𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛𝐬 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐭𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐭𝐞: 𝐖𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐛 𝐩𝐨𝐩𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐭𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭? (𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐝)

Arab lands such as Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Palestine, Hejaz, & Yemen came under Ottoman rule after the defeat of the Mamluks by Sultan Selim 1 in 1517 who was the first Ottoman Caliph & assumed the humble title of Khadmain ul Haramain Shareefain (Servant of the Two Holy Mosques)

In this thread the word "Porte" refers to Ottoman government. It's a reference to the title of "Sublime Porte" which was given to the Ottoman government by Venetian Ambassador Andrea Gritti in 1500s during Sultan-Caliph Sulayman's rule when the Ottoman state was at its peak.

The Arab populations of the Ottoman state occupied more than half of the landmass, but they didn't form a conscious nationality but rather identified by religion. Ottoman officials never defined the Arabic speakers as constituting a distinct ethnic or religious community.

They used “Arab” to denote people of the Arabian Peninsula & the Arabic-speaking Muslim population Fertile Crescent. The Porte thought in terms of religious identity rather than language, & the loyalty of the Ottoman Sultan’s Arabic-speaking subjects was based on the Ummah.

Arab loyalty to the Ottoman sultan as Caliph was conditioned on rule according to Sharia & protection of the Holy Cities & Islamic realms from Christian infidels & Shiʽite heretics. So Ottoman Sultans ostentatiously publicised their victories over Christians and Shiʽites.

Ottomans successfully ruled diverse Arab provinces by adapting to traditional, local institutions & providing security. The Porte sent to the Arab provinces officials and governors who were products of the Topkapı or the madrassas of Istanbul.

In ruling through local institutions, the Porte made evermore use of the local elites in Arab provinces to collect taxes & keep order. From the early 17th century, Ottoman officials used the Arabic word ayan to describe the men who bid on tax contracts and maintained order.

These notables ran society in the cities and countryside down to the end of Ottoman  rule. They formed the ruling council of the city, patronized guilds, engaged in moneylending, & dominated local and regional trade.

During 17th century, an alliance emerged between the professional Ottoman governors, officials, & Janissaries sent from the capital with the town notables. These consortia of local power brokers were immensely successful in maintaining order in the Arab provinces.

The Porte tolerated some disorder along the desert frontiers as long as taxes were paid & the Hajj to Mecca, was not threatened. In the rugged Amanus region Ottoman officials granted titles & subsidies to achieve a balance among the warring Druse, Shiʽite, & Christian tribes.

In governing the Holy Cities of the Hejaz, the Porte showed utmost discretion & respect to Islamic traditions. Since the 10th century, a member of the Hashemite clan, claiming descent from the Prophet, held the offices of the Sharif and emir of the two Holy Cities.

The Porte invested rank and titles to each Hashemite Sharif whose standing and legitimacy among his fellow tribesmen was  increased. The Ottoman governer of Hejaz took seat in Jeddah instead of Mecca or Medinah to show respect to House of Sharif.

Morever many tax exemptions were given to the population of Hejaz. Aside from customs collected in Jeddah, the inhabitants of the Hejaz did not pay taxes to the state. They were supported by the personal wealth of the Ottoman Caliph and by Vakf (charity) properties.

The Ottoman state, as custodian of Mecca and Medina, was supposed to provide safe passage for all pilgrims travelling to the Holy Cities. However, political alliances & conflicts shaped the routes that were opened or closed.

There is no record of a ruling Sultan visiting Mecca during the Hajj but Ottoman Princes were sent to make the pilgrimage or visit the Holy Cities during the year. The fear of coup in Sultan's absence, was the main factor that prevented Sultans from travelling to the Hijaz.

The role of Amir al-hajj was continued by the Ottomans when they gained control over the Hejaz in 1517. Besides the latter year, during which the Ottoman sultan appointed a bureaucrat to the post, the umara' al-hajj from Cairo for much of the 16th century.

The trade caravan under the Amir Al Hajj was a procession which took the Kiswa (the ceremonial cover of Kabah) with some gifts for the inhabitants of Holy Cities from Damascus or Egypt as a symbol of the Sultan as the maintainer of Hajj pilgrimage thus validating his rule.

For 400 years Ottomans ruled the Arabs justly. There was no attempt made to Turkify Arabs, rather they were always first class citizens under Ummah. Professor Kenneth W Harl states that there was little serious opposition to Ottoman rule in Arab lamds until 19th century.

So now the million dollar question is that what went wrong in the 19th century? To understand this we must know that the Ottoman government was hijacked by the Committee of Union and Progress which ousted Sultan AbdulHamid II & started to Turkify Arabs which caused problems.

The Committee of Union & Progress was run by Dönmehs (crypto-Jews) of Thessalonika. It ousted Sultan AbdulHamid II in 1909 since he refused the establishment of any Jewish state in Palestine. The CUP/Young Turks forced the Sultan but hr didn't budge so finally they ousted him

Who did the Young Turk and the Unionists who made a coup on Abdulhamid serve?

Quotes of foreigners have been selected so that others don't accuse that this is a just conspiracy of Islamic bigots etc. Now read!

On this subject, Webster's book says:

“The Young Turk movement was initiated by the Masonic lodges in Salonica, under the direction of the Italian Constitutional authority, and the same post later helped Mustafa Kemal succeed. [1]

On the other hand, Friedrich Wichtl writes that in the 1900s, the French Mashriki chief decided that Sultan Abdulhamid should be overthrown and turned the developing Young Turk movement in this direction. [2]

RW Seton-Watson says:

"The real minds of the movement were Jews or Jewish-Muslims (Sabethaiists)" They were funded by the wealthy converts & Jews of Thessaloniki, from the international capitalists of Vienna, Budapest, Berlin (& increasingly, perhaps Paris & London) [4]

RESOURCES:

[1] Nesta H. Webster, Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, London, Boswell 1928, page 284.

[2] (World Freemasonry: The World Revolution: A Study of the Origin and Goals of the World War) 2nd edition, JF Lehmanns Verlag, Munich 1920 page 105.

[4] RW Seton-Watson, The Rise of Nationality in The Balkans, London 1917, Constable, p. 134, 135.

This information is also confirmed by some Arab historians who also agree that Ottoman Sultans never tried to Turkify the Arabs until the Committee of Union and Progress hijacked the government and discriminated Arabs while allowing Jews to settle on Palestine.

Syrian historian al-Husri stated in his works that the Arabs saw the rule of the Ottoman sultans as a direct continuation of the Islamic caliphate & didn't feel as a people conquered by & subjugated by a foreign power. (Biladu'l-Arabiyya ve Devletü'l-Osmaniyye, Beirut 1960)

Arab historian Zeyn N. Zeyn stated that the Ottomans never colonised Arab lands. According to the same author, the Ottomans made no attempt to assimilate and Turkify the Arabs until the Young Turks came to power. (The Emergence of Arab Nationalism, Beirut 1966, pages 9, 10)

So after understanding the reality of Young Turks how can we attribute their crimes upon the Ottoman Sultans who ruled Arabs with Justice for around 400 years? That is surely a horrible distortion and dishonesty since the Young Turks were worst enemies of Ottoman Sultans.

Arabs wanted autonomy but didn't want to leave the fold of Ottoman state. They were against the actions of the Young Turks but not against the Ottoman state itself. Most Arabs in Palestine, Egypt, Libya, Jordan, and Lebanon fought alongside the Ottomans against British.

Pictorial proofs showing that Ottoman Turks and Arabs stood shoulder to shoulder in the ranks of Jihad against British in Palestine, Libya, Syria and elsewhere. How can this reality of the past be ignored?

Sources:

1. The Ottoman Empire lecture series by Professor Kenneth W Harl (Phd Byzantine history from Yale university)

2. https://belgelerlegercektarih.com/2018/03/25/osmanlinin-adaletini-araplar-da-itiraf-etti/

3.Faroqhi, Suraiya (1994). Pilgrims and Sultans: The Hajj under the Ottomans 1517–1683.