The emergence of the concept of "Eastern question" refers to the end of the 18th century, although the term itself was introduced into diplomatic practice in the 30s of the 19th century. Three main factors led to the emergence and further exacerbation of the Eastern question: 1) the decline of the once powerful Ottoman Empire, 2) the growth of the national liberation movement against the Ottoman yoke, 3) the aggravation of contradictions between European countries in the Middle East caused by the struggle to divide the world. The decline of the Ottoman Empire and the growth of the national liberation movement among the peoples subject to it prompted the great European powers to interfere in its internal affairs, especially since its possessions covered the most economically and strategically important regions of the Middle East: the Isthmus of Suez, Egypt, Syria, the Balkan Peninsula, Black Sea straits, part of Transcaucasia.

For Russia itself, the eastern issue was primarily associated with ensuring the security of its southern borders and the economic development of the country's south, with the intensive growth of trade through the Black Sea ports. Russia also feared that the collapse of the Ottoman Empire would make it an easy prey for the stronger European powers. Therefore, she tried to strengthen her position in the Balkans in order to prevent their expansion in this region. Here Russia relied on the support of the Slavic peoples, who in their national liberation struggle were guided by the help of this country, close to them by faith. The patronage of the Orthodox population of the Balkan Peninsula served as a pretext for Russia to constantly interfere in Middle Eastern affairs and to oppose the expansionist aspirations of England, France and Austria. Of course, Russian tsarism was most concerned not so much with the national self-determination of the peoples subject to the sultan, as with using their national liberation struggle in order to spread its political influence in the Balkans. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish the foreign policy goals of tsarism from the objective results of its foreign policy, which brought liberation to the Balkan peoples. In this situation, the Ottoman Empire cannot be viewed as a "suffering" party. She also pursued an aggressive, aggressive policy, sought revenge - to restore her former domination in the Crimea and the Caucasus, suppressed, with the most brutal measures, the national liberation movement of the peoples oppressed by her, in turn tried to use the national liberation movement of the Muslim mountain peoples of the Caucasus in their own interests against Russia.

The Eastern question acquired the greatest acuteness in the 20s - 50s of the 19th century. During this period, three crisis situations arose in the Eastern question. 1) in the early 20s - in connection with the uprising in 1821 in Greece, 2) in the early 30s - in connection with the war of Egypt against the Ottoman Empire and the threat of its collapse, and 3) in the early 50s - in connection with the dispute between the Orthodox and Catholics about "Palestinian shrines", which was the reason for the Crimean War. It is characteristic that these three phases of the exacerbation of the Eastern question followed the revolutionary "upheavals": in 1820 1821. - in Spain, Naples, Piedmont; in 1830 - 1831 - in France, Belgium and Poland; in 1848 - 1849 - in a number of European countries. During these revolutionary crises, the Eastern problem seemed to be relegated to the background in the foreign policy of the European powers, in order to then arise again.

The uprising in Greece was being prepared with the active participation of Greek emigrants who lived in the southern cities of Russia. Lively trade between Russia and the Mediterranean countries went through their intermediaries. For a long time, the Greeks hoped for help from Russia in the struggle for liberation from the Ottoman yoke. In 1814, the leading center of the Greeks' struggle for independence, "Filiki Eteria" (or Heteria), emerged in Odessa. In 1820, Major General Alexander Ypsilanti in the Russian service became the head of this center.

February 22, 1821 A. Ypsilanti with a detachment of Greeks crossed the river. Prut and two days later in Iasi published an appeal to compatriots to rise up to fight for freedom. At the same time, he sent a letter to Alexander I, in which he called on the Russian emperor to expel the Turks from Europe with an armed hand and thereby acquire the title of "liberator of Greece". In response, Alexander I condemned the action of Ypsilanti and ordered him to be excluded from the Russian service, with the prohibition to return to Russia.

Ypsilanti's call was the signal for an uprising in Greece. The Ottoman government sought to resolve the "Greek question" by mass extermination of the insurgent Greeks. The atrocities of the punishers caused an explosion of indignation in all countries. The advanced public in Russia demanded immediate assistance to the Greeks.

In the summer of 1821, the Turkish punitive troops drove the 6,000-strong detachment of Ypsilanti to the Austrian border and on July 19 they were defeated. Ypsilanti fled to Austria, where he was arrested by the Austrian authorities.

At the same time, the Porta, under the pretext of fighting Greek smuggling, closed the Black Sea straits for Russian ships, which hit the interests of the landowners who were bread exporters. Alexander I hesitated. On the one hand, he was obliged to achieve freedom of navigation through the straits and at the same time take advantage of the events in Greece to weaken the Ottoman rule in the Balkans, to strengthen the influence of Russia in this region. On the other hand, as an adherent of the principles of the Holy Alliance, he viewed the rebellious Greeks as "rebels" against the "legitimate" monarch.

At the Russian court, two groups arose: the first - for helping the Greeks, for the prestige of Russia, for using the current situation to resolve the issue of the straits and strengthening the position of Russia in the Balkans, the second - against any help to the Greeks out of fear of aggravating relations with other European powers. Alexander I supported the position of the second group. He realized that this was contrary to the state interests of Russia, but he had to sacrifice them for the sake of strengthening the Holy Alliance and the principles of "legitimism." At the Verona Congress of the Holy Alliance in 1822, Alexander I agreed to sign a joint declaration with Austria, Prussia, England and France, which obliged the rebellious Greeks to submit to the authority of the Sultan, and the Sultan himself not to take revenge on the Greeks.

In 1824, in connection with the ongoing massacre of the Greeks, Alexander I tried to unite the efforts of European countries to collectively influence the Sultan. But the representatives of the European powers summoned to St. Petersburg refused the tsar's proposal, saying that "although the Greeks are Christians, they are rebels against the legitimate sovereign." The punitive actions of the Turkish authorities against the Greeks continued. In April 1825, Alexander I again called on the members of the Holy Alliance to apply "coercive measures" to the Sultan, but was refused. On the part of the Russian public, the voice in defense of the Greeks sounded louder and louder, with which Alexander could not but reckon. On August 6, 1825, he announced to the European courts that Russia would follow its own interests in "Turkish affairs". Preparations began for a war with the Ottoman Empire, but the death of Alexander I suspended it.

Meanwhile, the European powers sought to benefit from the Sultan's conflict with his Greek subjects. England wanted to gain a foothold in the eastern Mediterranean, so it recognized the Greeks as a belligerent (and not ordinary "rebels"). France, in order to spread its influence in Egypt, encouraged the Egyptian government of Muhammad Ali to assist the Sultan in suppressing the Greek liberation movement. Austria also supported the Ottoman Empire, hoping to get some territory in the Balkans for this. In this situation, Nicholas I decided first of all to come to an agreement with England. On March 23, 1826, the Petersburg Protocol was signed, according to which Russia and England undertook to mediate between the Sultan and the rebellious Greeks. The Sultan was required to grant Greece autonomy - with its own government and laws, but under the vassalage of the Ottoman Empire. France joined the Petersburg Protocol, and all three powers concluded an agreement on the "collective protection" of the interests of Greece. The Sultan was presented with an ultimatum to grant Greece independence, but the Sultan rejected it, and the powers that signed the agreement sent their squadrons to the shores of Greece. On October 8, 1827, a naval battle took place in the Navarino Bay (in the south of Greece), in which the Turkish-Egyptian fleet was completely defeated. The Battle of Navarino contributed to the victory of the Greek people in the struggle for independence.

The joint action of Britain, France and Russia in resolving the "Greek question" by no means removed the acute contradictions between them. England, wanting to tie the hands of Russia in the Middle East, feverishly incited revanchist sentiments in Iran, whose army was arming and reorganizing with British money and with the help of British military advisers. Iran sought to return the territories in Transcaucasia that were lost under the Gulistan Peace Treaty of 1813.

The news of the events in St. Petersburg at the end of 1825 was perceived by the Shah and his government as a favorable moment for unleashing hostilities against Russia. In July 1826, the Shah's 60,000-strong army invaded Transcaucasia without declaring war and launched a swift attack on Tiflis. But soon it was stopped near the Shusha fortress, and then the Russian troops went on the offensive. In September 1826, Iranian troops suffered a crushing defeat near Ganja and were driven back to the r. Arake. The Russian army under the command of A.P. Yermolov transferred the hostilities to the territory of Iran.

Nicholas I, not trusting Ermolov (he suspected him of having connections with the Decembrists), transferred the command of the troops of the Caucasian corps to IF Paskevich. In April 1827 Russian troops captured Nakhichevan and Erivan. The entire Armenian population rose to the aid of the Russian troops. Russian troops occupied Tabriz - the second capital of Iran - and quickly advanced towards Tehran. Panic broke out in the Iranian troops. The Shah's government was forced to agree to the peace terms proposed by Russia. According to the Turkmanchay treaty, on February 10, 1828, the Nakhichevan and Erivan khanates, which made up Eastern Armenia, withdrew to Russia. Iran pledged to pay an indemnity of 20 million rubles. The exclusive right of Russia to maintain a navy in the Caspian Sea was confirmed. The agreement provided for the freedom of resettlement of the Armenian population of Iran to Russia. As a result, 135 thousand Armenians moved to Russia. In 1828, from the Erivan and Nakhichevan khanates annexed to Russia, the Armenian region was formed with Russian administrative control. However, the complete reunification of the Armenian people did not take place: Western Armenia continued to remain part of the Ottoman Empire.

The Turkmanchay world was a major success for Russia. He strengthened the Russian position in the Transcaucasus, helped to strengthen its influence in the Middle East. The British government did everything to frustrate it. Bribery of officials of the Shah and incitement of religious and national fanaticism were also used. In January 1829, the Iranian authorities instigated an attack on the Russian mission in Tehran. The reason was the flight from one harem of two Armenian women and a eunuch who had taken refuge in the Russian embassy. The fanatical crowd destroyed the embassy and slaughtered almost the entire Russian mission; out of 38 people, only the secretary of the embassy escaped. Among the dead was the head of the mission, A.S. Griboyedov. The tsarist government, not wanting a new war with Iran and complications with England, was satisfied with the personal apology of the Shah, who also presented a large diamond to the Russian Tsar.

The Turkmanchai world untied Russia's hands in front of the brewing military conflict with the Ottoman Empire, which took an openly hostile position towards Russia, yearned for revenge for previous failures and systematically violated the articles of previous treaties. The immediate causes of the war were the delay of merchant ships flying the Russian flag, the seizure of goods and the expulsion of Russian merchants from Ottoman possessions. On April 14, 1828, Nicholas I issued a manifesto declaring war on the Ottoman Empire. Although the English and French cabinets declared their neutrality, they secretly supported the Sultan. Austria helped him with weapons, and demonstratively concentrated its troops on the border with Russia.

The war turned out to be unusually difficult for Russia. Troops accustomed to parade ground, technically poorly equipped and led by mediocre generals, initially could not achieve any significant success. The soldiers were starving; diseases raged in the army, from which they died more than from enemy bullets and shells.

At the beginning of 1828, a 100,000-strong army under the command of Field Marshal P. Kh. Wittgenstein crossed the river. Prut and occupied the Danube principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia. At the same time, the 11-thousandth corps of IF Paskevich, operating in the Transcaucasus, launched an offensive on Kars. On the Danube, Russian troops met stubborn resistance from well-armed Turkish fortresses. Only by the end of 1828 was it possible to seize the seaside fortress of Varna and a narrow strip of land along the Black Sea. Military operations were more successful in the Caucasus and Transcaucasia, where they managed to blockade the large Turkish fortress of Anapa, and the 11-thousandth detachment of I.F.

At the beginning of 1829, II Dibich was put in charge of the army operating across the Danube, replacing the elderly P. Kh. Wittgenstein. He defeated the main forces of the Turkish army and captured the strategically important fortresses - Silistria, Shumla, Burgas and Sozopol, and in early August 1829 Adrianople. Russian troops were located 60 versts from Constantinople, but Nicholas I did not dare to give the order to inflict a crushing blow on the Ottoman Empire. At the moment, Russia did not want its fall, guided by the principle: "The benefits of preserving the Ottoman Empire in Europe exceed its disadvantages." In addition, the capture of Constantinople by the Russian troops would inevitably cause a sharp aggravation of Russia's relations with other powers. Nicholas I hurried Dibich with the conclusion of peace. On September 2, 1829, a peace treaty was signed in Adrianople. The mouth of the Danube with the islands, the eastern coast of the Black Sea from Anapa to Sukhumi, and in the Transcaucasia Akhaltsykh and Akhalkalaki were transferred to Russia. The Ottoman Empire paid an indemnity of 33 million rubles. Russian merchants received the right of extraterritoriality throughout the Ottoman Empire. The Black Sea straits were declared open to Russian merchant ships. The relatively small acquisitions under the Treaty of Adrianople nevertheless had an important strategic importance for Russia, since they strengthened its position on the Black Sea and put the end to Ottoman expansion in Transcaucasia. But the Adrianople Peace was especially important for the peoples of the Balkan Peninsula: Greece received autonomy (and from 1830 and independence), the autonomy of Serbia and the Danube principalities - Moldavia and Wallachia - expanded.

But Russia achieved even more significant diplomatic successes in the Middle East in 1832 - 1833, when it intervened in the Turkish-Egyptian conflict.

Back in 1811, the ruler of Egypt, Muhammad Ali, achieved the autonomy of this Arab part of the Ottoman Empire. He created his own army and navy, pursued an independent foreign policy, focusing on France, and had long hatched plans for the final liberation from the sultan's power, as well as the annexation of another Arab territory to Egypt within the Ottoman Empire - Syria.

By the beginning of the 30s, Muhammad Ali, taking advantage of the weakening of the Ottoman Empire in connection with its defeat in the war of 1828 - 1829. with Russia, expanded the territory of Egypt, carried out a series of reforms and, with the help of French military advisers, transformed his army. In 1832 he rebelled against the Sultan and moved his troops to Constantinople. In December 1832, the Egyptian army defeated the Sultan's troops and posed an immediate threat to Constantinople. Sultan Mahmud II turned to France and England for help, but those interested in strengthening their influence in Egypt refused to support him. But Nicholas I readily agreed to provide military assistance, with the request for which the Sultan turned to him. In addition, Nicholas I viewed the "Egyptian rebellion" as "a consequence of the outrageous spirit that now seized control of Europe and especially France."

In February 1833, a Russian squadron entered the Bosphorus, and a 30,000th expeditionary corps under the command of A.F. Orlov landed in the vicinity of Constantinople. England and France also sent their squadrons to Constantinople. The diplomats of England and France managed to achieve reconciliation between Muhammad Ali and the Sultan, between whom an agreement was concluded. Under this agreement, all of Syria was transferred to the control of Muhammad Ali, but he recognized his vassalage from the Sultan. This agreement also eliminated the pretext for the presence of the Russian armed forces in the Ottoman Empire. But before their withdrawal, A.F. Orlov signed an agreement on June 26, 1833 at the summer residence of Sultan Unkar-Iskelessi (Tsar's harbor). He established between Russia and the Ottoman Empire "eternal peace", "friendship" and a defensive alliance. The secret article of the treaty freed the Ottoman Empire from providing Russia with military assistance, in return for which, in case of war, the Sultan, at the request of Russia, pledged to close the Dardanelles Strait for all foreign warships. The Unkar-Iskeles Treaty significantly strengthened Russia's Middle East positions. At the same time, he aggravated her relations with England and France, which sent notes of protest to the Tsar and Sultan, demanding the annulment of the treaty. Austria also joined the protest. A noisy anti-Russian campaign arose in the English and French press.

England sought to "drown" the Unkar-Iskeles treaty in some kind of multilateral convention. Such a case presented itself. In 1839, Sultan Mahmud II removed Muhammad Ali from the post of ruler of Egypt. He again gathered a large army, moved it against the Sultan and defeated his troops in several battles. The Sultan again turned to the European powers for help, primarily to Russia in pursuance of the treaty of 1833. England tried to use the current situation to conclude a multilateral treaty with the Ottoman Empire. As a result, the bilateral Russian-Turkish alliance was replaced by the collective "tutelage" of four European powers - Russia, England, Austria and Prussia. The London Convention, signed by them on July 3, 1840, provided for collective assistance to the Sultan and guaranteed the integrity of the Ottoman Empire. The convention proclaimed the principle: "while the Port is at peace", all foreign warships are not allowed in the straits. Thus, the secret clause of the Unkar-Iskelesky treaty on the exclusive right of Russia to wire its warships through the straits became invalid. On July 1, 1841, the second London Straits Convention was concluded, this time with the participation of France. The convention provided for pan-European control over the observance of the "neutralization" of the Black Sea straits. Thus, the London conventions of 1840–1841, in essence, nullified Russia's achievements in 1833 and were its diplomatic defeat.

In 1844, Nicholas I undertook a trip to London to negotiate with the British cabinet on the division of the "Turkish inheritance" in the event of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. The British cabinet took an evasive position, agreeing in the event of "Turkey's death" to enter into negotiations with Russia, but refusing to conclude any agreement with her on this issue.

The Eastern question is the so-called oral designation of a number of international contradictions that arose in the late 18th - early 20th centuries. It was directly related to the attempts of the Balkan peoples to free themselves from the Ottoman yoke. The situation was aggravated by the impending collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Many great powers, including Russia, Great Britain, Prussia, Austria-Hungary, strove to fight for the division of Turkish possessions.

Background

The Eastern question initially arose due to the fact that the Ottoman Turks, who settled in Europe, formed a rather powerful European state. As a result, the situation on the Balkan Peninsula has changed dramatically, a confrontation has emerged between Christians and Muslims.

As a result, it was the Ottoman state that became one of the key factors in international European political life. On the one hand, they were afraid of her, on the other, they were looking for an ally in her face.

France was one of the first to establish diplomatic relations with the Ottoman Empire.

In 1528, the first alliance between France and the Ottoman Empire was concluded, which was based on mutual hostility towards the Austrian Empire, which at that time was personified by Charles V.

Over time, religious components were added to the political ones. King Francis I of France wanted one of the churches in Jerusalem to be returned to Christians. The Sultan was against it, but promised to support all Christian churches that would be founded in Turkey.

From 1535, free visits to the Holy Places were allowed for the French and all other foreigners under the auspices of France. Thus, for a long time, France remained the only Western European country in the Turkish world.

Decline of the Ottoman Empire

The decline in the Ottoman Empire began in the 17th century. The Turkish army was defeated by the Poles and Austrians near Vienna in 1683. Thus, the advance of the Turks to Europe was stopped.

The weakened empire was taken advantage of by the leaders of the national liberation movement in the Balkans. They were Bulgarians, Greeks, Serbs, Montenegrins, Vlachs, mostly Orthodox.

At the same time, in the 17th century, the economic and political positions of Great Britain and France, which dreamed of maintaining their own influence, while trying to interfere with the territorial claims of other powers, were increasingly strengthening in the Ottoman Empire. First of all, Russia and Austria-Hungary.

The main enemy of the Ottoman Empire

In the middle of the 18th century, the main enemy of the Ottoman Empire changed. Russia is replacing Austria-Hungary. The situation in the Black Sea region changed radically after the victory in the war of 1768-1774.

As a result, the Kuchuk-Kainardzhi agreement was concluded, which officially confirmed the first Russian intervention in Turkey's affairs.

At the same time, Catherine II had a plan for the final expulsion of all Turks from Europe and the restoration of the Greek Empire, on the throne of which she predicted her grandson Konstantin Pavlovich. At the same time, the Ottoman government hoped to take revenge for the defeat in the Russian-Turkish war. Great Britain and France continued to play an important role in the Eastern question; the Turks were counting on their support.

As a result, in 1787 Turkey started another war against Russia. In 1788, the British and French, through diplomatic tricks, forced Sweden to join the war on their side, which attacked Russia. But within the coalition, it all ended in failure. First, Sweden withdrew from the war, and then Turkey agreed to another peace treaty, which moved its border to the Dniester. The government of the Ottoman Empire renounced its claims to Georgia.

Aggravation of the situation

As a result, it was decided that the existence of the Turkish Empire would ultimately prove to be more beneficial for Russia. At the same time, the sole protectorate of Russia over Turkish Christians was not supported by other European states. For example, in 1815, at a congress in Vienna, Emperor Alexander I believed that the Eastern question deserves the attention of all world powers. Soon after this, a Greek uprising broke out, followed by the terrible barbarism of the Turks, all this forced Russia, along with other powers, to intervene in this war.

After that, relations between Russia and Turkey remained tense. Noting the reasons for the aggravation of the Eastern question, it is necessary to emphasize that the Russian rulers regularly studied the likelihood of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. So, in 1829, Nicholas I ordered to study the position of Turkey in the event of collapse.

In particular, it was proposed to justify five secondary states instead of Turkey. Kingdom of Macedonia, Serbia, Epirus, Kingdom of Greece and the Principality of Dacia. Now it should be clear to you what are the reasons for the aggravation of the Eastern question.

Expulsion of Turks from Europe

The plan for the expulsion of the Turks from Europe, conceived by Catherine II, was also attempted by Nicholas I. But as a result, he abandoned this idea, deciding on the contrary to support and protect its existence.

For example, after the successful uprising of the Egyptian Pasha Megmet Ali, after which Turkey was almost completely crushed, Russia in 1833 entered into a defensive alliance, sending its fleet to the sultan's aid.

Feud in the East

The enmity continued not only with the Ottoman Empire, but also between the Christians themselves. In the east, the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches competed. They competed for various perks, privileges for visiting the Holy Places.

By 1740, France managed to achieve certain privileges for the Latin Church to the detriment of the Orthodox. The followers of the Greek religion obtained from the Sultan the restoration of ancient rights.

Understanding the reasons for the Eastern question, one must turn to 1850, when French envoys sought the return of certain Holy Places located in Jerusalem to the French government. Russia was categorically against it. As a result, a whole coalition of European states came out against Russia in the Eastern question.

Crimean War

Turkey was in no hurry to adopt a decree favorable for Russia. As a result, in 1853, relations deteriorated again, and the solution of the Eastern question was again postponed. Soon after this, relations with European states went wrong, all this led to the Crimean War, which ended only in 1856.

The essence of the Eastern question was the struggle for influence in the Middle East and the Balkan Peninsula. For several decades, he remained one of the key in Russia's foreign policy, she confirmed this time after time. Russia's policy in the Eastern question was the need to establish its influence in this region; many European powers opposed it. All this resulted in the Crimean War, in which each of the participants pursued their own selfish interests. Now you have figured out what the Eastern question was.

Massacre in Syria

In 1860, the European powers again had to intervene in the situation in the Ottoman Empire, after a terrible massacre against Christians in Syria. The French army set off to the east.

Regular uprisings soon began. First in Herzegovina in 1875, and then in Serbia in 1876. Russia in Herzegovina immediately declared the need to alleviate the suffering of Christians and finally put an end to the bloodshed.

In 1877, a new war broke out, Russian troops reached Constantinople, Romania, Montenegro, Serbia and Bulgaria gained independence. At the same time, the Turkish government insisted on the observance of the principles of religious freedom. At the same time, the Russian military-political leadership at the end of the XIX century continued to develop plans for the landing on the Bosphorus.

The situation at the beginning of the 20th century

By the beginning of the 20th century, the decay of Turkey continued to progress. This was largely facilitated by the reign of the reactionary Abdul-Hamid. Italy, Austria and the Balkan states took advantage of the crisis in Turkey to seize their territories from her.

As a result, in 1908, Bosnia and Herzegovina was ceded to Austria, the Tripoli region was annexed to Italy, in 1912, four secondary Balkan countries began a war with Turkey.

The situation was aggravated by the genocide of the Greek and Armenian people in 1915-1917. At the same time, the allies in the Entente made it clear to Russia that in the event of a triumph, the Black Sea straits and Constantinople could retreat to Russia. In 1918, Turkey surrendered in the First World War. But the situation in the region changed dramatically again, which was facilitated by the fall of the monarchy in Russia, the national-bourgeois revolution in Turkey.

In the war of 1919-1922, the Kemalists won under the leadership of Ataturk, the new borders of Turkey and the countries of the former Entente were approved at the Lausan Conference. Ataturk himself became the first president of the Turkish Republic, the founder of the modern Turkish state in a familiar form.

The results of the Eastern question were the establishment of borders in Europe close to modern ones. We also managed to resolve many issues related to, for example, population exchange. Ultimately, this led to the final legal elimination of the very concept of the Eastern Question in modern international relations.

History of Russia XVIII-XIX centuries Milov Leonid Vasilievich

§ 4. Eastern question

§ 4. Eastern question

Ottoman Empire and European Powers. At the beginning of the 19th century, the Eastern question did not play a noticeable role in Russian foreign policy. The Greek project of Catherine II, which provided for the expulsion of the Turks from Europe and the creation of a Christian empire in the Balkans, the head of which the empress saw her grandson Constantine, was abandoned. Under Paul I, the Russian and Ottoman empires united to fight revolutionary France. The Bosphorus and Dardanelles were open to Russian warships, and FF Ushakov's squadron successfully operated in the Mediterranean. The Ionian Islands were under the protectorate of Russia, their port cities served as a base for Russian warships. For Alexander I and his "young friends" the Eastern question was the subject of serious discussion in the Secret Committee. The result of this discussion was the decision to preserve the integrity of the Ottoman Empire, to abandon the plans for its partition. This was contrary to the Catherine's tradition, but was fully justified in the new international conditions. The joint actions of the governments of the Russian and Ottoman empires ensured relative stability in the Black Sea region, the Balkans and the Caucasus, which was important against the general background of European upheavals. It is characteristic that the opponents of the balanced course in the Eastern question were FV Rostopchin, who were nominated under Paul I, who proposed detailed projects for the partition of the Ottoman Empire, and the reputed leader N. M. Karamzin, who considered the collapse of the Ottoman Empire "beneficial for reason and humanity."

At the beginning of the XIX century. for the Western European powers, the Eastern question was reduced to the problem of the "sick man" of Europe, which the Ottoman Empire was considered to be. From day to day, her death was expected, and it was about the division of the Turkish inheritance. England, Napoleonic France and the Austrian Empire were especially active in the Eastern question. The interests of these states were in direct and acute contradiction, but on one thing they were united, seeking to weaken the growing influence of Russia on affairs in the Ottoman Empire and in the region as a whole. For Russia, the Eastern question consisted of the following aspects: the final political and economic establishment in the Northern Black Sea region, which was mainly achieved under Catherine II; recognition of her rights as the patroness of the Christian and Slavic peoples of the Ottoman Empire and, above all, the Balkan Peninsula; the favorable regime of the Black Sea straits of the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles, which ensured its trade and military interests. In a broad sense, the Eastern Question also touched on Russian policy in the Transcaucasus.

Accession of Georgia to Russia. The cautious approach of Alexander I to the Eastern question to a certain extent was due to the fact that from the first steps of his rule he had to solve a long-standing problem: the annexation of Georgia to Russia. The Russian protectorate over Eastern Georgia, proclaimed in 1783, was largely formal in nature. Severely affected by the Persian invasion in 1795, Eastern Georgia, which made up the Kartli-Kakhetian kingdom, was interested in Russian patronage and military protection. At the request of Tsar George XII, Russian troops were stationed in Georgia, an embassy was sent to St. Petersburg, which was supposed to seek that the Kartli-Kakhetian kingdom "was considered belonging to the Russian state." At the beginning of 1801, Paul I issued a Manifesto on the annexation of Eastern Georgia to Russia on special rights. After some hesitation caused by disagreements in the Permanent Council and in the Secret Committee, Alexander I confirmed his father's decision and on September 12, 1801 signed a Manifesto to the Georgian people, which liquidated the Kartli-Kakhetian kingdom and annexed Eastern Georgia to Russia. The Bagration dynasty was removed from power, and a Supreme Government was created in Tiflis, made up of Russian military and civilians.

P. D. Tsitsianov and his Caucasian policy. General PD Tsitsianov, a Georgian by birth, was appointed as the chief administrator of Georgia in 1802. Tsitsianov's dream was the liberation of the peoples of Transcaucasia from the Ottoman and Persian threats and their unification into a federation under the auspices of Russia. Acting energetically and purposefully, in a short time he achieved the consent of the rulers of the Eastern Transcaucasia to annex the territories under their control to Russia. Derbent, Talysh, Cuban, Dagestan rulers agreed to the patronage of the Russian tsar. Tsitsianov undertook a successful campaign against the Ganja Khanate in 1804. He began negotiations with the Imeretian king, which later culminated in the incorporation of Imereti into the Russian Empire. In 1803, the ruler of Megrelia passed under the protectorate of Russia.

Tsitsianov's successful actions aroused the discontent of Persia. The Shah demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops from Georgia and Azerbaijan, which was ignored. In 1804, Persia began a war against Russia. Tsitsianov, despite the lack of forces, conducted active offensive operations - the Karabakh, Sheki and Shirvan khanates were annexed to Russia. When Tsitsianov accepted the surrender of the Baku khan, he was treacherously killed, which did not affect the course of the Persian campaign. In 1812, the Persian crown prince Abbas Mirza was utterly defeated by General PS Kotlyarevsky at Aslanduz. The Persians were supposed to clear the entire Transcaucasia and negotiate. In October 1813, the Gulistan Peace Treaty was signed, according to which Persia recognized Russian acquisitions in the Transcaucasus. Russia received the exclusive right to keep warships in the Caspian Sea. The peace treaty created a completely new international legal position, which meant the approval of the Russian border along the Kura and Araks and the entry of the peoples of the Transcaucasus into the Russian Empire.

Russian-Turkish War 1806-1812 Tsitsianov's active actions in the Transcaucasus were apprehended with caution in Constantinople, where French influence noticeably increased. Napoleon was ready to promise the Sultan the return of Crimea and some Transcaucasian territories under his rule. Russia considered it necessary to agree to the proposal of the Turkish government on the early renewal of the union treaty. In September 1805, a new treaty of alliance and mutual assistance was concluded between the two empires. Of great importance were the articles of the treaty on the regime of the Black Sea straits, which during the hostilities Turkey undertook to keep open to the Russian navy, while not allowing the warships of other states to enter the Black Sea. The agreement did not last long. In 1806, incited by Napoleonic diplomacy, the Sultan replaced the pro-Russian rulers of Wallachia and Moldavia, to which Russia was ready to respond by introducing its troops into these principalities. The Sultan's government declared war on Russia.

The war, started by the Turks with the expectation of weakening Russia after Austerlitz, was fought with varying degrees of success. In 1807, having won a victory at Arpachai, Russian troops repulsed the attempt of the Turks to invade Georgia. The Black Sea Fleet forced the Turkish fortress of Anapa to surrender. In 1811 Kotlyarevsky took the Turkish fortress of Akhalkalaki by storm. On the Danube, military operations took on a protracted nature until, in 1811, MI Kutuzov was appointed commander of the Danube army. He defeated the Turkish forces at Ruschuk and Slobodzeya and forced Porto to conclude peace. This was the first huge service provided by Kutuzov to Russia in 1812. Under the terms of the Bucharest Peace, Russia received the rights of the guarantor of Serbia's autonomy, which strengthened its position in the Balkans. In addition, she received naval bases on the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus and part of Moldova between the Dniester and Prut rivers departed to her.

Greek question. The system of European equilibrium established at the Congress of Vienna did not extend to the Ottoman Empire, which inevitably led to an aggravation of the Eastern question. The sacred union meant the unity of the European Christian monarchs against the infidels, their expulsion from Europe. In fact, the European powers waged a fierce struggle for influence in Constantinople, using the growth of the liberation movement of the Balkan peoples as a means of pressure on the Sultan's government. Russia made extensive use of its opportunities to provide patronage to the Sultan's Christian subjects - the Greeks, Serbs, and Bulgarians. The Greek question has become especially acute. With the knowledge of the Russian authorities in Odessa, Moldavia, Wallachia, Greece and Bulgaria, Greek patriots were preparing an uprising aimed at the independence of Greece. In their struggle, they enjoyed broad support from the advanced European public, which viewed Greece as the cradle of European civilization. Alexander I showed hesitation. Proceeding from the principle of legitimism, he did not approve of the idea of ​​Greek independence, but did not find support either in Russian society, or even in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, where I. Kapodistria, the future first president of independent Greece, played a prominent role. In addition, the tsar was impressed by the idea of ​​the triumph of the cross over the crescent, the expansion of the sphere of influence of European Christian civilization. He spoke about his doubts at the Verona Congress: “Nothing, without a doubt, seemed more in line with the public opinion of the country than the religious war with Turkey, but in the unrest of the Peloponnese, I saw signs of revolution. And he abstained. "

In 1821, the Greek national liberation revolution began, led by the general of the Russian service, aristocrat Alexander Ypsilanti. Alexander I condemned the Greek Revolution as a revolt against the legitimate monarch and insisted on a negotiated settlement of the Greek question. Instead of independence, he offered the Greeks autonomy within the Ottoman Empire. The rebels, who had hoped for direct help from the European public, rejected the plan. The Ottoman authorities did not accept him either. The forces were clearly unequal, the Ypsilanti detachment was defeated, the Ottoman government closed the straits for the Russian merchant fleet, and moved troops to the Russian border. To settle the Greek question, at the beginning of 1825, a conference of the great powers convened in St. Petersburg, where Britain and Austria rejected the Russian program of joint action. After the Sultan refused to mediate the conference participants, Alexander I decided to concentrate troops on the Turkish border. Thus, he crossed out the policy of legitimism and went on to openly support the Greek national liberation movement. Russian society welcomed the emperor's determination. A firm course in the Greek and, more broadly, the Eastern question was defended by such influential dignitaries as V.P. Kochubei, M.S. Vorontsov, A.I. They were concerned about the possible weakening of Russian influence among the Christian and Slavic population of the Balkan Peninsula. A. P. Ermolov asserted: “Foreign offices, especially English, they put us guilty of patience and inaction before all peoples in a disadvantageous way. The end result is that in the Greeks, who are committed to us, we will leave a fair bitterness on us. "

A.P. Ermolov in the Caucasus. The name of A.P. Yermolov is associated with a sharp increase in the military-political presence of Russia in the North Caucasus, a territory that was ethnically diverse and whose peoples were at very different levels of socio-economic and political development. Relatively stable state formations existed there - the Avar and Kazikumyk khanates, the Tarkov shamkhalstvo, patriarchal "free societies" dominated in the mountainous regions, the prosperity of which largely depended on successful forays on the lowland neighbors engaged in agriculture.

In the second half of the 18th century. The northern Ciscaucasia, which was the object of peasant and Cossack colonization, was separated from the mountainous regions by the Caucasian line, which stretched from the Black Sea to the Caspian Sea and ran along the banks of the Kuban and Terek rivers. A postal road was laid along this line, which was considered almost safe. In 1817, the Caucasian cordon line was moved from the Terek to the Sunzha, which caused discontent among the mountain peoples, for thereby they were cut off from the Kumyk plain, where cattle were driven to winter pastures. For the Russian authorities, the inclusion of the Caucasian peoples in the orbit of imperial influence was a natural consequence of the successful establishment of Russia in the Transcaucasus. Militarily and economically, the authorities were interested in eliminating the threats that the raiding system of the highlanders concealed. The support that the highlanders received from the Ottoman Empire justified Russia's military intervention in the affairs of the North Caucasus.

General A.P. Ermolov, appointed in 1816 to the post of the chief commander of the civilian unit in Georgia and the Caucasus and at the same time the commander of the Separate Corps, considered it his main task to ensure the security of the Transcaucasia and the inclusion of the territory of mountainous Dagestan, Chechnya and the North-Western Caucasus into the Russian Empire. From Tsitsianov's policy, which combined threats and monetary promises, he went on to abruptly suppress the raiding system, for which he widely used deforestation and the destruction of recalcitrant auls. Ermolov felt himself to be the "proconsul of the Caucasus" and was not shy about using military force. It was under him that the military-economic and political blockade of mountainous regions was carried out, he considered a demonstration of force and military expeditions to be the best means of pressure on mountain peoples. On the initiative of Ermolov, the fortresses of Groznaya, Vnezapnaya, Burnaya were built, which became strongholds for the Russian troops.

Ermolov's military expeditions led to opposition from the mountaineers of Chechnya and Kabarda. Ermolov's policy provoked a rebuff from the "free societies", the ideological basis for the rallying of which was Muridism, a kind of Islam adapted to the concepts of mountain peoples. The teaching of Muridism demanded from every faithful constant spiritual improvement and blind obedience to the mentor, the student, whose murid he became. The role of the mentor was exceptionally great, he combined spiritual and secular power in his person. Muridism imposed on its followers the obligation to wage a "holy war", ghazavat, against the infidels before their conversion to Islam or complete extermination. Appeals to ghazavat, addressed to all mountain peoples who professed Islam, were a powerful stimulus for resistance to Yermolov's actions and at the same time helped to overcome the disunity of the peoples inhabiting the North Caucasus.

One of the first ideologues of Muridism, Muhammad Yaragsky, preached the transfer of strict religious and moral norms and prohibitions to the field of social and legal relations. The consequence of this was the inevitable clash of Muridism, based on Sharia, a body of Muslim law, relatively new for the Caucasian peoples, with adat, the norms of customary law, which for centuries determined the life of "free societies". The secular rulers were wary of the fanatical preaching of the Muslim clergy, which often led to civil strife and bloody massacres. For a number of the peoples of the Caucasus who professed Islam, Muridism remained alien.

In the 1820s. the opposition of previously scattered "free societies" to Yermolov's straightforward and short-sighted actions grew into organized military-political resistance, the ideology of which was muridism. We can say that under Ermolov, events began, which contemporaries called the Caucasian War. In reality, these were actions of separate military detachments, devoid of a general plan, which either sought to suppress the attacks of the mountaineers, or undertook expeditions deep into the mountainous regions, without representing the enemy's forces and not pursuing any political goals. Military operations in the Caucasus have become protracted.

From the book The Truth About Nicholas I. The Swindled Emperor the author Tyurin Alexander

The Eastern question in the interval between the wars of the Gunkyar-Skelessian Treaty of 1833 The Egyptian crisis put the Ottoman Empire on the brink of life and death, and determined its short-term rapprochement with Russia. The ruler of Egypt Megmed-Ali (Muhammad Ali) came from Rumelia,

the author Milov Leonid Vasilievich

§ 4. Eastern question Ottoman Empire and European powers. At the beginning of the 19th century, the Eastern question did not play a noticeable role in Russian foreign policy. The Greek project of Catherine II, which provided for the expulsion of the Turks from Europe and the creation of a Christian empire in the Balkans,

From the book History of Russia XVIII-XIX centuries the author Milov Leonid Vasilievich

§ 2. The Eastern question. Russia in the Caucasus The problem of the Black Sea straits. Relying on the Petersburg Protocol of 1826, Russian diplomacy forced the Ottoman authorities to sign the Akkerman Convention in October of the same year, according to which all states received the right

From the book Russia and Russians in World History the author Narochnitskaya Natalia Alekseevna

Chapter 6 Russia and the World Eastern Question The Eastern question is not one of those that are subject to the solution of diplomacy. N. Ya.Danilevsky. "Russia and Europe" The transformation of Russia into Russia took place by the second half of the 18th century, and by the second half of the next, 19th century in

From the book The Course of Russian History (Lectures LXII-LXXXVI) the author

Eastern question So, in the course of the XIX century. the southeastern borders of Russia are gradually being pushed back beyond their natural boundaries by the inevitable linkage of relations and interests. Russia's foreign policy on the southwestern European borders differs in a completely different direction. I AM

From the book The Course of Russian History (Lectures XXXIII-LXI) the author Klyuchevsky Vasily Osipovich

The Eastern question Bogdan, who was already dying, again stood in the way of friends and foes, both states, and the one to whom he betrayed, and the one to whom he swore allegiance. Frightened by the rapprochement between Moscow and Poland, he entered into an agreement with the Swedish king Charles X and the Transylvanian

From the book of Attila. Scourge of god the author Bouvier-Azhan Maurice

VII THE EASTERN QUESTION Attila's behavior at the walls of Constantinople always raised many questions, and indeed, even if the prospect of a brutal war with Aspar was more than likely, even if the storming of the city promised to be extremely difficult, despite the successes of Edekon in the matter

From the book History of Romania author Bolovan Ioan

The Romanian Principalities and the "Eastern Question" The evolution of the "Eastern Question", the progress caused by the French Revolution, and the spread of the revolutionary spirit in South-Eastern Europe also affected the political situation in the Romanian principalities. At the end of the 18th century, in a close

From the book History of Romania author Bolovan Ioan

"Eastern question" and the Romanian principalities "Eteria" and the revolution of 1821 under the leadership of Tudor Vladimirescu. It is indisputable that the French Revolution and especially the Napoleonic Wars gave at the beginning of the 19th century. The "eastern question" has a new meaning: the defense of the national idea,

From the book of Compositions. Volume 8 [Crimean War. Volume 1] the author Tarle Evgeny Viktorovich

From the book Alexander II. Spring of Russia the author Carrer d'Ancausse Helene

The eternal "Eastern question" The "Union of three emperors" concluded in 1873 revealed its fragility in the face of the Balkan question. The fate of the Slavic peoples, who were under the heel of the Ottoman Empire, was the subject of unceasing concerns of Russia. A significant contribution to the fact

From the book Volume 4. Reaction times and constitutional monarchies. 1815-1847. Part two author Lavisse Ernest

From the book Patriotic History: Cheat Sheet the author author unknown

54. "EASTERN QUESTION" The term "eastern question" is understood as a group of contradictions in the history of international relations from the end of the XVIII - beginning. XX century, in the center of which were the peoples who inhabited the Ottoman Empire. The solution of the "eastern question" as one of the main

From the book Russian Istanbul the author Komandorova Natalia Ivanovna

The Eastern question The so-called "Eastern question" was actually a "Turkish question" in relation to Russia, many scholars and researchers believe, since since the 15th century, its main content was Turkish expansion in the Balkan Peninsula and in the eastern

From the book Russia and the West on the Swing of History. From Paul I to Alexander II the author Romanov Petr Valentinovich

The Eastern question that spoiled everyone Nicholas I remained in history as a man who lost the Crimean (or Eastern) War, which broke out in 1853, in which Russia was opposed by a powerful coalition of European states, which included England, France, Turkey, Sardinia and

From the book General History [Civilization. Modern concepts. Facts, events] the author Olga Dmitrieva

The Eastern Question and the Problems of Colonial Expansion While the European political elite was comprehending the new realities that arose after the Franco-Prussian war, the unification of Germany and the formation in the center of Europe of a powerful and aggressive empire, clearly claiming leadership in

EASTERN QUESTION - a diplomatic and historiographic term denoting a complex of contradictions between the powers in the Middle East, the Balkans, in the Black Sea straits and in the North. Africa - territories ruled by Turkey. The term was first voiced at the Verona Congress (1822) of the Holy Union in connection with the discussion of the situation in the Balkan Peninsula, which arose as a result of the Greek uprising of 1821. As an international problem arose in the middle of the 18th century. due to the weakening of the once powerful Ottoman Empire and the strengthening of the colonial expansion of European powers.

The policy of the Western powers in the eastern question was aimed, firstly, at strengthening their economic and political influence in the possessions of Turkey, as well as at the seizure of its individual territories (Cyprus, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia) and, secondly, at opposing the strengthening of positions Russia in the Balkans. Throughout the XIX century. the main antagonists of Russia in the Balkans were Great Britain, France and Austria (since 1867 - Austria-Hungary) (see the London Convention of 1841, the Paris Peace Treaty of 1856, the Berlin Treatise of 1878). At the end of the XIX - beginning of the XX century. Germany began to develop a rapid expansion in Turkish possessions, relying on the construction of the Baghdad railway and interaction with Austria-Hungary (Bosnian crisis of 1908). Western European countries often covered up their selfish interests and colonial plans with a promise of assistance to the Turkish sultan in the event of internal political crises in the Ottoman Empire, but did not take any effective measures. The defeat of Turkey, which fought in the First World War 1914-1918. on the side of the Triple

Union, allowed the Western countries - members of the Entente to openly declare their plans to seize part of Turkish lands. Only the rise of the national liberation struggle of the Turkish people made it possible to preserve the independence of Turkey as a sovereign state.

For Russia, the Eastern question in the XVIII - early XX century. was of great military-strategic and economic importance. The state of security in the southern regions of the country, as well as ensuring free navigation in the Black Sea basin and the unimpeded passage of Russian ships through the Bosphorus and Dardanelles into the Mediterranean Sea, depended on his decision. At various times, certain Russian politicians have put forward plans for the division of Turkish possessions - "the legacy of a sick person." Particular attention was paid to the Danube principalities. However, on the whole, Russia strove to preserve the integrity of Turkey, as it preferred to see a weak neighbor, undermined from within, on its southern borders.

A special place in Russian policy on the Eastern question was occupied by assistance to the Balkan peoples in their struggle for national-state independence. At the same time, the Russian government relied on the text of the Kuchuk-Kainardzhiyskiy (1774) and other treaties that gave it the right to patronize the Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire. As a result of several Russian-Turkish wars in the 19th century. and diplomatic assistance from Russia Romania, Serbia, Montenegro and Bulgaria gained state independence.

In the XIX - early XX century. the eastern question remained one of the most acute international problems, in the solution of which all European powers took part.

Orlov A.S., Georgieva N.G., Georgiev V.A. Historical Dictionary. 2nd ed. M., 2012, p. 96-97.

a complex of international conflicts of the late 18th - early 20th centuries associated with the struggle of the Balkan peoples against the Turkish yoke and with the rivalry of the great powers (Russia, Austria, Great Britain, France, later Italy and Germany) for the partition of the weakening Ottoman Empire (Turkey).

In the middle of the 17th century. The Ottoman Empire entered a period of deep internal and external political crisis. After the defeat of the Turks by the Austrians and Poles near Vienna in 1683, their advance to Europe was stopped. At the end of the 17-18th century. Turkey suffered a number of serious defeats in the wars with Austria, Venice, the Commonwealth and Russia. Its weakening contributed to the rise of the national liberation movement of the Balkan peoples (Moldovans, Vlachs, Bulgarians, Serbs, Montenegrins, Albanians, Greeks), most of them Orthodox. On the other hand, in the 18th century. in the Ottoman Empire, the political and economic positions of France and Great Britain strengthened, which, wishing to maintain their influence and prevent the territorial acquisitions of other powers (especially Austria and Russia), began to advocate the preservation of its territorial integrity and against the liberation of the conquered Christian peoples.

From the middle of the 18th century. the role of the main enemy of the Ottoman Empire passed from Austria to Russia. Her victory in the Russian-Turkish war of 1768-1774 led to a radical change in the situation in the Black Sea basin. Under the terms of the Kucuk-Kainardzhiyskiy Peace Treaty of 1774, Russia finally established itself on the northern coast of the Black Sea and received the right of protectorate over the Christian population of Turkey; Danube principalities (Moldavia, Wallachia, Bessarabia) acquired internal autonomy; the dependence of the Crimean Khanate on the Turkish Sultan was eliminated. In 1783, Russia annexed the Crimea and Kuban. The sharp weakening of the Ottoman Empire created the conditions for Russia to enter the Mediterranean Sea and for the elimination of Turkish rule in the Balkans. The Eastern question came to the fore in European politics - the question of the fate of the Turkish heritage and the Christian Balkan peoples: realizing the inevitability of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the largest European states - Russia, Great Britain, France and Austria - stepped up their intervention in the affairs of the Eastern Mediterranean.

In the 1780s - the first half of the 1790s, an acute diplomatic struggle between the Austro-Russian bloc, which sought to speed up the process of the dismemberment of Turkey, began with Great Britain and (until 1789) France, which were trying to maintain the status quo in the Balkans. Catherine II (1762-1796) put forward a project for the complete expulsion of the Turks from Europe, the restoration of the Greek (Byzantine) Empire (she planned to build her grandson Konstantin Pavlovich on her throne), the transfer of the western part of the Balkan Peninsula to Austria and the creation of the buffer state of Dacia from the Danube principalities ... At the same time, Porta (the Ottoman government), hoping to take revenge for the defeat in the war of 1768-1774, with the active support of Great Britain and France, began a new war against Russia (the Russian-Turkish war of 1787-1791), on the side of which Austria came out in 1788. In 1788, Anglo-French diplomacy succeeded in provoking an attack on Russia by Sweden (the Russian-Swedish war of 1788-1790). But the actions of the anti-Russian coalition turned out to be unsuccessful: in 1790 Sweden withdrew from the war (the Peace of Verelsky), and in 1791 Turkey had to agree to the conclusion of the Yassy Peace Treaty, which confirmed the terms of the Kucuk-Kainardzhi Treaty and pushed the Russian-Turkish border to the Dniester; Porta renounced its claims to Georgia and recognized the right of Russia to interfere in the internal affairs of the Danube principalities.

The struggle of the European powers against revolutionary France (from 1792) temporarily diverted their attention from the Eastern question, which allowed the Ottoman Empire to strengthen its foreign policy position. However, in the late 1790s, the Eastern Mediterranean again came to the fore in European politics. In 1798, France, seeking to restore its positions in the East that had been lost after the Revolution and to create a bridgehead for striking British possessions in India, attempted to seize Egypt, which was under Ottoman rule (Napoleon Bonaparte's Egyptian campaign). In response, Turkey declared war on France (1798) and entered into an alliance with Russia and Great Britain (1799). In 1801, French troops in Egypt surrendered. However, the growth of the liberation movement of the Balkan peoples, who perceived Russia as their natural ally, and Britain's attempts to gain a foothold in Egypt led to the collapse of the Anglo-Russian-Turkish alliance. In 1803, the British had to evacuate their troops from Egypt. After the uprising under the leadership of Kara-Georgy that broke out in Serbia in 1804 and the victories of the Napoleonic Empire over the Third Coalition in Europe in 1805-1806 ( see also NAPOLEONIAN WARS) Porta approached France and in 1806, with her support, began a war with Russia; at the same time she had to fight with Great Britain (Anglo-Turkish War 1807-1809). The protracted Russian-Turkish war of 1806-1812 ended with the victory of Russia: according to the Peace of Bucharest in 1812, she received Bessarabia; Turkey recognized the Western Transcaucasia for her and somewhat expanded the autonomy of Moldova and Wallachia. Although she also pledged to grant internal independence to Serbia, in 1813 her troops occupied Serbian lands; only after the uprising of 1814–1815 under the leadership of M. Obrenovic did Porta agree to give Serbia limited autonomy: this event was the beginning of the process of liberation of the South Slavic peoples.

The defeat of Napoleonic France (1814–1815) again drew the attention of the European powers to the fate of the Ottoman Empire. Alexander I (1801-1825) returned to the plans of Catherine II and began to patronize secret Greek national organizations, but he could not get the support of other members of the Holy Alliance and in the late 1810s, under pressure from Austria and Great Britain, he softened his anti-Turkish policy. But in 1821 an uprising against the Ottoman yoke broke out in Greece (1821-1829), which aroused great sympathy in European countries (the Philhellenic movement). From 1825 Russia launched diplomatic activity in support of the Greeks; this prompted England and France to also intervene in the conflict. In 1827, at the London Conference, the three powers demanded that Turkey grant autonomy to Greece; when she refused to satisfy their demands, they sent a joint squadron to the shores of the Peloponnese, which defeated the Turkish-Egyptian fleet at Navarin. In response, the Ottoman Empire declared war on Russia (Russian-Turkish war of 1828–1829). This war, in which only Austria helped the Turks, ended with another victory for Russian weapons. According to the Adrianople Peace Treaty of 1829, Russia acquired the mouth of the Danube and the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus; Turkey recognized the whole of Transcaucasia as Russian possession, expanded the autonomy of the Danube principalities, granted independence to Greece, and Serbia - the status of a vassal autonomous principality, promised to it back in the Bucharest Peace of 1812.

Russia's role in Eastern affairs increased even more in the 1830s, when it acted as an ally of the Ottoman Empire. In 1831, the Egyptian Pasha Muhammad Ali, behind whom stood France, began a war against Sultan Mahmud II (1808-1839) ( cm... MAHMUD). In the face of the defeat of the Turkish troops, Nicholas I (1825-1855) resolutely supported Porto. In February 1833, a Russian squadron entered the Bosphorus and landed a 30,000-strong landing to defend Istanbul, which forced Muhammad Ali to come to a compromise agreement with the Sultan. In July 1833, the Russian-Turkish Unkar-Iskelesi allied-defensive treaty was concluded for eight years, according to which Russia guaranteed the independence and integrity of the Ottoman Empire, and the Porta pledged not to allow military ships of other countries, with the exception of Russians, into the straits (Bosphorus and Dardanelles).

In 1839 Great Britain, to which Muhammad Ali refused to grant trade privileges in Egypt, provoked a new war between him and the Sultan. The victories of the Egyptian forces prompted the European powers to intervene. At the London Conference of 1840, Russia, Great Britain, Austria and Prussia made decisions on collective assistance to Mahmud II and demanded the preservation of the "integrity and independence" of the Ottoman Empire. When Muhammad Ali rejected the powers' ultimatum to end hostilities, the Anglo-Austrian navy bombed Syrian ports and forced the Egyptian Pasha into submission. In 1841, under pressure from other European states, Russia abandoned the advantages it received under the Unkar-Iskelesi Treaty: from now on, the straits were closed to military vessels of all European countries, including Russia.

In the 1840s - early 1850s, the Eastern question became significantly aggravated. Back in 1839, during the second war with Muhammad Ali, Porta announced its intention to carry out reforms aimed at improving the situation of the Christian population (inviolability of life and property of subjects, regardless of their religious affiliation; elimination of abuses in the tax system), but these promises remained on the paper. For the Balkan peoples there was only one way left - an armed struggle against Ottoman rule. On the other hand, by the middle of the 19th century. the economic and political penetration of European states into Turkey expanded, which intensified their mutual rivalry. In 1853, taking advantage of the conflict between the Catholic and Orthodox clergy for control over Christian shrines in Palestine, Nicholas I demanded from the Porta the right of patronage over all Orthodox subjects of the Sultan. When Turkey, with the support of British and French diplomacy, rejected this demand, Russian troops occupied the Danube principalities, which resulted in the Russian-Turkish war of 1853-1856 ( see also CRIMEAN WAR). In 1854 Great Britain and France entered the war on the side of the Ottoman Empire, in 1855 - Sardinia; the anti-Russian coalition also enjoyed active diplomatic support from Austria. The defeat of Russia led to a serious weakening of its positions in the Black Sea basin: it lost South Bessarabia and lost the right to have a navy in the Black Sea; The Danube principalities were placed under a joint protectorate of the great powers (Peace of Paris 1856).

In the Paris Peace Treaty, Porta reaffirmed its commitment to grant the Christian population of the Ottoman Empire equal rights with the Muslim, but again did not fulfill it. The situation in the Balkans has become even more tense. In 1858, after a long struggle, Montenegro achieved de facto independence. In 1859, with the support of Russia, the Danube principalities created a unified state of Romania, despite the opposition of the Port and Anglo-Austrian diplomacy; in 1861 Turkey recognized Romania on the condition of recognizing the suzerainty of the Sultan and paying tribute. In 1861 an uprising broke out in Herzegovina; aid provided to the rebels in neighboring Montenegro led to the Turkish-Montenegrin War of 1862-1863; the Montenegrins were defeated in it, and the Herzegovinian uprising was suppressed. In 1861 Serbia proclaimed full autonomy in internal affairs and created its own army, which in 1862 expelled the Turkish garrison from Belgrade; in 1866 Serbia entered into an anti-Turkish coalition with Montenegro, in 1867 achieved the complete withdrawal of Turkish troops from its territory, and in 1868 entered into an alliance with Greece and a treaty of friendship with Romania. In 1866 there was an uprising in Crete, the participants of which proclaimed the unification of the island with Greece. Russia, France, the North German Confederation and Italy offered Turkey to hold a plebiscite in Crete, but Porta, with the assistance of Great Britain and Austria, rejected their collective note and, threatening war, demanded that Greece stop helping the rebels. At the Paris Conferences of 1869, the great powers persuaded Greece to accept the Turkish ultimatum; the Cretan uprising was soon suppressed.

In the early 1870s, Russia was able to restore its positions in the Black Sea basin. In 1870, with the support of Germany, she announced her withdrawal from the Paris Treaty of 1856 in the part concerning the right to have a navy in the Black Sea; this decision was sanctioned by the London Conference of the Great Powers in 1871.

Porte's failure to fulfill his promises of reform provoked two uprisings in Bulgaria in 1875-1876, however, they were brutally suppressed. In 1875, an uprising broke out in Bosnia and Herzegovina; in 1876 Serbia and Montenegro openly supported the rebels; Turkey opened hostilities against them. The Serbian army was defeated, but the Russian ultimatum forced Porto to suspend hostilities. In the context of the growing collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Great Britain and Austria-Hungary abandoned their previous policy of maintaining the status quo and began to develop plans for the division of Turkish possessions. In 1876-1877 the European powers made several attempts to induce Porto to carry out the necessary reforms in the Balkan provinces (Constantinople 1876 and London 1877 conferences). After the Ports refused to fulfill their demands, Russia declared war on her. As a result of the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878, the Ottoman Empire suffered a complete defeat and was forced to conclude the Treaty of San Stefano, according to which it returned to Russia Southern Bessarabia, recognized the independence of Romania, Montenegro and Serbia and agreed to grant self-government to Bosnia and Herzegovina and to create a vast Great Bulgaria as part of Northern Bulgaria, Thrace and Macedonia. However, Russia's successes provoked opposition from other European powers, led by Great Britain and Austria-Hungary, who achieved a revision of the terms of the Treaty of San Stefano at the Berlin Congress of 1878: it confirmed the transfer of Southern Bessarabia to Russia and the independence of Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, but Bulgaria was divided into three parts - Northern Bulgaria in the status of a vassal principality, Eastern Rumelia in the position of a Turkish province with internal autonomy and Macedonia, which was returning to Turkey; Bosnia and Herzegovina was transferred under the control of Austria-Hungary.

Despite the diplomatic defeat of Russia, the Russian-Turkish war of 1877-1878 became a decisive stage in the solution of the Eastern question, in the process of the liberation of the South Slavic peoples and the creation of national states by them; Turkish rule in the Balkans was dealt a mortal blow.

In the late 19th - early 20th century. the collapse of the Ottoman Empire became irreversible. Back in 1878, the Porta ceded the island of Cyprus to Great Britain. In 1881, Greece, through negotiations, obtained from Turkey the transfer of Thessaly to her. The 1885 uprising in Eastern Rumelia led to its reunification with Bulgaria; under pressure from British and Austrian diplomacy, which sought to wrest Bulgaria from under Russian influence, the Porta de facto recognized the creation of a unified Bulgarian state. In 1896, a new uprising broke out in Crete; in 1897 Greek troops landed on it. The great powers declared the island an autonomy "under the protectorate of Europe" and occupied it. Although Greece was defeated in the outbreak of the Greek-Turkish war of 1897 and was forced to evacuate its troops from Crete, Turkey actually lost its dominance over the island: the Greek king George became the High Commissioner of Crete; the troops of the European states remained on it. After the Young Turkish Revolution of 1908, Austria-Hungary, with the support of Germany, annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina. As a result of the Italian-Turkish war of 1911-1912, Italy took Cyrenaica, Tripolitania and the Dodecanese Islands from the Ottoman Empire.

The Balkan Wars of 1912-1913 became the final act of resolving the Eastern question. In 1912, Bulgaria and Serbia, with the assistance of Russia, formed a military-political alliance with the aim of dividing the European possessions of the Ottoman Empire, which was joined by Greece and Montenegro. As a result of the First Balkan War (1912), Turkey was practically expelled from the Balkan Peninsula, having lost Macedonia and almost all of Thrace; the independent state of Albania arose on the Adriatic coast. Although as a result of the Second Balkan War (1913) the Ottoman Empire managed to return part of Eastern Thrace with Adrianople (Tur. Edirne), Turkish rule in southeastern Europe was ended forever.

see also RUSSIAN-TURKISH WARS.

Eastern question in the foreign policy of Russia: the end of the XVIII - the beginning of the XX century. M., 1978
Kostyashov Yu.V., Kuznetsov A.A., Sergeev V.V., Chumakov A.D. Eastern question in international relations in the second half of the XVIII - early XX century. Kaliningrad, 1997
Vinogradov V.N. The Eastern question in big European politics... - In the "powder magazine of Europe": 1878-1914. M., 2003
Soloviev S.M. The history of the fall of Poland. Eastern question... M., 2003

Find " EASTERN QUESTION" on the