1920-1922 Could there have been a different outcome?

[Kyriakos]

This is about the Greek-Turkish war of 1920-1922. I have read many times that the death of the king due to a bite by his monkey (sounds rather ludicrous) played a major role in the progression of the war, since the political ruling party changed in the next election, it was an inexperienced party, the main military officers were replaced, and this led to terrible disorganization.
Also it is said that the change in the ruling party/king affected the major powers as well, and they were no longer as sympathetic towards Greece as they were in the Venizelos era.

I still have not read any book about this issue, since i fear it will make me depressed. 1920-1922 seems to have been a very critical point in Greek history, and if the result of the Asia minor campaign had been different Greece might now have been a far more influential power.

Anyway, i am looking forward to reading your views of this question

 

[Dachs]

Yes, the outcome could've been different.

No, it probably wouldn't make Greece a significantly more "influential" power. Smyrna and Thrace was what was up for grabs. That ain't that much.

Yes, such an outcome would have been more ideal than the way things worked out, not because the Greeks would be in charge of Smyrna (at this point, I don't really care) but because Konstantinos and Ataturk both initiated some pretty sick reprisals against the local civilians (the worst of which, obviously, was the Great Fire) and frankly it'd have been nice if that garbage didn't happen.

Yes, it's an incredibly depressing period of history to read about, rather like the Second World War: a race to the bottom to see who could be the biggest douchebag.

 

[Kyriakos]

Maybe if all of eastern Thrace was incorporated in Greece things would be quite different if in no other way then for psychological reasons: Constantinople would have been back in Greek hands, and possibly would be restored as the capital. The latter would effectively mean the revival of the Byzantine Empire in a way, again at least in the popular psychology.

Another question to you Dachs (and other historians) is whether or not the Goeben and Breslau loading up with coal in Greece played a crucial role in the failure of the allies to break through turkish defences in the Dardanelles. Effectively this failure meant that they could not impose their plans completely, and this led to a real war later on.

 

[Dachs]

Maybe if all of eastern Thrace was incorporated in Greece things would be quite different if in no other way then for psychological reasons: Constantinople would have been back in Greek hands, and possibly would be restored as the capital. The latter would effectively mean the revival of the Byzantine Empire in a way, again at least in the popular psychology.

Mmm. Maybe. The problem is that Constantinople was supposed to be a free city with that Zone of the Straits thing there. Might that have been renegotiated in the wake of a victorious war against the revolutionary Turks? Maybe. More likely that it'd end up as another Danzig, to be the focus of international crises further down the line. As to psychological stuff: whatever. I suppose it's not outside the realm of possibility.

Another question to you Dachs (and other historians) is whether or not the Goeben and Breslau loading up with coal in Greece played a crucial role in the failure of the allies to break through turkish defences in the Dardanelles. Effectively this failure meant that they could not impose their plans completely, and this led to a real war later on.

The Goeben and the Breslau had little to do with the defenses of the Straits. They operated in the Black Sea against the Russians. The main defenses of the Straits were mines and shore artillery emplacements; both of those things were there for a long time, but were upgraded somewhat (the Ottomans lacked the money to do much) by Admiral Usedom, one of the members of the Liman von Sanders mission, from early 1914, and again by German shipments of mines later on.

I've said this in another thread, but the Goeben and Breslau were not the decisive element in the Ottoman move to war, nor were they a necessary precondition of same. Most of the relevant critical factors - Anglo-Russian provocations, Ottoman lack of money, the need for mobilization in order to retain robust neutrality - were independent of Souchon's flight.

 

[Winner]

This is about the Greek-Turkish war of 1920-1922. I have read many times that the death of the king due to a bite by his monkey (sounds rather ludicrous) played a major role in the progression of the war, since the political ruling party changed in the next election, it was an inexperienced party, the main military officers were replaced, and this led to terrible disorganization.
Also it is said that the change in the ruling party/king affected the major powers as well, and they were no longer as sympathetic towards Greece as they were in the Venizelos era.

I still have not read any book about this issue, since i fear it will make me depressed. 1920-1922 seems to have been a very critical point in Greek history, and if the result of the Asia minor campaign had been different Greece might now have been a far more influential power.

Anyway, i am looking forward to reading your views of this question

Seems like every small nation in Europe has something in its recent history that never ceases to be hotly debated We have Munich, you have this...

 

[r16]

ahh , the Goeben and Breslau . ı had thought they loaded from Italy and there were maybe Geman merchantmen that loaded coal in some deserted island without interference from the Greeks . Should have re-read that book ı had somewhere . The one that says 4 Germans were scalded to death with damaged steam pipes . Would have suggested they would not dare losing time with official dealings.

as for a different outcome , you know me , we would have come up with what passed for a TIE Bomber in those days and it would be all the same .

 

[aronnax]

Yes, the outcome could've been different.

No, it probably wouldn't make Greece a significantly more "influential" power. Smyrna and Thrace was what was up for grabs. That ain't that much.

Yes, such an outcome would have been more ideal than the way things worked out, not because the Greeks would be in charge of Smyrna (at this point, I don't really care) but because Konstantinos and Ataturk both initiated some pretty sick reprisals against the local civilians (the worst of which, obviously, was the Great Fire) and frankly it'd have been nice if that garbage didn't happen.

Yes, it's an incredibly depressing period of history to read about, rather like the Second World War: a race to the bottom to see who could be the biggest douchebag.

Now, how would the outcome be different? Whether or not it was the Venizelist or the Royalists in charge it wouldn't make the military capability of the Greeks to fight a protracted war overseas any better.

And in regards to Major powers changing support with the restoration of the Monarchists, even before that, France and Italy were already about to drop the war and leave their commitments months before that. The return of the Greek Monarchy just gave them more reason than ever before to stop caring for the Greeks. Only the British, and when I say British I mean Lloyd George, who really cared about stopping the Turks before and after the fall of Venizelism.

 

[RedRalph]

Mmm. Maybe. The problem is that Constantinople was supposed to be a free city with that Zone of the Straits thing there. Might that have been renegotiated in the wake of a victorious war against the revolutionary Turks? Maybe. More likely that it'd end up as another Danzig, to be the focus of international crises further down the line. As to psychological stuff: whatever. I suppose it's not outside the realm of possibility.

Now's there's an idea for some cool alt-history...

 

[Masada]

ahh , the Goeben and Breslau . ı had thought they loaded from Italy and there were maybe Geman merchantmen that loaded coal in some deserted island without interference from the Greeks . Should have re-read that book ı had somewhere . The one that says 4 Germans were scalded to death with damaged steam pipes . Would have suggested they would not dare losing time with official dealings.

That all happened.

 

[r16]

and the original question seemed to imply , to an idiotic non-native English speaker , that Greeks should have stopped some ship so that its sailors wouldn't be on the firing line . Goeben had a couple of 15cm s on the ground on 18th of March 1915 .

 

[r16]

ı have always had this childish interest in the what ifs . So let me have one right here . The thing we will change is the presence of USS Idaho / Lemnos around the deserted island the Goeben is coaling in the early hours of the morning . The newly delivered Greek battleship is on training with Americans onboard and is mistaken for a British cruiser coming from Alexandria searching for the Germans . Goeben opens fire causing casualties and moving the crisis of Lusitania a year ahead . Which means when the U-boots start to hunt merchantmen in 1915 there will be no cushion in American attitude and Uncle Sam will want Yanks earlier than 1917. Greece with its territory invaded and ship fired upon is already in war . So they will be able to provide boots on the ground to the Allied navies in March 1915 . Now that Goeben attacked both countries , Russia can not keep Athens out , based on a jealousy of capturing the city of Konstantin . . For the purposes of the scenario , we will prolong the war into 1917 and there will still be a Communist Revolution in Russia . Meaning Western Allies still have a new enemy but a clear victory in the Great War and troops to spare . Troops that can be used for colonial control . And do some serious puppetry .

the result will be a Greece on two continents and 5 seas . Cultural center of the oppressed elsewhere Orthodox Church .Useful for the West to fight off the evil Commies and Persians . We no longer exist , except only as bandits who have seperatist ambitions against the glory of the new Alexanders . Considering the Germans are truly squashed , we can't have any help from there or for the record nowhere else . And mind you since there will be no concentration camps - except the ones that deal with us - nobody will have to develop a sympathy for the untermensch , leaving Athens to lobby Washington to its heart's content ...

plausible ? Hell , no . ı have a reputation to maintain as a nationalist afterall .

ı summon him and you see ...

 

[Dachs]

Now, how would the outcome be different? Whether or not it was the Venizelist or the Royalists in charge it wouldn't make the military capability of the Greeks to fight a protracted war overseas any better.

Actually, it would, because aside from preventing Konstantinos from getting anywhere near an army command, the Greeks would keep a lot of the older military leadership - the ones who successfully conducted the initial landings and who served in the First World War - thus preserving continuity, as well as probably maintaining a higher standard of professional competence. Morale wouldn't go on a roller coaster ride. The Greeks wouldn't be committed to massive overextension (i.e. Konstantinos' policy - you know, because if you destroy your army's morale, the best way to bring it back up is to take the offensive and hopefully win). Stuff like that.

Of course it doesn't make anything guaranteed, but I think that the Greeks had a reasonable shot.

 

[r16]

they did not . As soon as the English wilted , they went down .

 

[Lord Baal]

they did not . As soon as the English wilted , they went down .

Such a detailed, cogent response.

 

[r16]

well , one has to be careful you know . ı had this post somewhere that democracy would come to S.Arabia . Luckily for all corcerned the post didn't survive for long .

as to the topic , the issue with England being the chief pillar the Greeks were countin' on , especially after RAF was put on alert against , presumably , French bombers 1921ish is ?

 

[aronnax]

Actually, it would, because aside from preventing Konstantinos from getting anywhere near an army command, the Greeks would keep a lot of the older military leadership - the ones who successfully conducted the initial landings and who served in the First World War - thus preserving continuity, as well as probably maintaining a higher standard of professional competence. Morale wouldn't go on a roller coaster ride. The Greeks wouldn't be committed to massive overextension (i.e. Konstantinos' policy - you know, because if you destroy your army's morale, the best way to bring it back up is to take the offensive and hopefully win). Stuff like that.

Of course it doesn't make anything guaranteed, but I think that the Greeks had a reasonable shot.

I feel doubtful still over the possibility of a Greek victory in Asia Minor. If they have stayed in Izmir and not venture out, I would think it would just be one ineffective siege by Ataturk until the Great Powers stepped in and forced Greece to withdraw.
Probably once Lloyd George was out of power and Ataturk traded some economical benefit over the Bosphorus with Britain.

 

[Kyriakos]

Just noting that this thread is not meant to be a showcase of nationalism. I am sure no one here is really interested in reading how turkey was supposedly a strong power in 1920, cause it was not, their victory in the war was the effect of many parameters, probably most of which did not have much to do with turkey itself, regardless of what books in turkish schools claim.

 

[aronnax]

Just noting that this thread is not meant to be a showcase of nationalism. I am sure no one here is really interested in reading how turkey was supposedly a strong power in 1920, cause it was not, their victory in the war was the effect of many parameters, probably most of which did not have much to do with turkey itself, regardless of what books in turkish schools claim.

If that was directed at me, I'm not attributing a Turkish Victory to the Turks. I'm attributing it to the apathetic/exploitative nature of France, Italy, Britain and the USA in supporter the Greeks who either don't really care (Britain, USA)or much prefer Greece to lose.(France, Italy)

 

[Tee Kay]

Credit where credit is due. That the Entente decided not to enforce Sevres does not change the fact that the Turks won real victories on real battlefields.

 

[RedRalph]

well , one has to be careful you know . ı had this post somewhere that democracy would come to S.Arabia . Luckily for all corcerned the post didn't survive for long .

as to the topic , the issue with England being the chief pillar the Greeks were countin' on , especially after RAF was put on alert against , presumably , French bombers 1921ish is ?

What is that character you are even using for 'I'?