PDA

View Full Version : How the Goeben and the Breslau changed world history.


herakles
06-01-2008, 03:21
These two German ships comprised the German Mediterranean fleet in 1914, commanded by Rear Admiral Souchon.

Initially their task was to harass French troop ships that were carrying troops from Algeria to France.

At the time, WW1 had not started so Churchill commanded Admiral Milne - commander of the British Mediterranean fleet, to shadow these two ships.

The Mediterranean Fleet, based at Malta, comprised three fast, modern battle cruisers, HMS Inflexible, Indefatigable and Indomitable, as well as four armoured cruisers, four light cruisers and a flotilla of 14 destroyers.

Initially Milne disobeyed these orders. It wasn't until hostilities broke out that the two German ships were at last shadowed.

By having to respect Italian neutrality at the time, the British ships had to stay out of Messina where the German ships were bunkering.

The British expected the German ships to then sail east to attack the French. Instead they went west, shadowed only by the heavily out-gunned Gloucester. Milne had the fleet sail east having been sent an incorrect message from the Admiralty that Britain had declared war on Austria. At the time, the Austrian navy was considerable. Only some time later was it realised this was not happening so at last the Fleet was sent to find the Germans in the west.

In the meantime, the Goeben and Breslau reached the Dardanelles and awaited permission to enter. The German government put great pressure on the Turks - then neutral - to allow their passage and to attack any British ships that followed. Pascha, the Turkish Minister of war agreed to this, thus infuriating the Russians as the Dardanelles was its only all weather shipping route. And thereby causing Turkey to declare itself an ally of the Germans.

The Goeben and Breslau reached Constantinople and were handed over to the Turks, which meant that the German crews donned fez's and hoisted new colours.

At the time. the Turks were bitterly angry with Britain as at the outbreak of war with Germany two ships ordered by them, the Sultan Osman and the Reshadieh were confiscated without compensation. (and later became HMS Agincourt and HMS Erin.) These two ships had been paid for by public contribution. Even the children in schools had raised money for their purchase. Previously the Turks had purchased 40 ships from the British as the Turkish navy was strongly pro-British. At the time Turkey was neutral.

When the British and French fleets eventually attacked the Turks in the Dardanelles, the two German ships remained at Constantinople. They weren't needed as the combined fleet was heavily defeated on March 18th 1915. It's interesting to reflect what might have happened had they moved out to attack. They were well equipped and Roebuck the British fleet commander, kept plenty of reserves in hand in case they did. This defeat caused the ill-fated landing on the Gallipoli peninsula to happen.

Later that year, the Goeben and Breslau did attack Russian ports in the Black Sea, causing Russia to declare war on Turkey.

Consequences:

1. The British commanders were heavily censured and one court-martialled for failing to engage the German ships.

2. Forcing Turkey to ally itself with Germany opened up several new fronts, notably Gallipoli, Palestine and Iraq. Without these war zones to have to cope with, it's possible the war in France could have been concluded in 1916. Thus the Battle of the Somme and the USA changing its neutral stance might never have occurred.

3. When Turkey eventually collapsed, the European powers were able to carve up the Ottoman Empire. It was at this time that Palestine, Iraq and Iran were created and the first thoughts given to the creation of a Jewish state.

4. With the all weather passage denied the Russians, their economy suffered greatly and their war effort was severely hampered. It was one of the critical factors that brought about the Russian revolution.

Cancelling the ship building contract, made the decision for Turkey to ally itself with Germany much easier. This in turn created some if not all of the major problems facing the world today.

(I am indebted to an article in Wikipedia for this thread)

The Sailor
06-01-2008, 03:56
Good one Richard. A new topic too.

In 1914, the main concern of the Turkish Navy was maintaining a balance of power with the Greeks with whom relations were very tense. Both countries were attempting to enlarge their navies and Turkish orders included two British dreadnoughts, two scout cruisers and four destroyers, none of which were delivered. In fact the non-delivery of the two completed dreadnoughts did much to bring Turkey into the war on Germany’s side in November 1914.

What a complete political fiasco the whole Turkish situation was from start to finish. Totally mismanaged by a seemingly incompetent British diplomatic corps.

Admiral Wilhelm Souchon (1864-1946) [pictured below] was the German commander who fired the first naval shots of the First World War and also unveiled the Ottoman Empire's entry into the war.

Commander of the German navy's Mediterranean squadron when war broke out in August 1914, Souchon opened the war when he fired upon two French Algerian ports on 4 August 1914.

herakles
06-01-2008, 04:37
The Greek situation was most complex. Mainly because the Greek PM was very pro-British whereas the Greek Royal family were pro-German. And the Royal family were not titular heads.

The Greek PM was keen to send Greek troops to Gallipoli but was denied this, causing his resignation.

herakles
07-01-2008, 00:39
I really can't understand how it is that 17 people read this thread yet only 1 person was able to make any sort of comment.

You are allowed to!

:confused:

HMS DARLASTON
05-08-2008, 19:15
I think it was tragic that the Germans were inwilling to preserve Goeben when the Turks wanted rid of her.

designeraccd
05-08-2008, 20:12
There is a case to be made that the Goeben was THE most influential warship ever built given the consequences that came from her arrival in Turkey. Indeed a tragic shame she wasn't preserved. DFO :(

Harley
06-08-2008, 03:34
It is misleading that the British seized "Reshadiah" and "Sultan Osman" without offering compensation. Churchill wrote personally to the Turkish grand vizier (Said Halim Paşa) with Asquith's approval offering a vast amount of money per day for every day the Sultan Osman at any rate remained in British hands (1,000 pounds sterling a day if memory serves). The pro-German influence in Constantinople was such that the offer went unanswered. Said Halim was sympathetic to the British cause but the "Young Turks" of the Committee for Union and Progress were blatantly not.

Simon

herakles
06-08-2008, 03:43
Interesting Simon. I didn't know of this aspect of the sad and sorry business.

I have often considered the way things might of happened with the Turks. Clearly they were split between the Germans and the British but of course the Germans won the day.

I'm not sure the British were as active there as they might have been. Perhaps if they had been ... ... ...

Harley
06-08-2008, 04:23
There were so many, many variables involved it's quite ludicrous. Being a Conservative I quite happily blame the Liberal Asquith government for the mess. Some of today's government's could learn from the Asquith ministry's reconciling of sending naval missions to BOTH Greece and Turkey (somewhat analogous say to Britain sending MoD hawkers to Syria and Israel).

My somewhat cursory reading of things picked up over the years (i.e. I haven't read "The Ship that Changed the World" nor do I intend to) I get the feeling Milne and Troubridge were put in impossible positions and it's ludicrous to say a Nelson or a Hawke would have done any different.

One of these days when I get the time I'll have to read Miller's "Superior Force" and other works to get a grounding of the murky Greek aspect of things.

Simon

herakles
06-08-2008, 05:55
There was certainly benefits to be gained having Greece on-side. Their PM was keen and determined Greek forces would take Constantinople if possible. No-one was to know that the King would be so opposed.

And the Naval Turks were very British oriented. With further support perhaps things might have changed.

One can't say too many positive things about Asquith though I feel.

Harley
08-08-2008, 20:29
Reading through Martin Gilbert's life of Churchill, one can't help but get the feeling that Enver Pasha, the Turkish minister of war was determined to go to war on the German side no matter the cost nor the opinion of his colleagues on the governing committee of the Ottoman Empire.

It is interesting that apparently Germany and Turkey signed a secret pact on 4 August, before the escape of Goeben and Breslau, which led to the sham purchase of the two ships when they reached Constantinople and the stirring of the hornets' nest caused by seizing the battleships in Britain.

So far Gilbert's picture of Churchill hasn't altered my view of him, i.e. brilliant but prone to protracted bouts of stupidity. What surprises me is the way his cabinet colleagues treated him, in light of their own hardly auspicious behaviour. Asquith comes across very poorly, and I'm still appalled by the manner in which seemingly every cabinet minute found its way into his letters to Venetia Stanley (later Montagu). Foreign Secretary Edward Grey refused to send a clear message to the Turks by having Admiral Limpus, head of the Naval Mission to Turkey, sent back home instead of being given command of the Eastern Mediterranean Squadron as Churchill and the Board of Admiralty wanted. Limpus was well-known to the Turks and his presence might have had some effect in quelling the Ottoman Empire's slide into war.

When Churchill finally resigned as a government minister in late 1915 he gave a customary farewell speech to the House of Commons. In it he essentially complained that had the Sea Lords disagreed with him he would not have tried to force the Straits and take the Dardanelles, glossing over Fisher's repeated stated misgivings and his attempts to resign over Admiralty policy. Gilbert thoughtfully reproduces a letter in Asquith's handwriting to Fisher, succinctly worded; "In the name of the King I order you to return to your post. H.H. Asquith."

All very interesting...

Simon

herakles
08-08-2008, 23:48
Several points to reflect on Simon. Like you, I find this entire matter very muddy.

I must agree with your thoughts re Churchill. A flawed genius. There always seems to be the influence of his father in the wings.

German involvement in the region was massive. I feel the building of the train line somehow doesn't get the prominence it deserves. It's often overlooked just how well the Turks were armed with German munitions at Gallipoli. So different to our forces, making grenades out of jam tins.

There's no doubt that Pasha had considerable opposition to his plans yet he won through. How much of his behaviour is an over reaction to the Sultan's ways?

Then there's Fisher. Another utterly dogmatic man who, unlike Churchill, had experience to draw on. Those two were destined to clash. His desire to fall on his sword was irrational if not brave behaviour.

Edward Grey. I haven't been able to read much on him yet I can see that he was hugely influential - even beyond the dictates of his position. I'd like to better understand Grey. One can sense his presence in many areas.

Finally, there's Kitchener, sitting darkly brooding whilst everyone awaits his solutions.