5 - British Politicians and Macedonia
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 November 2022
Summary
Analysts have disagreed on the effect of the Balkan Committee and the press on British foreign policy. Unquestionably, British foreign secretaries cited the pressure of British public opinion on their decisions. They forwarded the statements of the committee to the embassy in Istanbul. It is most important to note that the proposals of the British Government coincided with those of the committee, but it is also true that the British politicians themselves held the same views toward the Ottoman Empire as the Balkan Committee.
Lord Lansdowne
Henry Charles Keith Petty-Fitzmaurice, Fifth Marquess of Lansdowne, Conservative foreign secretary from 1900 to 1905 was particularly affected by the Balkan Committee. He has been described as ‘living in terror of the Committee’.
Lansdowne attempted to convince the Powers to put into effect a programme that was an almost exact duplicate of that of the committee – a European governor and European Commission were to rule over Macedonia. Organs of security and the judiciary were to be put under overall European control. Oddly for a Conservative, the party of Disraeli, Lansdowne echoed the Balkan Committee in saying that Britain was ultimately responsible for the troubles in Macedonia, because Britain had been the main force in supplanting the Treaty of San Stephano with the Treaty of Berlin.
Lansdowne made his feelings on Macedonia and the Turks plain. Speaking in the House of Lords, he described the Ottoman Government as ‘chronic and grievous mismanagement’. He made reference to the failing of the Ottomans to carry out reforms envisaged in the Treaty of Berlin, neglecting, of course, to mention the more egregious British violations of that treaty by not protecting the Muslim populations of Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania, as had been stipulated in the treaty. In another speech before parliament, Lansdowne admitted that some of the problems in Macedonia had been caused by Christian rebel bands, but said that the bands’ actions were understandable, because they were reacting to ‘the long-standing misgovernment and maladministration of the Turkish Government’. He was sure the Bulgarian Government would keep the bands in check in the future.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The British and the TurksA History of Animosity, 1893-1923, pp. 169 - 208Publisher: Edinburgh University PressPrint publication year: 2022