F I r s t d r a f t

75 Jon Jacobson, “Locarno, Britain and the Security of Europe,” in Locarno Revisited, European Diplomacy 1920-1929, ed. Gaynor Johnson (London: Routledge, 2004), 16.

76 Jules Laroche, Au Quai d’Orsay avec Briand et Poincaré, 1913-1926 (Paris: Hachette, 1957), 228-229.

77 Polayni, The Great Transformation…, 22.

78 Patrick O. Cohrs, “The Quest for a New Concert of Europe: British Pursuits of German Rehabilitation and European Stability in the 1920s,” in Locarno Revisited, European Diplomacy 1920-1929, p. 42.

79 Graham Ross, The Great Powers and the Decline of European States System, 1914-1945, (London and New York, 1983), 119.

80 Wandycz, France and her Eastern Allies…, 359.

81 Anthony Adamthwaite, Grandeur and Misery: France’s Bid for Power in Europe 1914-1940 (London: Arnold, 1995), 121.

82 Wandycz, France and her Eastern Allies…, 363.

83 Allan Cassels, “Locarno: Early Test of Fascist Intentions” in Locarno Revisited…, 91.

84 Alan Cassels, Mussolini’s Early Diplomacy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975), 126.

85 Adamthwaite, Grandeur and Misery…, 120-21

86 Shorrock, From Ally to Enemy…, 32.

87 Hale, Turkish Foreign Policy…

88 Holbraad, Middle Powers…,3.

89 Wight, Power Politics…, 65

90 Hale, Turkish Foreign Policy…,1.

91 Ibid.

92 Hale, Turkish Foreign Policy…,, 2.

93 Baskın Oran, “TDP’nin Askeri, Siyasal ve Ekonomik Arkaplanı,” in Türk Dış Politikası: Kurtuluş Savaşından Bugüne Olgular, Belgeler , Yorumlar, ed. B. Oran, vol. I (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2000), 29-33. See also Ersel Aydınlı and Julie Mathews, “Periphery Theorizing for a Truly Internationalized Discipline: Spinning IR Theory out of Anatolia,” Review of International Studies 34/4 (October 2008): 706.

94 Robert W. Cox, Approaches to World Order, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 242

95 Bridge and Bullen, The Great Powers and..., 3

96 Nuri Yurdusev and Esin Yurdusev, “Osmanlı İmparatorluğunun Avrupa Devletler Sistemine Girişi ve 1856 Paris Konferansı,” Çağdaş Türk Diplomasisi: 200 Yıllık Süreç, ed. İsmail Soysal (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1999), 137-147.

97 Holbraad, Middle Powers…, 33-35.

98 Holbraad, Middle Powers…, 34.

99 Deringil, Turkish Foreign Policy…3.

100 Holbraad, Middle Powers…, 89.

101 Andrew Webster, “Making Disarmament Work: The Implementation of the International Disarmament Provisions of the League of Nations Covenant, 1919-1925,” Diplomacy and Statecraft 16/3 (2005): 560-563.

102 The whole series of Yearbooks of International Disarmament from 1924 to 1939 is accessible electronically at http://www.library.northwestern.edu/govinfo/collections/league.

103 J. C. Smuts, The League of Nations: A Practical Suggestion (London: Hadder and Stoughton, 1918), 37-38.

104 Holbraad, Middle Powers…, 48. Interestingly, 13 years later, in 1931 Turkish Foreign Minister Tevfik Rüştü Aras went a step further than General Smuts and hinted that Ankara would not consider joining the League of Nations without a permanent seat in the League Council. T.B.M.M Zabıt Ceridesi, Term IV, Vol. 3 (15 July 1931): 133.

105 The Correlates of War Project may be featuring more detailed, more comprehensive and arguably more accurate measures of national power for comparison along demographic, industrial and military dimensions. However, it draws primarily on the League’s Yearbooks of International Disarmament for the resource categories we choose in this book. It should be granted though that the Correlates of War Project includes data on iron and steel production and primary energy consumption as two measures of industrial capacity, which we do not take into account. In the interwar era, Turkey remained behind the other four European middle powers in both categories with literally no production of iron and steel until 1939. Reşat Bayer et. al., “National Material Capabilities Data set”, Version 3.0, May 2005: http://corrolatesofwar.org; J. David Singer, "Reconstructing the Correlates of War Dataset on Material Capabilities of States, 1816-1985" International Interactions, 14 (1987): 115-32.

106 On the significance of population in international power hierarchy, see Geoffrey McNicoll, “Population Weights in the International Order,” Population and Development Review 25/3 (September 1999): 411-442.

107 Norbert von Bischoff, Ankara: Türkiye’deki Yeni bir Oluşun İzahı, trans. Burhan Belge (Ankara: Ulus Basımevi, 1936), 295.

108 Holbraad, Middle Powers…,68-69.

109 For a discussion of Ottoman diplomacy and European states system, see A. Nuri Yurdusev, “The Ottoman Attitude Toward Diplomacy,” in Ottoman Diplomacy: Conventional or Unconventional?, ed. A. Nuri Yurdusev (Houndmills, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005), 21-30.

110 See Dilek Barlas, Etatism and Diplomacy in Turkey: Economic and Foreign Policy Strategies in an Uncertain World, 1929-1939 (Leiden, Brill, 1998).

111 See for instance, Evang. An. Averoff, Union Douaniere Balkanique, (Paris: Librairie de Recuil Sirey, 1933).

112 Osterud, “Regional Great powers…,” 8.

113 Wight, Power Politics…, 63.

114 Holbraad, Middle Powers…,189.

115 Iver B. Neumann, “Poland as a Regional Great Power: the Interwar Heritage,” in Regional Great powers in International Politics, ed. Neumann, Iver B. (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1992), 140

116 Fatih Özbay and Bülent Aras, “Polish-Russian Relations: History-Geography and Geopolitics,” East European Quarterly 42/1, (March 2008), 29

117 Neumann, “Poland as a Regional Great Power… “129.

118 Neumann, “Poland as a Regional Great Power… “ 132.

119 Neumann, “Poland as a Regional Great Power… “ 133.

120 Neumann, “Poland as a Regional Great Power… “ 123.

121 Neumann, “Poland as a Regional Great Power… “ 135-136.

122 Neumann, “Poland as a Regional Great Power… “ 138.

123 Rolf Ahmann, “’Localization of Conflicts’ or ‘Indivisibility of Peace’: The German and Soviet Approaches towards Collective Security and East Central Europe, 1925-1939,” in The Quest for Stability: Problems of West European Security, 1918-1957, ed. Ahmann, R., A. M. Birke, and M. Howard (Oxford: Oxford University Pres, 1993), 226.

124 Wandycz, France and her Eastern Allies…, 283.

125 Joshua B. Spero, Bridging the European Divide: Middle Power Politics and Regional Security Dilemmas (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.: 2004), 3.

126 Spero, Bridging the European Divide…, 307.

127 Spero, Bridging the European Divide…, 25.

128 Özbay and Aras, “Polish-Russian Relations…,” 35.

129 Fabio L. Grassi, İtalya ve Türk Sorunu, 1919-1923: Kamuoyu ve Dış Politika (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2003).

130 See Bülent Gökay, A Clash of Empires: Turkey between Russian Bolshevism and British Imperialism, 1918-1923 (London: Taurus Academic Studies, 1997).

131 A. Haluk Ülman, “Türk Dış Politikasına Yön Veren Etmenler I,” Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 23/3 (1968): 241-273.

132 See, for intance, Zacharias N. Tsirpanlis, “Camile Barrere and the Italo-Turkish Dispute over Kastellorizo in 1923,” Balkan Studies, 39/2 (1998): 289-303.

133In his six-day marathon speech, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk devoted a large section to Rauf Orbay's anti-republican stand and acts. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Speech (Ankara: Başbakanlık Basımevi, 1981), 676-697. For Rauf Orbay’s remarks, see “Rauf Bey’in Vatan Gazetesine Demeci, 1 Kasım 1923 [1 November 1923], in CHP Grup Toplantısı Tutanakları (1923-1924), ed. Yücel Demirel and Osman Zeki Konur (İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2002), 23-30. Cf. Rauf Orbay, Cehennem Değirmeni: Siyasi Hatıralar II, 2nd edition (İstanbul: Emre Yayınları, 2001).

134 Kazım Karabekir, Paşaların Kavgası: İnkilap Hareketlerimiz (İstanbul: Emre Yayınları, 1991), 246-250.

135 “İtalya ve Yunanistan’ın Tehdidine 924 Harb Oyunları ile Nasıl Cevap Vermiştik?” Tarih Konuşuyor 3/13 (February 1965): 1021-1027.

136 Kazım Karabekir, Paşaların Kavgası: İnkilap Hareketlerimiz (İstanbul: Emre Yayınları, 1991), 252.

137 William Hale, Turkish Politics and the Military (London: I. B. Taurus, 1994), 76

138 İsmet İnönü, Hatıralar, Vol. II (Ankara: Bilgi Yayınevi, 1987), 191. Cf. Kazım Karabekir, Paşaların Kavgası: İnkilap Hareketlerimiz (İstanbul: Emre Yayınları, 1991).

139 Fahri Çoker, Bahriyemizin Yakın Tarihinden Kesitler (Ankara: Dz. K.K. Karargah Basımevi, 1994), 179-183.

140 The amount of attention devoted to naval operations in the official military history of the War of Independence illustrates the magnitude of naval contribution to the whole nationalist effort during the War of Independence. Air and naval operations are lumped together into a single volume in the 20-volume series published by the General Staff Military History Service. See [Saim Besbelli], "Deniz Cephesi," in Türk İstiklal Harbi: Deniz Cephesi ve Hava Harekatı, Vol. 5 (Ankara: Genelkurmay Basımevi, 1964).

141 Afif Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanmasi, 1923-1960 (İstanbul: Deniz Basımevi, 1967), 13.

142 See Rauf Orbay, Cehennem Değirmeni: Siyasi Hatıralar I, 2nd. Edition (İstanbul: Emre Yayınları, 2001).

143 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donaması…, 21-23; and Raşit Metel, Atatürk ve Donanma…, (İstanbul: Deniz Basımevi, 1966), 52-58.

144 Metel, Atatürk ve Donanma…, 52.

145 Metel, Atatürk ve Donanma…., 58; M. Celaleddin Orhan, Bir Bahriyelinin Anılari, 1918-1981 (İstanbul: Kastaş Yayınları, 2001), 259.

146 See Ali İhsan Gencer, Bahriye’de Yapılan Islahat Hareketleri ve Bahriye Nezareti’nin Kuruluşu (1789-1867) (İstanbul: Edebiyat Fakültesi Basımevi, 1985).

147 Çoker, Bahriyemizin Yakın…, 230.

148 TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi, Vol. II, Term II, Session 2 (22 December 1924): 216-20.

149 Erik Jan Zürcher, Political Opposition in the Early Turkish Republic: The Progressive Republican Party (Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1991).

150 TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi (22 December 1924): 287-304.

151 Before the split in the ranks of CHF, Ali İhsan Eryavuz tabled a motion against Rauf Orbay in the party assembly for his comments in newspaper Vatan. Demirel and Konur, CHP Grup Toplantısı…., 17-20.

152 Ali Fuat Cebesoy, Siyasi Hatıralar, Part II (Ankara: Doğan Kardeş Yayınları, 1960), 123. Foreign observers shared the same view. PRO FO 371 10870 E3338/3338/44(1 June 1925); MAE, Serie E Levant/Turquie, Vol 76/II, no. 305 (24 December 1924).

153 Gül Akyılmaz, Osmanlı Diplomasi Tarihi ve Teşkilatı, (Konya, 2000).

154 Kemal Girgin, Osmanlı ve Cumhuriyet Dönemleri Hariciye Tarihimiz (Teşkilat ve Protokol), 3rd ed. (İstanbul: Okumuş Adam, 2005), 199

155 Girgin, Osmanlı ve Cumhuriyet…, 33. Gökay, A Clash of Empires…, 83

156 Erik Goldstein, “The British Official Mind and the Lausanne Conference, 1922-23,” Diplomacy and Statecraft 14/2, (June 2003): 189.

157 Metin Tamkoç, The Warrior Diplomats (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 1976), 20-21.

158 Goldstein, “The British Official Mind…,” 192.

159 Davison, “Turkish Diplomacy…,

160 Kazım Karabekir, Birinci Cihan Harbine Neden Girdik, Vol. I,(İstanbul: Emre Yayınları, 2000), 30-32.

161 See George S. Harris, Atatürk’s Diplomats and their Brief Biographies, (İstanbul: ISIS Press, 2010), 77-80

162 Bilal N. Şimşir, Bizim Diplomatlar, (Ankara. Bilgi Yayınevi, 1996), 169-170.

163 See, for instance, Galip Kemali Söylemezoğlu’s letters to Foreign Minister Fuad Köprülü and Prime Minister Adnan Menderes, BCA, 20.713.20, (13 June 1956). For his memoirs see, Galip Kemali Söylemezoğlu, Hariciye Hizmetinde 30 Sene, 1892-1922, Vol. IV (İstanbul: Maarif Basımevi, 1955), 113 and 172-185.

164 Harris, Atatürk’s Diplomats…, 99-111

165 Şimşir, Bizim Diplomatlar…, 4-5.

166 On the link between hosting diplomatic missions and international status, see J. David Singer and Melvin Small, “The Composition and Status Ordering of the International Systems: 1815-1940,” World Politics 18/2, (January 1966): 236-282. According to Singer and Small, the Ottoman Empire ranked in terms of hosting foreign diplomatic missions 17 out of 43 states in 1910; 20 out of 43; 48 out of 61 in 1920, whereas the new Turkish republic ranked 22 out of 63 states in 1930 and 15 out of 66 states in 1935.

167 Golstein, “The British Official Mind...,” 196-197.

168 For an eloborate account, see Nur Bilge Criss, “Shades of Diplomatic Recognition: American Encounters with Turkey (1923-1937),” Studies in Atatürk’s Turkey: The American Dimension, eds. George S. Harris and Nur Bilge Criss, (Leiden: Brill, 2009), 97-144.

169 Tamkoç, The Warrior Diplomats…, 193-195.

170 Ülman, “Türk Dış Politikasına,…,” 244.

171 Güçlü, “Turkey’s Entrance…, 190.

172 Serpil Sürmeli, “Cemiyet-i Akvam’a Müzaheret Cemiyeti – Türkiye’de Kuruluşu ve Prag Konferansı,” Atatürk Yolu 25-26, (May-November 2000), 181-200. For a short history of the Turkish League of Nations Association, see BCA 205.814.3. See also Cemil [Bilsel], Cemiyet-i Akvam’a Müzaheret Cemiyetleri Beynelminel İttihadı Dokuzuncu Varşova Kongresine Aid Raporlar, (İstanbul: Ahmed İhsan Matbaası, 1340 [1925].

173 “Italo-Turkish Relations,” The Times (11 April 1928).

174 BCA 226.523.6 (18 September 1926).

175 Akşin, Atatürk’ün Dış Politika..., 50.

176 For Tevfik Rüştü Aras’ views, see TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi, Term IV, Vol III, Extraordinary Session (15 July 1931): 133

177 Dingman, Power in the Pacific…, 217.

178 Zara Steiner, “The League of Nations and the Quest for Security,” in The Quest for Stability: Problems of West European Security, 1918-1957, ed. Ahmann, R., A. M. and Birke, M. Howard (Oxford: Oxford University Pres, 1993), 61.

179 Steiner, “The League of Nations…, 61.

180 Steiner, “The League of Nations…, 64-65.

181 Philip Towle, “British Security and Disarmament Policy in Europe in the 1920s,” in The Quest for Stability: Problems of West European Security, 1918-1957, ed. Ahmann, R., A. M. and Birke, M. Howard (Oxford: Oxford University Pres, 1993), 148

182 Towle, “British Security..., 149.

183 Maurice Vaisse, “Security and Disarmament: Problems in the Development of the Disarmament Debates, 1919-1934,” in The Quest for Stability: Problems of West European Security, 1918-1957, ed. Ahmann, R., A. M. and Birke, M. Howard (Oxford: Oxford University Pres, 1993), 189-190.

184 Dick Richardson, The Evolution of British Disarmament Policy in the 1920s (London: Pinter Publishers, 1989), 46-47.

185 Raymond G. O’Connor, Force and Diplomacy: Essays Military and Diplomatic (Florida: University of Miami Pres, 1972: 25). See also Raymond G. O’Connor, Perilous Equilibrium: The United States and the London Naval Conference of 1930 (Lawrence: University of Kansas Pres, 1963: 125).

186 See E. Goldstein, J. Maurer and E. R. May, ed. The Washington Conference, 1921-22: Naval Rivalry, East Asian Stability and the Road to Pearl Harbor (Essex: Frank Cass, 1994).

187 Dingman, Power in the Pacific…, 212.

188 Dingman, Power in the Pacific…, 216.

189 Roland Aimé Chaput, Disarmament in British Foreign Policy (London: Unwin Brothers Ltd., 1935), 198.

190 Dingman, Power in the Pacific…, 208-209.

191 Gerard Silverlock, “British Disarmament Policy and the Rome Naval Conference,” War in History 10/2 (2003), 187.

192 On the Chank Crisis, see Stanford J. Shaw, From Empire to Republic: The Turkish War of Liberation, 1918-1923, Vol. IV, (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2000), 1749-1789; Robin Denniston, “Diplomatic Intercepts in Peace and War: Chanak 1922,” Diplomacy and Statecraft 11/1, (March 2000): 241-256. .

193 Silverlokc, “British Disarmament Policy…,” 190-199.

194 Towle, “British Security…,” 136.

195 PRO FO 371/9598 A3838/52/45 (24 June 1924). See also Silverlock,”British Disarmament Policy…,” 201. He refers to a League of Nations document which mentions a 36 000-ton limit. The battlecruiser Salamis had been ordered from German shipyard, Vulkan, in 1912. Her building was interrupted due to the First World War. Zisis Fotakis, Greek Naval Polivy and Stategy, 1910-1919 (London: Routledge, 2005), 36-39.

196 For an interesting comparison of Turkish and Greek naval strengths, see PRO FO 371/13085, E252/43/44 (5 January 1928). For the Ottoman naval units, see Bernd Langensiepen and Ahmet Güleryüz, The Ottoman Steam Navy: 1828-1923 (İstanbul: Denizler Kitapevi, 2000).

197 PRO FO 371/10223 E6637/3189/44 (28 July 1924).

198 BCA 62.420.3 (20 June 1925).

199 PRO FO 371/10223 E6637/3189/44 (28 July 1924).

200 See for instance, Evanthis Hatzivassiliou, “The 1930 Greek-Turkish Naval Protocol,” Diplomacy and Statecraft 9/1 (March 1998): 92-93.

201 Robert W. Lambert, Soviet Disarmament Policy: 1922-1931, Research Report 64-2, (Washington, D.C.: United States Arms Control Control and Disarmament Agency,

1964), 6-7.

202 Lambert, Soviet Disarmament Policy…, 7-8.

203 Cited in Lambert, Soviet Disarmament Policy…, 11-12. For the Soviet demands at the Rome Naval Conference, see also Silverlock, “British Disarmament Policy…,” 200.

204 MAE, Serie E, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 84, no. 306, (20 August 1923): 12.

205 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanması…, 21-23.

206 Afif Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanmasının Kuruluşu Sırasında 60 Yıl Hizmet (1918-1977), Vol. 1 (İstanbul: Deniz Basımevi, 2005), 89.

207 Serhat Güvenç, Birinci Dünya Savaşına Giden Yolda Osmanlıların Drednot Düşleri (İstanbul: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2009).

208 See Selahittin Özçelik, Donanma-yı Osmani Muavenet-i Milliye Cemiyeti (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu, 2000); Mehmet Beşikçi, The Organized Mobilization of Popular Sentiments: The Ottoman Navy League, 1909-1919, Unpublished MA Thesis, Boğaziçi University, Social Science Institute, İstanbul, 1999.

209 BCA, 030.18.1.1/80.525.8 (6 February 1925).

210 Metel, Atatürk ve Donanma..., 57.

211 TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi (22 December 1924): 227.

212 Hulusi Kaymaklı, Havacılık Tarihinde Türkler 2 (1918-1939), (Ankara: Hava Kuvvetleri Yayını, 1997),161.

213 Geoffery Till, "Adopting the Aircraft Carrier: The British, American and Japanese Case Studies," in Military Innovation in the Interwar Period, ed. Williamson Murray and Allan R. Millett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1996), 207-208.

214 Rimanelli, Marco, Italy Between Europe and the Mediterranean: Diplomacy and Naval Strategy from Unification to NATO, 1800s-2000 (New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 1997), 500-506.

215 By 1973 Turkish navy resurrected its own “air service” equipped with both fixed-wing and rotary-wing naval aircraft. See Serhat Güvenç, "Deniz Havacılığın Türkiye'de Seyri," Savunma ve Havacılık (September 2000): 28-33; İki Mavi: Türk Deniz Havacılık Tarihi (İstanbul: Deniz Basımevi, 2007), 57-107.

216 See Holger Herwig, "Innovation Ignored: The Submarine Problem - Germany, Britain and the United States, 1919-1939," in Murray and Williamson, 227-264. For comparable Soviet and Italian experiences, see Jürgen Rohwer and Mikhail Monakov, “The Soviet Union’s Ocean-Going Fleet, 1935-1956,” International History Review 18(4) (November 1996): 838-845; Rimanelli, Italy Between Europe…, 494-495.

217 Büyüktuğrul, Büyük Atamız…, 92. A well-informed observer later claimed that a certain strand in the Turkish military advocated abolishing the navy altogether. Abidin Daver, "Donanmamızın İhyası İsmet Paşanın Muvaffak Olduğu En Büyük Eserlerinden Biridir," Cumhuriyet (25 August 1930).

218 Williamson Murray describes military culture "as the sum of intellectual, professional, and traditional values of an officer corps; it plays a central role in how that officer corps assesses the external environment and how it analyzes the possible response that it might make to 'the threat'... The past weighs in with a laden hand of tradition that can often block innovation. And not without reason. The approaches that succeeded on earlier battlefields were often worked out at a considerable cost in blood. Consequently, military cultures tend to change slowly, particularly in peacetime.” Willamson Murray, "Innovation: Past and Future," in Murray and Millet, 312-313.

219 When it was inaugurated in 1930, the Naval War College curriculum featured a heavy dose of infantry tactics at company and battalion levels. Osmanlı Deniz Harp Tarihi ve Cumhuriyet Donanması, Vol. IV (İstanbul: Deniz Kuvvetleri Basımevi, 1984), 641.

220 Osman Nuri, “Tahtelbahir ve Göreceği İşler,” Deniz Mecmuası 41/312 (March 1929): 83

221 Kaymaklı, Havacılık Tarihinde 2…, 160 and Raşit Metel, Türk Denizaltıcılık Tarihi (İstanbul: Deniz Basımevi, 1960), 31.

222 For an argument that the Yavuz had enjoyed an undeserved popularity see Hasan Ersel, "Yavuz Geliyor Yavuz," Toplumsal Tarih 76/4, (April 2000): 28-39.

223 371/11544 E2050/523/441926(29 March 1926).

224 Robert Olson, “The Kurdish Rebellions of Sheikh Said (1925), Mt. Ararat (1930), and Dersim (1937-38): Their Impact on the Development of the Turkish Air Force and on Kurdish and Turkish Nationalism”, Welt des Islams 40/1 (March 2000): 67-94; Fahri Uçantürk, 1930 Yılı Ağrı Harekatına Karaköseden bir Bakış, (Eskişehir: Hava Okulu Matbaası, 1948).

225 Phillip S. Meilinger, “Clipping the Bombers Wings: The Geneva Disarmament Conference and the Royal Air Force, 1932-1934,” War in History 6/3 (1999): 323.

226 Yavuz Özgüldür, Türk-Alman İlişkileri (1923-1945) (Ankara: Genelkurmay Basımevi, 1993), 65-69.

227 For foreign assessments of Turkish naval programs in that period, see Serhat Güvenç, “Yabancı Arşivlere Göre Cumhuriyetin İlk Yıllarında Deniz Kuvvetleri” Deniz Kuvvetleri Dergisi, No. 586 (March 2003): 3-11.

228 SHM, Carton 1BB2/86, Bulletin de Renseigments, No. 1231 (December 1924): 58.

229 SHM, Carton 1BB7/189 “Marine Turquie: Renseigments Generaux: Chapitre Second” (10 July 1924).

230 PRO FO 371/11557, E7070/7070/44 (28 December 1926).

231 For instance, see Martin Thomas, “To Arm an Ally: French Arms Sales to Romania, 1926-1949,” Journal of Strategic Studies 19/2 (June 1996): 231-259.

232 For an account of British naval policy, see David Mac Gregor, “Former Naval Cheapskate: Chancellor of the Exchequer Winston Churchill and the Royal Navy, 1924-1929,” Armed Forces and Society 19/3 (Spring 1993): 319-333.

233 Keith Krause, Arms and the State: Patterns of Military Production and Trade (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 72-78.

234 See, BOA, 99/4-2, 1338, C26, “Government Imperial Ottoman-Schneider & C^ie. Convention,” (30 April 1914).

235 SHM, Carton 1BB7/150, Bulletin de Informations Militaires, (Turquie), No. 292 (12 August 1924).

236 MAE, Serie E, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 77/I, no. 305 (3 December 1924): 54.

237 MAE, Serie E, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 77/I, no. 305 (5 June 1925): 69-73.

238 Metel, Türk Denizaltıcılık…, 27-28.

239 MAE, Serie E, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 77/I, no. 305, (2 June 1925): 73.

240 See Allison Winthrop Saville, The Development of the German U-Boat Arm, 1919-1934, Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Washington, 1964.

241 Björn Forsén and Annette Forsén, “German Secret Submarine Exports, in Girding for Battle: the Arms Trade in a Global Perspective, 1815-1940, ed. Donald J. Stoker Jr. and Jonathan A. Grant (London: Preager, 2003), 116-117; also Herwig, “Innovation Ignored…”, 232

242 Chaput, Disarmament in British…, 130: n. 1.

243 See David B. Ralston, Importing the European Army (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1990), 54-55. For naval missions see, Celalettin Yavuz, Osmanlı Bahriyesi’nde Yabancı Misyonlar (İstanbul: Dz. İk. Grp. K.’lığı Basımevi, [1999]).

244 Jehuda Wallach, Bir Askeri Yardımın Anatomisi: Türkiye'de Prusya-Alman Askeri Heyetleri, 1835-1919, trans. F. Çeliker (Ankara: Genel Kurmay Basımevi, 1985); Chris B. Rooney, "The International Significance of the British Naval Mission to the Ottoman Empire," Middle Eastern Studies 34/1 (January 1998).

245 Orbay, Cehennem Degirmeni I…, 160.

246 PRO FO 371/10870, E3338/3338/44 (1 June 1925).

247 Afif Büyüktuğrul, "Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Donanmasının Ellinci Yılı," Belleten 37/148, (October 1973): 503.

248 PRO FO 371/10870, E4368/3543/44 (27 July 1925). London was interested in restoring naval links with Turkey. In response to a British shipyard's request for clearance to bid for a Turkish tender for destroyers, the Admiralty wrote "the fact that our relations with Turkey are strained is an additional reason for encouraging Messrs. Beardmore to tender, as it is preferable that the Turks should have to rely on us for ammunition, torpedoes, spare parts, etc." PRO FO 371/11521, E121713/44 (20 February 1926).

249 PRO FO 371/10870, E7305/3543/44 (26 November 1925).

250 Güvenç, “Yabancı Arşivlere Göre…”, 3-117.

251 Özgüldür, Türk-Alman İlişkileri…, 64-65. Gencer Özcan, “Türkiye’de Cumhuriyet Dönemi Ordusunda Prusya Etkisi,” İdea 1/1, (Spring 2009): 15-69.

252 Mustafa Aksakal, “Not ‘by those books of international law but only by war’: Ottoman Intellectuals on the Eve of the Great War,” Diplomacy and Statecraft 15/3 (September 2004): 508-509.

253 Özgüldür, Türk-Alman İlişkileri…, 63.

254 PRO FO 371/11544, E4168/513/44 (10 July 1926).

255 Cemil Koçak, Türk-Alman İlişkileri 1923-1939 (Ankara: Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, 1991), 46.

256 Büyüktuğrul, Cunhuriyet Donanması…, 27.

257 Koçak, Türk-Alman İlişkileri…, 46.

258 Güvenç, “Yabancı Arşivlere Göre…, 7.

259 Büyüktuğrul, Osmanlı Deniz Harp…, 622.

260 PRO FO 371/11544 E2050/513/44 (29 March 1926).

261 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanması…, 32

262 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanması…, 32

263 It should be noted that France was the only Triple Entente power with which Turkey had cordial relations at the time. MAE, Serie E, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 77/I, no. 305 (1 and 10 November 1926).

264 MAE, Serié E, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 599, No. 305 (12 March 1930).

265 Özgüldür, Türk-Alman İlişkileri…, 95.

266 See Air Vice-Marshal Arthur S. Gould Lee, Special Duties: Reminiscences of a Royal Air Force Staff Officer in the Balkans, Turkey and the Middle East (London: Sampson Low, [1946]).

267 Roger Dingman, Power in the Pacific: The Origins of the Naval Arms Limitation, 1914-1922 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1976), 78.

268 David R. Stone, “Imperialism and Soverignty: The League of Nations’ Drive to Control the Global Arms Trade,” Journal of Contemporary History 35/2 (2000), 224.

269 [Afet İnan], Yurt Bilgisi Notlarımdan Askerlik Vazifesi (İstanbul: Devlet Matbaası, 1930), 36-37.

270 Akşin, Atatürk’ün Dış Politika İlkeleri..., 26..

271 See, for instance, “The Goeben Again.” The Times (26 May 1925). This reputation of the battlecruiser Yavuz was a direct result of the role attributed to her as SMS Goeben in the Otoman Empire’s “drift” into the First World War. Churchill himself wrote that “For the peoples of the Middle East SMS Goeben carried more slaughter, more misery and more ruin than has ever before borne within the compass of a ship.” Cited in Geoffrey Bennet, Naval Battles of the First World War (London: Penguin Books, 2001), 14.

272 Daniel C. Villanueva, “Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi’s Pan-Europa as the Elusive ‘Object of Longing,’” Rocky Mountain Review 67(Fall 2005): 70.

273 Richard N. Coudenhove-Kalergi, Pan-Europe (New York: Alfred.A. Knopf, 1926), 177-178.

274 MEA, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 616, no. 316, (27 April 1935): 49-51. Ami-adversion defined a relationship which includes elements of both friendship and adversity.

275 PRO FO 371/19039, E1213/1213/44 (10 February 1935).

276 Mevlüt Çelebi, Milli Mücadele Döneminde Türk-İtalyan İlişkileri (Ankara: Dışişleri Bakanlığı Stratejik Araştırmalar Merkezi, 1999); Fabio L. Grassi, L’Italia e la Questione Turca (1919-1923) (Turin: Silvio Zamaroni Editore, 1996). For Turkish translation of the book, see Fabio L. Grassi, İtalya ve Türk Sorunu 1919-1923 Kamuoyu ve Dış Politika (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Kültür Sanat Yayıncılık, 2000).

277 H. James Burgwyn, Italian Foreign Policy in the Interwar Period 1918-1940 (Connecticut: Praeger, 1997), 55.

278 Luca de Caprariis, “’Fascism for Export’? The Rise and Eclipse of the Fasci Italiani all’Estero,” Journal of Contemporary History 35/2 (2000): 175

279 J. B. Bosworth, Italy and the Wider World 1860-1960 (London: Routledge, 1996), 41.

280 Burgwyn, Italian Foreign Policy…, 24-27.

281 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Lausanne (30 April 1923).

282 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Lausanne (30 April 1923).

283 H. Stuart Hughes, “The Early Diplomacy of Italian Fascism, 1922-1932”, in The Diplomats, 1919-1939, ed. Gordon A. Graig and Felix Gilbert (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981),

219.

284 Barclay, Glen St. J., The Rise and Fall of the New Roman Empire: Italy’s Bid for World Power, 1890-1943, (London: Sidgwick and Jackson, 1973), 132.

285 Mussolini’s seizure of Fiume was against the Rapallo Treaty that Conte Sforza signed with the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes in 1920.

286 In 1922, the year Mussolini came to power Czechoslovakia, Romania, and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes established the Little Entente with the support of France. Eliza

Campus, The Little Entente and the Balkan Alliance (Bucaresti: Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romania, 1978), 13-17.

287 Bosworth, Italy and the Wider World…, 44.

288 Martin Blinkhorn, Mussolini and Fascist Italy (London: Routledge, 1994), 26.

289 Denis Mack Smith, Mussolini (New York: Vintage Books, 1983), 153.

290 ASMAE, Pacco 1704/7859, Turchia 1924 (29 August 1924) and Pacco 1714/7889 (21 January 1925).

291 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople, (14 April 1926).

292 MacGregor Knox, Common Destiny, Dictatorship, Foreign Policy and War in Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 122.

293 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (19 April 1926).

294 For an extensive and balanced treatment of compulsory population exchange between Turkey and Greece, see Renee Hirschon (ed.), Crossing the Aegean: An Appraisal of the 1920 Compulsory Population Exchange between Greece and Turkey, (New York, Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2003).

295 Arguably, the exchange of populations might have contributed to the emergence of authoritarian political regimes in both countries in the 1930s. Yaprak Gürsoy, “The Effects of the Population Exchange on the Greek and Turkish Political Regimes in the 1930s,” East European Quarterly 42/2, (June 2008): 95-128.

296 Suat Bilge, Büyük Düş: Türk-Yunan Siyasi İlişkileri, (Ankara: 21. Yüzyıl Yayınları, 2000), 255.

297 Ionnis D. Stefanidis, “Reconstructing Greece as a European State: Venizelos’ Last Premiership, 1928-1932,” in Eleftherios Venizelos: The Trials of Statesmanship, ed. Paschalis M. Kitromilides, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006), 216. For the Megali Idea, see Umut Özkırımlı and Spyros A. Sofos, Tormented by History: Nationalism in Greece and Turkey, (London: Hurst & Company, 2008), 108-116

298 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (23 April 1926).

299 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (23 April 1926).

300 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (23 April 1926).

301 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (27 October 1926).

302 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Sofia (22 November 1926).

303 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople, (24 February 1927).

304 Stephen Josep Stilwell, Jr., Anglo-Turkish Relations in the Interwar Era (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, Ltd., 2003), 62.

305ASMAE, Pacco 1714/7889, Turchia 1925 (21 January 1925).

306 Rıfat Uçarol, Siyasi Tarih (Ankara: Havacılık Basın ve Neşriyat Müdürlüğü, 1979), 426.

307 Ayın Tarihi, 55 (August 1928): 3889.

308ASMAE, Pacco 1714/7890, Turchia 1925 (10 April 1925).

309ASMAE, Pacco 1714/7890, Turchia 1925 (7 April 1925).

310 ASMAE, Pacco 4171/584, Turchia 1927 (9 June 1927).

311 ASMAE, Pacco 4171/584, Turchia 1927 (9 June 1927).

312 ASMAE, Pacco 1719/7938, Turchia 1927 (19 February 1927).

313 Not until 1936 at Montreux, would the Straits question be resolved to the advantage of Turkey. Feridun Cemal Erkin, Les Relations Turco-Sovietiques et la Question des Détroits (Ankara: Başnur Matbaasi, 1968), 62-65 and Seha L. Meray, Lozan Barış Konferansı, Tutanaklar-Belgeler, Vol. 1 (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 1993), 131-180.

314 See, for instance, BCA 236.596.1 (18 November 1926).

315 PRO FO 371/ 13085, E 3218/43/44 (25 June 1928).

316 Milliyet, (28 June 1926).

317 Alan Cassels, Mussolini’s Early Diplomacy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970), 328.

318 According to Mango, Mustafa Kemal’s diplomatic tactic was as ever to split the Allied ranks. A compromise in Mosul would satisfy Britain. It would then be easier to resist the economic demands of the French and the Italians. Andrew Mango, Atatürk (London: John Murray, 1999), 378.

319 C. J. Lowe, and F. Marzari, Italian Foreign Policy, 1870-1940 (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1975), 190-191.

320 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Rome (6 January 1928).

321 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (18 July 1927).

322 Lowe and Marzari, Italian Foreign Policy…, 143.

323 Nettuno would have guaranteed the rights of Italians living in Dalmatia. Burgwyn, Italian Foreign Policy…, 42.

324 Denis Mack Smith, Mussolini (New York: Vintage Books, 1983),151-158.

325 J. Calvitt Clarke III, Russia and Italy against Hitler: The Bolshevik-Fascist Raprrochment of the 1930s, (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991), 8.

326 Adamwaith, p. 136

327 O’Connor, Perilous Equilibrium…, 55.

328 O’Connor, Perilous Equilibrium…, 57.

329 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (25 April 1928).

330 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (25 April 1928).

331 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (6 June 1928).

332 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Rome (13 December 1928).

333 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (6 June 1928,).

334 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Rome(25 September 1928).

335 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Rome (25 September 1928).

336 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople (1 January 1929).

337 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Rome (3 May 1929).

338 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Rome (3 May 1929).

339 NARA RG 59, M530, R 5, Constantinople,(6 June 1928).

340 Bischoff, Ankara: Türkiye’deki…., 286.

341 The text of the Government decree talks of three submarines that had been disposed off without providing any details on them. It is tempting to assume that they might part of the large Ottoman order of April 1914, as the transaction authorized was to be undertaken by an authorized representative of the Republic of Turkey in London. BCA, 09.25.11, (19 May 1340 [1923]). Captain Hamdi [Denizmen] had served briefly on the Ottoman naval commission in Newcastle in connection with the building of Ottoman battleship Sultan Osman-ı Evvel (formerly Brazilian Navy Rio de Janeiro). He was supposed to serve as the executive officer of the Sultan Osman-ı Evvel which was seized by the British Admiralty in August 1914. Fahri Çoker, Deniz Harp Okulumuz, 6^th ed. (Ankara: Deniz Basımevi, 2000), III-49.

342 Yakup Kadri Karaosmanoğlu, Politikada 45 Yıl, 2^nd ed. (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 1984), 105.

343 BCA 45.292.15 “General Staff to Prime Ministry,” (3 June 1927). The written recommendation of Marshal Çakmak on disbanding the Ministry of Marine was also brought to the attention of President Atatürk.

344 Hakan Özoğlu, “Exaggarating and Exploiting the Sheik Said Rebellion of 1925 for Political Gains,” New Perspectives on Turkey 41 (2009): 181-210,

345 Zürcher, Political Opposition…, 92-93.

346 ASMAE, Pacco 1727/7975, Turchia 1928 (17 December 1928).

347 PRO FO 371/13085, E252/43/44 (5 and 12 January 1928).

348 BCA 62.420.3 (20 June 1925)

349 Law No. 1244, Düstur, Series III (1175-1352), Vol. IX (1927-1928): 130.

350 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanması, 46-47.

351 PRO FO371/13081, E5864/17/44 (25 November 1928).

352 On French-Italian naval rivalry in the Mediterranean see Paul G. Halpern, “French and Italian Naval Policy in the Mediterranean,” in Naval Strategy and Policy in the Mediterranean: Past, Present and Future, ed. John B. Hattendorf (London: Frank Cass, 2000), 78-106.

353 ASMAE, Pacco 1727/7975, Turchia 1928 (3 December 1928).

354 ASMAE, Pacco 1727/7988, Turchia 1926 (6 December 1926).

355 ASMAE, Pacco 1727/7988, Turchia 1926 (31 December 1926).

356 ASMAE, Pacco 1720/17271,Turchia 1928 (23 November 1928).

357 ASMAE, Pacco 17271/7975, Turchia 1928 (3 December. 1928).

358 For the foreign military influence in the Ottoman Empire, see Rooney, ‘The

International Significance…,” and Wallach, Bir Asker Yardımın….

359 ASMAE, Pacco 1720/7939,Turchia 1927 (3 June 1927)

360 Barlas, Etatism and Diplomacy…, 114–23.

361 ASMAE, Pacco 1727/7948, Turchia 1927 (21 July 1927).

362 ASMAE, Pacco 1727/7948, Turchia 1927 (15 August 1927).

363 PRO FO 371/13817, E1855/189/44 (15 April 1929).

364 Libia served with the Italian Navy until 1938. Langensiepen and Güleryüz, The

Ottoman Navy…, 65.

365 Ayın Tarihi 12 (1927): 1945.

366 See Soysal, Türkiye’nin Siyasal Andlaşmaları I…, 105–6.

367 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanması…, 35–6.

368 ASMAE, Pacco 17271/7975, Turchia 1928 (4 December 1928).

369 ASMAE, Pacco 17271/.7975, Turchia 1928 (9 December 1928).

370 ASMAE, Pacco 17271/.7975, Turchia 1928 (17 December 1928). Ironically, one of these officers did not rate Italian shipbuilding very highly. See K. Münir, Avrupaya Tetkik için Gönderilen Dz. Zabitlerinin Raporları –3 (Istanbul: Deniz Matbaası, 1929).

371 ‘Bahri Siparişleri İtalyanlar Aldılar’, Cumhuriyet (24 May 1929). Basil Zaharoff was born

an Ottoman subject around 1850. He figured as a prominent arms salesman. He sold arms

to both Greece and the Ottoman Empire. Zaharoff symbolized the archetypal ‘merchant of

death’ for his lack of morals. He was later portrayed as ‘a figure of historical importance;

for he was not merely a master of salesmanship and bribery, but an operator who

understood the connections between arms and diplomacy, between arms and intelligence,

and who could serve as both salesman and spy’. A. Sampson, The Arms Bazaar: The

Companies, the Dealers, the Bribes, from Vickers to Lockheed (London: Hodder and

Stoughton, 1977), 49.

372 ASMAE, Pacco 1731/8003, Turchia 1929 (25 May 1929).

373 ‘Yeni Gemilerimiz’, Cumhuriyet (2 June 1929). The Evening News claimed ‘portentous

rumbling in the mountain spread over several years has brought a forward a very small

mouse’. ‘Turks Order More Warships’, Evening News (29 May 1929).

374 ASMAE, Pacco 1728/2319, Turchia 1929 (3 June 1929).

375 “Italy to Develop Turkey’s Fleet”, Morning Post (6 June 1929), See also, “Turkish Plan puts Britain on Alert,” New York Times (4 June 1919).

376 NARA NND 740058, RG 165, Box 925 (29 May 1929).

377 “Turkish Naval Plans”, Times (29 May 1929).

378 In 1927, the shipbuilder Vulcan demanded compensation for building costs from the Greek government. Greece’s reluctance led to a dispute which was subsequently submitted to arbitration. Norwegian Admiral Scott Hansen suggested Greece’s purchase of the cruiser with minimum armaments installed to settle the issue. Athens did not consider this suggestion until May 1929. ‘Yunanlılar Salamisi Alırlarsa’, Cumhuriyet (15 June 1929). “Greek Battle Cruiser Salamis: Pre-War Contract Binding,” The Times (12 December 1925); “The Salamis Case: Neutral Admiral’s Report,” The Times (15 June 1928).

379 “Salamis Dispute Settled,” The Times (9 July 1929).

380 PRO FO 371/13656 C4148/752/19 (11 June 1929); PRO FO 371/13648 C4304/14/19 (17 June 1929).

381 ‘The Greek Navy: Two More Destroyers to be Ordered, Daily Telegraph; ‘Greece to Have

Two New Warships’, Manchester Guardian (29 May 1929).

382 The Greek press accused Turkey of preparing to take over several Greek islands in the Aegean once the Yavuz was re-commissioned. For asummary of Greek press coverage see PRO FO 371/13656 C7131/752/19 (12 September 1929). For Turkish response in press, see “BahriSiparişlerimiz Harp İçin Değil, Harbe Mani Olmak İçindir”, Cumhuriyet (13 June 1929); A.Daver, “Sahte Bir Telaş”, Cumhuriyet (15 June 1929).

383 PRO FO 371/ 13648 C6078/14/19 (7 August 1929).

384 PRO FO 371/13648 C7796/14/19 (7 October 1929).

385 “İki İtalyan Torpidosu Geldi”, Cumhuriyet, (4 June 1929); “İki İtalyan Torpidosu Daha

Geldi”, Cumhuriyet (5 June 1929).

386 Clarke III, Russia and Italy…, 15. Also in 1929, a major Turkish naval game was based on a scenario involving a coordinated Italian-Greek assault on Turkey from the Aegean. Deniz Harp Oyunu (İstanbul: Yıldız Hr. Ak. K. Matbaası, 1929), 5-6.

387 ‘Dün İtalyan Tayyareleri Geldiler ve Hararetle Karşılandılar, Cumhuriyet (7 June 1929); “Italian Seaplanes on the Bosphorus,” The Times (7 June 1929). On Italo Balbo and his aviation exploits, see R. Barbalenardo, “The Odyssey of Italo Balbo”Airpower, 30/4 (July 2000); B. Taylor, Fascist Eagle: Italy’s Air Marshal Italo Balbo (Missoula, MT: Pictorial Histories, 1996).

388 ‘Roma Sefirimizin Beyanatı: Talebelerimiz Çok İyi Çalışıyor’, Cumhuriyet (8 June 1929).

389 Examples of Turkish admiration of Fascism’s achievements in organizing the society may be found in Falih Rıfkı Atay, Faşist Roma, Kemalist Tiran ve Kaybolmuş Makedonya

(Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası, 1931), 5–53; and Moskova–Roma (Istanbul:

Muallim Ahmet Halit Kitaphanesi, 1932), 73–109.

390 ‘Matbuat Cemiyeti İtalyan Gazetecileri Şerefine Bir Ziyafet Verdi’, Cumhuriyet (16 June

1929).

391 M. Saffet [Geylangil], İtalyadan Amerikaya Nasıl Uçtular (İstanbul: Akşam Kütüphanesi, 1933).

392 “Famed German Cruiser will Sail again,” Chicago Daily Tribune (12 January 1930); Old Goeben Cruiser is Set to Sail again,” New York Times (8 December 1929).

393 Jürgen Rohwer, ‘Soviet Naval Strategies and Building Programs: 1922–1941’, in Acta XIXth International Colloquium of Military History, Istanbul, Turkey (Ankara: ATASE, 1993), 425.

394 “Moscow Explains Black Sea Incident,” New York Times (20 January 1930).

395 See for instance, “Soviet Naval Move is seen as Protest,” New York Times (19 January 1930).

396 James Cable, Gunboat Diplomacy, 1919-1991, 3rd ed. (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994), 168.

397 Bürman, Kara ve Deniz Harp Oyunu Meseleleri, (İstanbul: Yıldız Hr. Ak. K. Matbaası, 1930). Cf. Deniz Harp Oyunu, (Yıldız-İstanbul: Hr. Ak. K. Matbaası, 1929).

398 İsmet İnönü, Defterler (1919-1973), Vol. I, ed. Ahmet Demirel (İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2001): 155.

399 ‘Deniz Müsteşarı İtalya’dan Geldi’, Cumhuriyet (19 March 1930).

400 Fanning, Peace and Disarmament…, 106–32.

401 “Reveal How Italy Schemes to Beat French Naval Lead, Chicago Daily Tribune (1 March 1930).

402 “Italy Plans to Add 5 Turkish Ships to Fleet if War Comes,” Chicago Daily Tribune (17 March 1930).

403 PRO FO 371/14567 E1017/206/44 (27 February 1930).

404 BCA 6.55.2 (11 November 1929); NARA NND 740058, RG 165, Box 925 (3 July 1931)..

405 “Türkiye–İtalya,” Cumhuriyet, 26 March 1930.

406 “Deniz Haberleri,” Deniz Mecmuası, Vol.43, No.319 (Jan. 1931): 2.

407 PRO FO 371/14421, C4368/1906/22 (27 May 1939).

408 PRO FO 371/14421, C7776/1382/22 (7 October 1930).

409 Krause, Arms and the State, p.74.

410 PRO FO 371/14421, C8541/1382/22 (13 October 1930).

411 PRO FO 371/14567, E1242/206/44 (28 February 1930).

412 See for instance, PRO FO 371/13085, E252/43/44 (5 January 1928); ASD Pacco 1732/8022, Turchia 1930 (Rome) (15 August 1930).

413 For a different interpretation of the link between Turkish naval modernization and

Turkish–Greek negotiations, see Mango, Atatürk…,486.

414 PRO FO 371/14567, E1792/206/44 (7 April 1930).

415 Rimanelli, Italy Between Europe and the Mediterranean…, 528.

416 PRO FO 371/14351, C9143/3519/62 (8 December 1930).

417 Soysal, Türkiye’nin Siyasal, p.385. The French Parliament ratified the Treaty

three years later in 1933.

418 TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi, Vol.25, Term 3, Session 3, Meeting 28 (12 February 1931): 35–7.

419 ASMAE Pacco 1732/8022, Turchia 1930 (28 July 1930).

420 Cem Ermence, “Rearticulating the Local, Regional and Global: The Greek Turkish Rapproachment of 1930,” Turkish Studies 4/3 (Autumn 2003): 24-42.

421 See D. Stefanidis, “Reconstructing Greece…,” 193-233.

422 Hatzivassiliou, “The 1930 Greek-Turkish…,” 92-93.

423 Tevfik Rüştü Aras, Atatürk’ün Dış Politikası, (İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları, 2003), 139.

424 Ravenhill writes that the creativity of middle powers is directed towards the construction of coalitions of “like-minded” states. Ravenhill, “Cycles of Middle Power Activism…, 312.

425 See Barlas, Etatism and Diplomacy…

426 Girgin, Osmanlı ve Cumhuriyet…, 210-215.

427 Hariciye Vekaleti Yıllığı 1959, ([Ankara]: T.C. Hariciye Vekaleti, 1959), 11-21.Temel İskit, Diplomasi: Tarihi, Teorisi, Kurumları ve Uygulaması, (Istanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2007), 420.

428 Reşat Bayer, “Diplomatic Exchange Data set v2006.1, 2006, online: http://corrolatesofwar.org.

429 Selim Deringil, “Dış Politikada Süreklilik Sorunsalı: II. Abdülhamit ve İsmet İnönü” Toplum ve Bilim, 28 (Winter 1985): 95-96.

430T.C. Maliye Bakanlığı, Dışişleri Hizmetleri ve Teşkilatlanması, (Ankara: T.C. Maliye Bakanlığı Hazine Genel Müdürlüğü ve Milletlerarasi İktisadi İşbirliği Teşkilatı, 1963), 59-65.

431 For a long memorandum by the French naval attaché on the Yavuz’s reconditioning by Penhoët, see MAE, Serié E, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 599, Carton 305 (12 March 1930). SHM, Carton 1BB2/89, Bulletin de Rensignements, No. 222 (June 1930): 71-73. “Yavuz’un Atış Tecrübeleri,” Cumhuriyet (11 August 1930).

432 According to a report of the Turkish Charges D’Affairs in Stockholm, the Danish press accused Ankara of adopting a hypocritical stand on international disarmament, aimed at smokescreening its growing appetite for arms. BCA 228.532.2 (15 May 1929).

433 A year ago, Tevfik Rüştü Aras had been reluctant to voice such an unqualified support to the Soviet proposal during his meeting with Mussolini in Milan. “Italo-Turkish Relations,” The Times, (11 April 1927).

434 Lambert, Soviet Disarmament Policy…, 56.

435 Akşin, Atatürk’ün Dış Politika..., 27-29.

436 Lambert, Soviet Disarmament Policy…,, 70-75.

437 Lambert, Soviet Disarmament Policy…,, 75.

438 Lambert, Soviet Disarmament Policy…,, 65.

439 Akşin, Atatürk’ün Dış Politika..., 27

440 Cable, Gunboat Diplomacy…,168.

441 PRO ADM 1/9992 NID 02286/MO87/40 (15 December 1939).

442 See Hatzivassiliou, “The 1930 Greek-Turkish Naval…,”89-111.

443 Quoted in Feroz Ahmad, “The Historical Background of Turkey’s Foreign Policy,” in the Future of Turkish Foreign Policy, ed. Lenore G. Martin and Dimitris Kerides, (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 2004), 18.

444 See, for instance, Cemal Tukin, Bugünkü Avrupa Devletler Manzumesinin Doğuşu ve Türkiye’nin Bu Manzumeye Duhulü, Konferanslar Seri: 1- Kitap 18, (Ankara: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi Yayını, 1938). Georges-Henri Soutou, “Was there a European Order in the Twentieth Century? From the Concert of Europe to the End of the Cold War, Contemporary European History 9/3 (August 2000): 337-338

445 Despite persistent Turkish efforts, participation in various pan-European schemes did not necessarily bring recognition of Turkey’s European identity, to the frustration of Turkish diplomats and intellectuals. Prominent Turkish journalist, Falih Rıfkı Atay who covered the London Conference in 1933 for Cumhuriyet, argued that Turkey should reconsider its claim rather than assert its being a European country each time Turkey was referred to as an Asian country in meetings or in the press, as The Times did during the Conference. Falih Rıfkı [Atay], Londra Konferansı Mektupları (Ankara: Hakimiyeti Milliye Matbaası, 1933), 48.

446 Marie-Renée Mouton, “La Société des Nations et le Plan Briand”, in Le Plan Briand d’Union Fédérale Européenne, (Bern: Peter Lang, 1998): 237.

447 For Briand’s memorandum and replies to it, see, League of Nations, Documents relating to the Organisation of a System of European Federal Union, A.46.1930. VII (Geneva, 15 September 1930).

448 [Hariciye Vekaleti], Siyasi Müşavirlik, Briyan Projesine Verilen Cevaplar Hakkında, (Ankara: Hariciye Vekaleti Matbaası, 1930); Daire IV U.M., Avrupa Federal İttihadı, (Ankara: Hariciye Vekaleti Matbaası, 1931.).

449 Zeki Mesut [Alsan],“Poincaré’nin İstifası,” Milliyet (3 August 1929).

450 “Avrupa Devleti,” Ayın Tarihi 22-23/75-78 (June-September 1930): 6440.

451 Mahmut [Nedim Soydan], “Milletlerin İttihadı” Milliyet (29 September 1929).

452 Tevfik Rüştü Aras, Atatürk’ün Dış Politikası (İstanbul: Kaynak Yayınları, 2003), 75-76.

453 Aras, Atatürk’ün Dış…, 76.

454 See League of Nations, Documents relating to…, 23, 32, 37, 43 and 61.

455 Petricioli argues that Italy was fighting against French hegemony in Europe either by a rapprochement with Britain (as in the naval disarmament conference), or by forming an entente with Berlin or by drawing new forces such as Turkey and the Soviet Union into the European system. Marta Petricioli, “Dino Grandi et la Réponse Italienne”, in Le Plan Briand d’Union…, 331-346. Hughe Knatchbull-Hugessen believed that Italy had pressed for an invitation to Turkey and the Soviet Union as a means of killing the scheme (possibly discrediting the League). Maarten L. Pereboom, Democracies at the Turning Point, Britain, France and the End of the Postwar Order, 1928-1933 (NY: Peter Lang, 1995), 167.

456 BCA, 254.712.20 (3 August 1930).

457 See Pierre Milza, Mussolini (Paris: Fayard, 1999), 633.

458 Muharrem Feyzi [Togay], “Avrupa Birliği,” Cumhuriyet (14 June 1930).

459 There was a series of article on the topic in Cumhuriyet and Hakimiyeti Milliye in 1930 and 1931.

460 Zeki Mesut [Alsan], “Avrupa”nın Manası” Hakimiyeti Milliyet (4 April 1931).

461 ASMAE, Pacco 1732/8021, Turchia 1930 (17 November 1930).

462 Domna Dontas, “La Grece et la Politique de Reconciliation de Briand”, in Le Plan Briand…, 519.

463 Dontas, “La Grece et la Politique…,” 519.

464 Clarke III, Russia and Italy…, 13

465 Dilek Barlas and Serhat Güvenç, “To Build a Navy with the Help of Adversary: Italian-Turkish Naval Arms Trade, 1929-1932,” Middle Eastern Studies 38(4) (October 2002): 158.

466 MAE, Levant/Turquie, Vol. 609, No. 234 (25 August 1930) and No. 111 (26 November 1930). For the neutrality and friendship treaties concluded in 1928 and 1930 with Italy and Greece respectively, see Soysal, Türkiye’nin Siyasal I…, 333-339 and 391-396.

467 ASMAE, Pacco 1732/8021, Turchia 1930 (8 September 1930).

468 For Turkish press coverage see, Ayın Tarihi 77 (August 1930): 6430-6441.

469 League of Nations, Commission of Enquiry for European Union, Minutes of the Second Session of the Commission, C.144.M45. 1931. VII (Geneva, 16 to 21 January 1931), 22.

470 Titulescu also said that Briand made a mistake in subordinating economics to politics. Dan Berindei, “La Roumanie et le Plan Briand” in Le Plan Briand..., 470.

471 Petricioli, “Dino Grandi et la…,” 341-324.

472 League of Nations, Minutes of the Second Session of the Commission…, 40 and 81. Although reserved about the Commission’s expansion, Denmark insisted on the inclusion of Iceland among the European states to be invited. League of Nations, Minutes of the Second Session of the Commission…, 24.

473 MAE, 1918-1940, Série Y Internationale, Vol. 642, No. 32/35 (20 January 1931): 32.

474 MAE, 1918-1940, Série Y Internationale, Vol. 642, No. 111/112 (29 January 1931): 194

475 Petriocioli, “Dino Grandi et la…,” 339-340.

476 Those motives were nearly identical in the case of Italian sponsonship of the Soviet Union. See Clarke III, Russia and Italy…, 13-14

477 Lowe and Marzari, Italian Foreign Policy…, 230.

478 See, League of Nations, Commission of Enquiry for European Union, Minutes of the Fourth Session of the Commission, C.681.M.287, 1931. VII (Geneva, September 3rd to 5th, 1931), 21.

479 League of Nations, Minutes of the Second Session…, 22.

480 Coudenhove-Kalergi, Pan-Europe…, 177-78.

481 Coudenhove-Kalergi, Europa Erwacht!, (Zurich: Paneuropa-Verlag, 1934), 140.

482 Coudenhove-Kalergi, Europa Erwacht!...

483 Peter Bugge, “The Nation Supreme: the Idea of Europe 1914-1945” in The History of the Idea of Europe, ed. Kevin Wilson and Jan van der. Dussen (London: Routledge, 1995), 99- 101.

484 Coundehove-Kalergi, Europa Erwacht!..., 21.

485 Coundehove-Kalergi, Europa Erwacht!..., 21.

486 Coudenhove-Kalergi, Crusade for Pan-Europe…, 280

487 For a different interpretation of Turkey’s transformation through the eyes of another Austrian, see Bischoff, Ankara: Türkiye’deki Yeni…, 290-291. Norbert von Biscoff, nevetheless, could not help but admire the Turkish civilizational transformation as Coudenhove-Kalergi did. For the former, this transformation did not turn Turkey into an integral part of Europe but into a model for other Asiatic or non-Western societies to emulate. He went further and suggested a leadership role for Turkey for Iran and Afghanistan both of which seemed to have embarked on a similar modernization path.

488 Coundehove-Kalergi, Europa Erwacht!..., 126-127

489 Coundehove-Kalergi, Europa Erwacht!..., 21.

490 Coundehove-Kalergi, Europa Erwacht!..., 156.

491 Coudenhove-Kalergi, Crusade for Pan-Europe…, 280.

492 Peter M. R. Stirk, A History of European Integration since 1914 (London: Continuum, 2001), 8.

493 MEA, Série Levant, Sous-Série Turquie, Vol. 611, no. 252 (5 October 1933).

494 ASMAE, Busta 3/6, Turchia 1931 (21 October 1931).

495 PRO FO 371/14567, E6865/206/44 (18 December 1930).

496 SHM, Carton 1BB2/97, Bulletin de Rensignements, No. 225 (November 1931): 72-73. “Hücumbotlarımız Fennin En Son Tekamülatına Göre İnşa Edilmişlerdir,” Yenigün (8 September 1931).

497 For detailed engineering notes and calculations related to the stability problems, see Ata Nutku, “Ansaldo Destoyerleri,” [The Ansaldo destroyers] (Unpublished manuscript), the Ata Nutku Collection, Turkish Naval Academy Library, Tuzla, İstanbul.

498 ‘Tahtelbahirlerimize Dün Sancak Çekildi,” Cumhuriyet (7 November 1931).

499 BCA 26.16.17, (13 March 1932).

500 BCA 17.5.13 (1 February 1931); 80.33.13, (20 May 1931).

501 ‘Zafer ve Tınaztepe,” Cumhuriyet (6 June 1932).

502 ASMAE, Busta 6/8, Turchia 1932 (5 August 1932).

503 ASMAE, Busta 6/8, Turchia 1932 (30 October 1932).

504 PRO FO 371/19089, E 6237/55/44(1 December 1932).

505 ASMAE, Busta 6/8, Turchia 1932 (14 December 1932.

506 ASMAE, Busta 6/48, Turchia 1933, (18 and 29 March 1933).

507 SHM, Carton 1BB7/169 Compte Rendu De Rensignements (Turquie) No. 5 (16 April 1934).

508 Sermet Fuat, “Donanmamız…,” 411-412.

509 League of Nations, Verbatim Record of the Special Session of the Assembly, Sixth Pleanary Meeting (1 July 1932): 1-2.

510 See Yücel Güçlü, “Turkey’s Entrance into the League of Nations, Middle Eastern Studies 39(1), (January 2003):186-206.

511 See also, Yücel Güçlü, “Turkey’s Entrance into the League of Nations,” Middle Eastern Studies 39(1) (January 2003): 186-206.

512 Manley O. Hudson, “Admission of Turkey to Membership in the League of Nations,” American Journal of International Law, 26 (4) (October 1932): 814

513 BCA, 222.498.4 (5 August 1932).

514 The League of Nations, Verbatim Record of the Thirteen Ordinary Session of the Assembly, Pleanary Sessions (26 September 1932): 1-7.

515 W. Ormsby-Gore, “The Fourteenth Assembly of the League of Nations,” International Affairs 13/1 (January-February 1934): 50.

516 For Turkish press coverage of the issue, see Ayın Tarihi 10, (October 1934): 181-183 and 218-228.

517 Barlas, Etatism and Diplomacy…, 137.

518 According to Stavrianos, the Balkan Entente of 1934 represented a third Balkan Alliance system. The first two attempts featured strong anti-Ottoman elements. L.S. Stavrianos, Balkan Federation: A History of the Movement Toward Balkan Unity in Modern Times (Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Books, 1964), 224-258

519 For instance, King Alexander of Yugoslavia is also considered “the primary architect of the [Balkan] pact.” Bogdan Raditsa, “Venizelos and the Struggle around the Balkan Pact,” Balkan Studies, 6/1(1965): 120.

520 O’Connor, Force and Diplomacy…, 49-50.

521 James Barros, Britain, Greece and the Politics of Sanctions, Ethiopia, 1935-36, (London: Royal Historical Society, 1982), 2

522 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 4, Sofia, (10 December 1930).

523 Cooper, Higgot and Nossal, Relocating Middle Powers…,19.

524As a matter of fact, the new Yugoslav Minister to Sofia left for Belgrade immediately after the visit of Aras. NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 4, Sofia (10 December 1930)

525Polychroniadis was Minister to Belgrade before his transfer to Ankara and instrumental in solving the Greco-Serbian differences, which arose over the free zone of Salonica after the fall of Pangalos. NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL I, Istanbul (23 February 1932).

526 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL I, Istanbul (23 February 1932).

527 Ileana Tilea (ed.), Envoy Extraordinary, Memoirs of a Romanian Diplomat, Viorel Virgil Tilea (London: Haggerston Press, 1998), 136-137.

528 Eugene Boia, Romania’s Diplomatic Relations with Yugoslavia in the Interwar Period, 1919-1941 (Boulder: East European Monographes, 1993), 167.

529 Lowe and Marzari, Italian Foreign Policy…, 220.

530 Vaisse, “Security and Disarmament…,” 199-200.

531 PRO FO 371/16801, C1237/175/22 (27 January 1933). Concerning Turkey, according to the British Archives, French ambassador in Rome M. de Jouvenal had recognized the priority of the Italian claim to penetrate Anatolia in the event of a break-up of Turkey on the demise of Mustafa Kemal. But it also opined that any Italian penetration into Anatolia was like dividing the lion’s skin before the animal was dead and could hardly be regarded as a serious proposition.

532 ASMAE, Busta 7, Rapporti Politici, 1933/1. However, Mussolini was willing to form a more limited alliance system with Turkey and Greece.

533 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri A. IV-6, D. 54, F. 85-4 (7 May 1933).

534 ASMAE, Busta 7, Turchia 1933 (18 June 1933).

535 ASMAE, Busta 7, Turchia 1933 (11 July 1933). According to Italian archival documents, Turkey would do everything possible to preclude the formation of any Slavic bloc. If such a bloc were realized, Ankara would come to a special agreement with the Soviet Union, Italy, Austria and Hungary. ASMAE, Busta 7/5, Turchia 1933 (16 September 1933). In fact, Yugoslavia could not convince Bulgaria to cooperate within the Little Entente as France expected.

536 These three countries agreed to bring up the strength of their armies to the same level. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri A. IV-6, D. 54, F. 85-15 (13 May 1933).

537 ASMAE, Busta 7, Turchia 1933 (19 October 1933). According to these treaties, they would not be engaged in any economic and political agreement against each other. In fact, Rome had favoured Turkey’s signing neutrality treaties with Bulgaria in 1929 and with Greece in 1930.

538 ASMAE, Busta 11/1, Turchia 1934 (26 May 1934).

539 For more details, see Dilek Barlas “Friends or Foes: Diplomatic Relations between Italy and Turkey, 1923-1936,” International Journal of Middle East Studies (May 2004).

540 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 4, Sofia (30 May 1933).

541 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 4, Sofia (29 September 1933).

542 On 27 November 1933 the Treaty was signed between the two countries.

543 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 4, Sofia (29 September 1933).

544 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanmasının Kuruluşu I…, 321.

545 BCA, 13.75.2 (24 September 1933).

546 Interview with Numan Urs, Captain (Ret.), Turkish Navy, (20 February 2003), Gölcük, Kocaeli.

547 Cem Gürdeniz, Güvenlik ve Dış Politika Aracı Olarak Cumhuriyet Döneminde Türk

Deniz Kuvvetlerinin Aktif Kullanımı ve Gelecek, paper presented at 1nci Deniz Harp Tarihi Semineri, 20 February 2003, Donanma Komutanlığı, Gölcük.

548 Mert Bayat, Atatürk’ün Deniz Stratejisi, Harp Akademileri Özel Bülten Eki, No. 160 (November 1988): 30.

549 Raoul V. Bossy, Recollections of a Romanian Diplomat 1918-1969, Diaries and Memoirs of Raoul V. Bossy, vol. I, ed. and trans.G. H. Bossy and M. A. Bossy (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 2003), 138

550 Dov B. Lungu, Romania and the Great Powers 1933-1940 (Durham: Duke University Press, 1989), 30-31

551 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 1, Istanbul, (25 August 1933)

552 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanmasının Kuruluşu I…, 330.

553 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 1, Istanbul, (25 August 1933).

554 Büyüktuğrul, Cumhuriyet Donanmasının Kuruluşu I…, 324.

555 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 1, Istanbul, (19 January 1934).

556 Lungu, Romania and the Great Powers …, 32-33. If Italy attacked Yugoslavia through Albania, irrespective of Bulgaria’s attitude, the other three states were bound to come to Yugoslavia’s assistance.

557ASMAE, Busta 11/2, Turchia 1934 (21 May 1934)

558 ASMAE, Busta 11/1, Turchia 1934 (26 April 1934) and (26 May 1934).

559 The Balkan Entente did not include Bulgaria as Italy expected, but ended up with the inclusion of Yugoslavia in the entente. Undersecretary in Italian Foreign Ministry Fulvio Suvich pointed out that Ankara rejected the demands of Romania and Yugoslavia, which sought that the Entente take under guarantee their boundaries with Italy and Hungary. ASMAE, Busta 11/2, Turchia 1933 (29 December 1933). According to some Italian officials, Turkey and Greece had not been instrumental in the formation of the entente and these two countries seemed to be pushed into it by Yugoslavia.

560ASMAE, Busta 11/1, Turchia 1934 (26 May 1934).

561 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A. IV-6, D. 54, F. 63-10 (6 February 1934)

562 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A.IV-16-b, D. 65, F. 20-18 (16 May 1934). In his visit to the British Embassy, Venizelos talked about a possibility of an armed dispute not only between Italy and Yugoslavia but also between Italy and Turkey and concluded that Greece had not to be involved in any of these disputes.

563 Soysal,Türkiye’nin Siyasal Andlaşmaları I…, 450.

564 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A.IV-16-b, D. 65, F. 20-10 (14 May 1934).

565 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A. IV-6, D. 54-1, F. 79 (11 June 1934)

566 The only great power Turkey maintained good relations after the War of Independence was the Soviet Union. Ankara had been careful to avoid any engagements that might have alienated its neighbour in the North. However, Moscow did seem to approve of Turkey’s championing Balkan cooperation. See T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı, Türk Dış Politikasında 50 Yıl: Cumhuriyetin İlk On Yılı ve Balkan Paktı (1923-1934) (Ankara: Dışişleri Bakanlığı, 1974), 335-347

567 Aydın, “Determinants of Turkish Foreign Policy…”157-167.

568 Deringil, “Dış Politikada Süreklilik…,” 94.

569 Ravenhill, 311-313.

570 Boia, Romania’s Diplomatic Relations…, 192.

571 Boia, Romania’s Diplomatic Relations…, 192. Romania and Yugoslavia ratified it on 16 June.

572 Bossy, Recollections of a Romanian Diplomat…, 144. Lungu added that the Romanians were unaware of the fact that the reservations made by Turkey about their involvement in an anti-Soviet war were inspired by Moscow and concerned a possible armed conflict between the Soviet Union and Romania for the possession of Bessarabia. Lungu, Romania and the Great Powers …,, 33

573 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 4, Bucharest (12 May 1934).

574 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 4, Bucharest (12 May 1934).

575 NARA RG 59 Microcopy T1245 ROLL 1, Ankara (1 November 1934).

576 Rolf Ahmann, “’Localization of Conflicts’ or ‘Indivisibility of Peace’: The German and Soviet Approaches towards Collective Security and East Central Europe, 1925-1939,” in The Quest for Stability: Problems of West European Security, 1918-1957, ed. Ahmann, R., A. M. and Birke, M. Howard, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 224.

577 Armando Borghi, Mussolini, Red and Black, (NY: Haskell House Publishers, 1974), 205.

578 Mussolini defined the revisionist countries such as Italy and Germany as the “have-not” nations.

579 Meir Michaelis, “Italy’s Mediterranean Strategy in the Mediterranean, 1935-1939,” in Britain and the Middle East in the 1930s, ed. M. J. Cohen and M. Kolinsky (London: MacMillan, 1992), 47.

580 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A.IV-6, D. 54, F. 64-3 (9 April 1934).

581 ASMAE, Busta 11/1, Turchia 1934 (21 April 1934).

582 ASMAE, Busta 11/1, Turchia 1934 (26 May 1934).

583 Ayın Tarihi 6 (June 1934): 299

584 ASMAE, Busta 11/2, Turchia 1934 (18 May 1934).

585 Ayın Tarihi, 7 (May 1934): 279-81. Ankara was also suspicious about the British support of the Greek population in the islands. In other words, the islands in the Aegean could easily become a hotbed of rivalry between Britain and Italy and the population on the islands could be manipulated to this end. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A. IV-16-b, D. 65, F. 3-(302-302) (21 November 1935).

586 PRO FO 371/18432, R 7064/471/22 (2 December 1934).

587 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A. IV-6, d. 54-1, F.90 (13 October 1934).

588 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A. IV-6, d. 54-1, F.90 (13 October 1934).

589 PRO FO 371/18432, R 7064/471/22, f. 341-342

590 PRO FO 371/17964, E 3073/2260/44, f. 365

591 Holbraad argued that this was a typical characteristic of a middle power. Holbraad, Middle Powers…, 69.

592 Ertuğrul [Büyüktuğrul],Yirminci yüz yılda Akdeniz egemenliği ve Türk deniz kuvvetleri (İstanbul: Deniz Matbaası, 1935), 12-16.

593 Ljudmil Spasov, “Les Projets d’un Pacte Méditerranéen et l’Entente Balkanique 1934-1937”, Etudes Balkaniques 2 (1987): 7

594MAE, 1918-1940, Série Y Internationale, Vol. 571, c. 63, D. 7, no. 104 (18 February 1930).

595 MAE, Levant 1918-1940, Turquie, Vol. 624, Directeur Politique, (28 November 1934).

596 Cumhuriyet, (12 June 1934).

597 Cumhuriyet, (24 June 1934).

598 Cumhuriyet, (29 June 1934).

599 Cumhurbaşkanlığı Arşivleri, A. IV-6, D. 54-1, F.90 (13 October 1934).

600 Ayın Tarihi 8 (June 1934): 183-184.

601 Cumhuriyet, (13 July 1934) and Milliyet