An Analysis of the Hamidian State during the Hamidian Era in Economic Change Perspective - Essay Example

? HAMIDIAN ERA Introduction The Hamidian period back the period which span from 1876 to 1909.History and records have it that the Ottoman Empire was founded by Osman Gazi. The empire was well founded under strong structures of power, religion and culture. Many dynasties were in place since the formation of the empire. The nineteenth century and early twentieth century saw among other sultan leaders Sultan Abdul amid II. He had a great dynasty with a well laid down structure in political dimension, economic perspective as well as in military power. However, there always was a distinction between different dynasties and Sultan’s in the way of political agendas over the different historical eras. Thesis statement: When we talk about Hamidian Era, this makes specific reference to Sultan Abdul amid II's period of rule during the 2nd half of the 19th century and early 20th century; specifically 1876-1909. Nevertheless, the era was characterized with various aspects in terms of economic performance and political leadership. How was economic performance related to the political governance of the era? How did the economic challenges that were experienced in the era influence Sultan Abdul amid II's political agenda? Discussion This paper intends to present an analysis of the Hamidian state during the Hamidian era in economic change perspective. Despite the commendable organization of the state during the reign of Sultan Abdul amid II, economic forces shook the state greatly. Economic forces such as foreign creditor’s debts and losing some regions to other imperial powers characterized the state’s governance. It is these forces and effects that this paper intends to analyze in the perspective of altering the Sultan’s political agenda. The paper will outline in details the economic pressures faced. An analysis of the political agenda of the empire will follow. The influence of these economic forces to the political agenda of the Sultan will then follow. In the efforts to destroy or abolish past legitimating crises that had engulfed the empire, on ascension to power, Sultan Abdul amid II adopted centralization system of governance. As the sole way to reform and save the entire empire from the sub sequential topple by the imperial colonies, Abdul amid II chose to ignore the reform calls by the westerners to implement their proposal. He established and imposed pan Islam policy whose main aim was to safeguard the interests of the Muslim culture in the empire against the invasion and corruption by other cultures. He advanced the segregation of other people on the basis of religion through supporting the Muslim religion against the ‘others’. The otto9man identity was a creation of modernization. Through this creation, the sovereigns appeared superior to their counterpart non-sovereigns. Religion identity was a critical aspect of association in the era of Hamidian. His policies were thus seen to be far from modernity; well interpreted to represent nationalism which instead of acknowledging individual identity, it concentrates with group. This was evident in his advocacy for Muslim protection and support. The Kurd people became beneficially of the same as unlike the case with other tribes who were easily overlooked on the grounds of religion, the Kurds were well integrated in the empire by the virtue of Muslim brotherhood (Yokmac, 2012, para 1-15). Economic challenges: The nineteenth century marked a historic time to the Ottoman Empire through which so much of the future shaping of the empire would rely. Despite the strength that the empire exhibited in the previous era, the empire started by slowly weakening in terms of political power, her territorial region in North Africa and in Europe. The political influence of the empire had been shaken by the dependency that had resulted by the poor economic performance that the empire had sailed through. Many of the policies that the previous governments had adopted proved unworkable. This necessitated engaging into unplanned engagement with mostly the western imperialists who stood to influence greatly the political scene in the empire in the early nineteenth century. Western economic influence as well as culture also slowly infiltrated some parts of Middle East. Furthermore, European imperialism took shape in the territory and brought about untold losses to the empire till the onset of the First World War (Reinkowski, 2005, 212). The shaky condition of the empire exposed the territories to other European empires who eyed the collapse of the empire for them to extend their influence. By extending poor policies for adoption, the western cultures were aware of the vulnerability of the Ottoman Empire from the past awareness of the financial constraints that the empire faced. These can therefore be seen as calculated moves to propel the Ottoman Empire into more dependency which would ultimately result to a chance for them to take over parts of the territory if not all. This actually materialized as after the economic crises, the Ottoman people were unable to settle the debts owed to foreigners majority of who were actually the same western imperialists as well as some internal beings. However this was done in disguise as the empire rule had widely spread. They capture much of the Christian dominated portions f the empire leaving the concentration of the Sultan influence among the Muslim dominated areas. Moreover, the empire weakness would result from the internal divisions that characterized the empire at the end of the century. Different cultures as well as religious groups within the empire sought to have dominion over their respective areas of influence. Many efforts were sought to bring about the union of the whole empire though to no avail. It was then that Sultan Abdul amid II came into power in 1876. By adoption autocratic leadership, the Sultan fought against the internal opposition though the empire had already lost a lot in terms of territory to her rival empires from Europe. Trade port cities were among the captured portions which actually posed substantial threat to territorial trade. Securing the port cities was strategic among any territory as the port cities served as business hubs. Tax revenues needed to run the empire were generated through trade activities which were centered on among other places the port cities. Economically, the empire during the Haminidian era was in a stale. The sector had almost collapsed and the trade as well as the commerce industry was shaken. The Ottoman Empire lacked economic stimulants such as money and proper industrial infrastructure. Money and man power were the most critical components that such an empire required in order to have her economic agenda propelled. However, due to the prevailing economic crises, there was no enough money after the bigger share went to service foreign as well as the internal debts that had previously been accrued. Money was equally critical for the empire in order to purchase the much required military equipment and service the required military personnel. Much of the income earning sectors had already been leased as securities in the borrowing deals which further weakened the administration. Moreover, as it is clear from the literature, the Sultan adopted unfavorable policies from the west in favor of specialized groups which was strategic in order to have much of the attention focused on the Muslim cultures and sideline the other cultural affiliations. Through this segregation, it became apparently clear that the empire would sideline the Christians majority and who managed the greatest portion of trade and money exchange. Commerce and trade were predominantly not the areas of Muslims interests but rather the practice by majorly the Christians (Gocek and Ozyuksel, nd, 9). This gave opportunity the European empire and the interested western cultures to in filtrate unnoticed and take control of the majority of the production hubs including the taking over of some Ottoman Empire territories. Thus, there was no favorable competition with her rival European empires. The modern production sector in industrial perspective and trade was so much taken over by the Christians therefore driving the Islam strongholds vulnerable to the adverse economic forces. The inhabitants in most territories practiced nomadic life. Nevertheless, farm production formed the livelihood for the majority especially to those who lived in areas that exchange was easy with the traders as the empire was strategically located to serve as a trade hub(Zurcher, nd, 3). Trade and related commercial dealings was the other pillar of the economy of the Ottoman people. Trade was an important occupation through which tax revenues were collected by the government to run the empire. The empire was strategically located to serve the majority of the areas around Middle East, Europe and the North America and which were constituent territories of the entire Ottoman Empire. Transport corridors through the sea were at the reach of the empire and through these, merchant form all over the world would access the empire for trade activities. The Christian culture favored the thriving of trade in the area unlike the Islam Culture which to a large extent relied on nomadic life. Moreover, Sultan Abdul amid II strategically constructed railway lines and telegraph infrastructure soon after his ascension to power for the sake of revitalizing the sector of trade as well as commerce. Agricultural produce would easily find its way to the exchange points through the rail. Communication was made easy via the introduced telegraphs. After taking over parts of the Ottoman Empire, the Europeans as well as other western cultures set up for proper production. In the late 19th century, it was apparently clear that the Europeans had become the dominant investors in the territory eliciting fears of eventual economic strength and hence takeover. The slow encroachment of the European empires into the Ottoman territory and the global crises as a result of the struggle for independence wars led the empire to sign treaties for free trade with German. The Ottoman sate lost much of her financial control to the foreigners and had no authority even in internal taxation. This led to her uncontrolled borrowing from the European governments which after a while they became unmanageable. This led to the state defaulting payment of the debts and the only recovery way was through handing over majority of her source of income to the foreigners. This pointed to a serious erosion of the empire’s fiscal position in the future (Ak arl?, 2006, 356). Internal conflicts against the imperial treaties with the Sultan ruler-ship emerged. Ethnic crises were experienced with cultures determined to restore the superiority of their territory. However, the autocratic regime only fueled the ethnic clashes which for the worse succeeded to weaken the empire the more. This was also opposed by the government as the government had sought the treaties in alignment with western powers for the purpose of security. This crisis persisted until the World War 1 after which the Sultan’s empire was toppled. He was dethroned and the empire suffered partitioning as the struggle for independence within the different regions that formed the empire intensified. The world also experienced a critical shock from the war which lead to decline in prices on agricultural products during the crises. Political agenda By the late nineteenth century, much of the empire’s political organization had become substantially weak. The strength of every political power is usually engraved in the military power of the state as well as the economic endowment. However, great failures had been experienced in the previous era which had left the empire not only vulnerable to internal social pressures but also to the external social political pressures. The previous administrations had exposed the empire to the forces of economic instability which left the country in complete dependence of the foreign administrations such as the Europe and Germany. The economic infrastructure in internal production was gradually taken over by Europe. Much of her productive territories including trading cities were gradually being seized and thus further exposing the territory to outside influence. Agricultural productivity and the taxation mechanisms had been liberalized to the extent of leaving the administration at an acute shortage of funds which necessitated borrowing. The debt crises which resulted from the uncontrolled borrowing shook completely the state necessitating a change in administration (Ozekicioglu and Ozekicioglu, 2010, 44-45). It is at this time that Sultan Abdul amid II ascended to power. Among the many political agendas that were the pillars of his governance was the restoration of the economic viability of the Ottoman Empire. This was basic and critical for economic security of governance propels an empire. This was seen to materialize soon after his take over with analysis’s pointing to the recovery direction of the economy. He had a well structure policy framework from his personal reasoning as well as from his learned counterparts. This was from his keen interest in economic matters of the empire even long before his appointment as a Sultan. Much of his agendas focused on short-term restoration of the economic structure of the empire as well as pointing to long-term strategies to revitalize the whole governance. His governance promised to restore government tax base by increasing economic productivity of the empire. This was achievable through building modern infrastructure in communication and transport sector. This he managed to deliver by building railways lines and improving communication mechanisms through the use of telegraphs (Kayal?, 1997, 15 of 105). Through improved transport and communication networks, Abdul amid II was in a position to increase agricultural production as well as trade and commerce. When the trade is revitalized, more tax was expected and as a result, better mechanisms of servicing the prevailing debts would be available. According to his administration, economic sustenance formed the foundation of any successful regime. He believed that the persistent dependence on foreign governments limited the superiority of his empire and necessitated the manipulation by these powers. He therefore committed to addressing the case before turning his attention to the other political agendas. He also sought to rebuild internal sanity in matters of security after the enmity that had saturated the empire with many ethnic groups rising against each other. Nevertheless, many hindrances faced his administration with much of the country’s revenues going to servicing the external debts. His administration was well aware of the need to unite the different groups that were predominantly members of the Ottoman Empire (Cetinsaya, 2003, 119). The way to incorporate them into the political and social consideration was through co-opting them into his rule which embraced the dimension of centralized rule. However, this was against his ideologies as he is seen to have further adopted the nationalism ideologies through which, all people were not equal; the Muslims were. He had developed his agendas of inclusion into his leadership on the basis of religion and culture. Records show that he advocated for the Muslim brotherhood regime which sidelined other people on the basis of religion affiliation. Christians as well as other professing faiths were not acknowledged and as such, his leadership suffered prejudice and discrimination. He also ensured tight observance of the bureaucratic class and who were seen as potential threats to his administration. Ottomanism was a movement that had the sole intention to dis-em-member the Ottoman territory though the mission was not successful. Christian representation within the ottoman administration was a common strain within the constitution redress. Centralization policies in the administration of Sultan Abdul amid II were faced with difficulties especially from the distances that characterized the empire with, most nomadic societies widely spread across the entire territory. Many civil groups often staged demonstrations and went as far as staging coups against which the Sultan was firm and counteracted. Most notably, the Sultan made great steps in expanding the Ottoman Empire by conquering more territories in Arabian Peninsula unlike his predecessors. He was still determined to rebuild a strong empire as was before by expounding on the empire. However, his failure is notable when he opted to join forces with Germany during World War 1. Because of his vulnerability in terms of empowerment, the Ottoman Empire under the leadership of the last sultan entered into treaties which saw her joining hands with the Germany. Effects: Most of the political agendas that encompassed Abdul amid II’s leadership faced a challenge in actualization owing to the economic setbacks that faced the empire. It is worth noting that the foundation and the success of any empire heavily depended on the financial strength of the empire. However, the Hamidian era suffered much of dependence on borrowing locally or from the foreigners. With increased borrowing, it became burdensome for the empire to service her debts which led to the seizing of parts of her territory by other western empires or well enough the taking over of most production strengths of the empire. This dependency and weakening of the Ottoman Empire led to many of the agenda that the Sultan had not to be realized. Though in the immediate onset of his power the empire was optimistic of revived performance in the economic aspect, the income generation was not viable to run the Empire. Coupled with the independence wars effects on the economic performance, the agendas would not be met. He also adopted bad policies as a result of the dependency pressure with which his leadership was forced to work. These policies were not aligned to his own and hence the led to the failure of his. His autocratic policies led to internal division which in return ruined his administration structure. He also managed to restore parts of his territories though internal conflicts among the native cultures led to the total failure of his administration. In conclusion, this paper indicates that the empire of the Ottoman people was a dynasty. The empire extended extensively and had a profound influence among the societies who lived in the territory. However, the mid 18th century saw bad governance which led to the empire sink into financial crisis. These financial crises would not be addressed without involvement of western powers. This was through borrowing of funds. Inability to service the debts led to her territories being seized. The reduction in territorial influence and the financial instability led to the weakness in Sultan Abdul amid II’s governance. Bibliography Ak arl? E. D. The Tangled Ends of an Empire: Ottoman Encounters with the West and Problems of Westernization—an Overview. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, Volume 26, Number 3, 2006, pp. 353-366. (356) Cetinsaya G. Essential Friends And Natural Enemies: The Historic Roots Of Turkish-Iranian Relations. Middle East Review of International Affairs, Vol. 7, No. 3 (September 2003) 119 Gocek F. G. and Ozyuksel M. n.d. The Ottoman Empire's Negotiation of Western Liberal Imperialis. 9. Retrieved on 26/4/2013. Web: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~gocek/Work/ja/Gocek.Muge.ja.ozyuksel.article.pdf Kayal? H. Ottomanism, Arabism, and Islamism in the Ottoman Empire, 1908 – 1918. Arabs and Young Turks. University of California Press, c1997 1997.1-105. Ozekicioglu S. and Ozekicioglu H. First borrowing period at Ottoman Empire (1854-1876): Budget policies and consequences. Budget policies and consequences | BEH, October, 2010 44-45. Volume 3 | Issue 3 | October 2010 |pp. 28-46 Reinkowski M. The State's Security and the Subjects' Prosperity: Notions of Order in Ottoman Bureaucratic Correspondence (19th Century). Legitimizing the order: the Ottoman rhetoric of state power. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2005, S. [195] – 212 Yokmac Z. Nationalism and modernization in the reign of Abdulhamid II .2012, para 1-15. Retrieved on 26/4/2013. Web: http://www.anatoliadaily.com/irst/index.php/main-subjects/europe/1299-nationalism-and-modernization-in-the-reign-of-abdulhamid-ii Zurcher E. J. THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE 1850-1922 - UNAVOIDABLE FAILURE? 3. Retrieved on 26/4/2013. Web: http://www.transanatolie.com/english/turkey/turks/ottomans/ejz31.pdf Read More