the Turkish Exporters’ Assembly show that Azerbaijan bought US$123 million in defence and aviation equipment from Turkey in the first nine months of 2020. Most of the purchases of drones, rocket launchers, ammunition and other weapons arrived were after July, when border clashes between Armenian and Azeri forces prompted Turkey and Azerbaijan to conduct joint military exercises.

Hoi4 Neo Ottoman Empire Tag

It is clear that Azerbaijan turned to Turkey for help, realizing that large scale fighting may break out. Turkey, on the other hand, did not hesitate because the conflict presented it with yet another opportunity after Syria, Iraq, East Mediterranean, and Libya to insert itself deep into the region beyond its borders and carve out a space for itself in what its leadership sees an increasingly multipolar world with newly available enough space to erect a ‘Neo-Ottoman’ edifice for Turkey as well. Turkey’s increasing external military adventures are, in other words, not only a response to the fast-changing world where the US hegemony and dictation is no longer the final say, but also a reflection of the growing geo-political competition between different power-centers.

“Why is Turkey siding with Azerbaijan? You know about the Minsk trio: The United States, Russia and France. Whose side are they on? They are with Armenia. Do they give Armenia all sorts of armed support? Yes, they do,” Erdoğan told a provincial convention in the south-eastern province of Şırnak on Oct. 18. “We will be present where oppression exists,” Erdoğan furtherstated while criticizing the supposedly ‘oppressive’ role of certain power.

Byzantine Empire

As such, whereas Turkey and Russia are closely allied in Syria and have been cooperating through the Astana and Sochi processes, they appear to be on the opposite side in Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict. This is because even for Russia, Turkeys’ expansion of its ‘Neo-Ottoman’ ideals to the Caucasus may not be acceptable. The reason for this unacceptability is not just Turkey’s increasing external interventions, but also the fact that Turkey’s involvement can lead and is leading to a surge in the number of Islamist fighters involved in the fighting in the Caucasus. Indeed, this was what Kremlin said Putin told Erdogan in their October 14 telephonic conversation.

This is not an unprecedented move. Even according to a Pentagon report, Turkey has a policy of enlisting Islamist fighters to advance its foreign-policy objectives. Earlier this year, according to the report, Ankara sent about 5,000 Syrian fighters to support the internationally recognized government in Libya’s civil war.

While Turkey has not yet confirmed the presence of these fighters in Azerbaijan, it has not even tried to hide their presence in Libya. In fact, Erdogan praised Syrians fighting in Libya under the supervision of Turkish military advisers, saying “These brothers who are with us consider this togetherness an honor for themselves.” “There is a spiritual dimension for them in going [to Libya]”, he added.

Given the emphasis Erdogan regime has been putting on the ‘Turkic identity’ of the people of Azerbaijan, it is quite possible that for the fighters, fighting in Azerbaijan will have an ethnic dimension as well. Given that the people of Azerbaijan are, as Erdogan said, “brothers of the people of Turkey”, the Islamist fighters will be fighting for the cause of their own kin.

For Russia, the presence of these fighters is a matter of real concern, one that can really undermine the overall security situation of the whole Central Asia and the Caucasus.

But sending these fighters to the Caucasus makes sense for Erdogan’s combative policies, his taste for gunboat diplomacy and the belief that flexing his military muscle allows him to force himself at the table with the big powers. This is how the Ottomans before the Word War One operated in the world; this is what the ‘Neo-Ottoman’ should do again.

Hoi4 Ottoman Loyalists

However, While Erdogan’s expansion would further destabilize Turkey’s ties with NATO, it will also put its relations with Russia in an increasingly competitive regional framework.

Neo Ottoman Empire Hoi4 Mod

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.