Bunton’s lecture described the Ottoman Empire as a progressive empire with ideas of constitutionalism. Fromkin described a “…sick man of Europe” and focused on the chaos within the Empire. Macmillan’s interview disregarded the role of the Empire in the war. The Empire siding with Germany resulted in unprecedented and lasting changes in the world. Bunton emphasized the significance Ottoman joining the war had ; WWI became a conflict between international armies. Nevertheless, Ottoman’s impact upon the war is on sidelines of historical accounts. By joining the war, Ottoman upset the balance of power in favour of Germany. The Triple Entente envisaged a swift defeat, but the Ottoman fought four fronts during four years. Ottoman made significant gains in Mesopotamia against Britain. However, the Russian winter on the Caucasus front killed 100,000 Ottomans. Churchill used the British Navy at Gallipoli to attract the Ottoman forces fighting …show more content…
Bunton argued that Ottoman had the option of remaining neutral during the conflict. Fromkin argued that the reason Ottoman joined the war was because of fears that Europe would want to expand its territories to the Middle East. Africa had already been conquered, the Monroe Doctrine prevented any expansion in the Western Hemisphere. This left the Ottoman vulnerable. The Young Turks believed that the best way to prevent Western expansion in its territories was by attaining a strong European ally. Details on how dignitaries formed alliances with Germany are unclear. In contrast to Bunton who described the Ottoman joining Germany as a choice. Fromkin, however, showed that initially Germany was reluctant to have Ottoman as an ally. Fromkin capitalized on Churchill’s influence on foreign affairs, however, the British foreign office lacked understating of the Empire. This resulted in inaccurate assumptions being made which paved the way for the Ottoman to join Germany in