How the Turks Duped the Germans

Chapter 6 in David Fromkin's book A Peace to End All Peace contains a fascinating, though somewhat speculative, account of how, in the days leading up to WW1, Ottoman Turk leaders Enver and Talaat duped the Germans into signing a treaty promising protection for the Turks in the event of military threats to Ottoman territory. Enver and Talaat were aware on August 1, 1914 when they signed the treaty with the Germans that Churchill had made the decision to commandeer two Dreadnought warships that were being built in British shipyards for delivery to the Ottomans. Churchill made the decision in spite of the refusal of the British cabinet to allow it, basically gearing up for their use in the event that war would break out with the Germans. At the time, the British had only 7 more Dreadnought warships than the Germans, so such action was a significant lift to the British. The decision was made on July 29 by Churchill to prevent one of the warships from setting sail, and on July 31 the Cabinet relented and accepted Churchill's view that seizure was necessary for the possible war effort.

The two key points are that, one, Churchill was essentially breaking the law in the service of preparing the British for war, and the Turks knew it, and two, the Turks did not tell the German ambassador, who was under instructions to sign a treaty providing military support for the Turks only if the Germans got something in return. The argument, supported by archival research, is that Enver and Talaat promised to deliver the warship Sultan Osman to the Germans, even though Enver and Talaat knew two days before that Churchill had commandeered the warship. According to British intelligence, the Germans eagerly awaited its arrival until it became clear some two weeks later that the British commandeered the warship. The Germans never learned that Enver and Talaat had duped them.

This story provides a great example of how geopolitical gamesmanship is a high-stakes arena in which all sorts of duplicitous games are being played in the service of national interests, and that yes, sometimes law and national security conflict and some of the greatest leaders in history have had to make a choice between the two and came out on the side of national security.