Views
59
Downloands
14
Mısır’ın önce 1798’de Fransızlar tarafından, ardından 1882’de İngiltere tarafından işgal edilmesi, Mısır meselesini Osmanlı diplomasisinin temel problemlerinden biri hâline getirmiştir. II. Meşrutiyetin ilanı ve İttihat ve Terakki hükûmetlerinin idaresi ile birlikte Osmanlı üst-kimliği altında Türk ve Arap halkları arasındaki ilişkiler yeniden şekillenirken Bâbıâli ile Kahire arasındaki ilişkiler de yeni bir biçim kazanmıştır. İngilizlerin Mısır’ı Hilafet için İstanbul’a alternatif bir merkez olarak düşündüğüne yönelik iddialar da ilişkilerin seyrini etkileyen ve kimi zaman gerilimli seyretmesine neden olan unsurlar arasında zikredilmektedir. I. Dünya Savaşı’nın başladığı dönemde Türk kamuoyunun dikkati yeniden Mısır’a yönelmiş, İslâmcı mecmualarda Mısır’ın yakın tarihi ve Osmanlı Devleti için taşıdığı ehemmiyete ilişkin yoğun bir yazım faaliyeti dikkat çekmeye başlamıştır. Bilhassa Sebîlürreşâd/Sırât-ı Müstakîm, Hikmet, Teârüf-i Müslimîn ve Beyânülhak mecmuaları Mısır’daki gelişmelerle yakından ilgilenmiş, gerek haberler gerekse makaleler ve yazı dizileri ile Mısır meselesini gündemde tutmaya çalışmışlardır. Sebîlürreşâd’da Ömer Rıza Doğrul, Tâhirülmevlevî ve Abdülganî Saîd; Teârüf-i Müslimîn’de Sâmizâde Süreyya Mısır izlenimlerini yerinden aktardıkları yazılarında, İngiltere’nin ilhakına rağmen Mısır’ın hala Osmanlı Devleti’nin bir parçası olduğu fikrini işlemeye çalışmışlardır. Mecmualarda ayrıca Mısır’ın İslâm medeniyetinde çok önemli ve ayrıcalıklı bir konuma sahip bulunduğu, İngilizlerin Mısır’ı işgal etmekle Müslümanların birliği ve dirliğine de kastetmiş olduğu yorumları yapılmıştır. Bununla birlikte, I. Dünya Savaşı’na gelindiğinde Mısır’ın resmen Osmanlı Devleti’nin elinden çıkmasıyla, II. Meşrutiyet’in İslâmcı aydınlarının yüzleşmeye çalıştığı bu kriz nispeten nihayete ermiş, Mısır Osmanlı kimliğinden ziyade İslâm birliğinin manevi çatısı altında düşünülmeye başlamıştır. Bu kanının oluşmasında, Osmanlı Devleti’nin kendi içinde geçirdiği dönüşüm ile Anadolu’da devam eden Kurtuluş Savaşı’nın doğurduğu yeni şartlar da etkili olmuş görünmektedir. İstanbul basını ile Mısır basınının birbirlerini yakından takip ettikleri II. Meşrutiyet döneminde İslâmcı mecmuaların yazarları Mısır’daki çeşitli basın organlarına yönelik kanaatlerini de okuyucuları ile paylaşmışlardır. Bu meyanda el-Mukattam İngiliz çıkarlarına hizmet etmekle, el-Ehrâm Mısır’ın meselelerini ele alırken Fransız bakış açısını kullanmakla itham edilirken el-Livâ ve eş-Şa‘b gibi muhafazakâr vatanperver çizgideki gazetelerin İngiliz işgali karşıtı tavrı sıkça övülmüştür. İslâmcı mecmuaların Mısır’da muhafazakâr vatanperver kanadı temsil eden Mustafa Kâmil liderliğindeki Vatancılar (Hizbü’l-Vatanî) grubuna yaklaşımı da son derece müspet olmuştur. Hatta bu mecmualardaki yazarların Mısır siyasi sahnesinde yer alan bütün aktörler arasında Mustafa Kâmil’e ve Vatancılar’a duydukları sempati ve verdikleri destek çeşitli vesilelerle sık sık dile getirilen bir husus olmuştur. Bununla birlikte partinin Mustafa Kâmil’den sonraki genel başkanı Muhammed Ferîd, selefi kadar etkili bir liderlik yapamamakla ne Mısır Hidivi’ne ne de İngilizlere karşı etkili bir siyaset geliştirebilmiş olmakla eleştirilmiştir. Zira bu dönemde Mısır’daki milliyetçi eğilimler iki ana fikir etrafında toplanıyordu. Bunlardan Hizbü’l-Ümme grubu, İngiliz işgaline karşı daha ılımlı olan ve işgalin müzakereler yoluyla ve ancak anayasal monarşi modelinin sağlıklı bir şekilde işlemesi temin edildikten sonra sona ermesi gerektiğini savunuyor, buna karşılık Vatancılar İngiltere’nin Mısır’dan derhal çıkmasını istiyor ve bunun için sert bir söylem benimsiyorlardı. I. Dünya Savaşı boyunca Mısır’ın yeniden Osmanlı Devleti topraklarına bağlanacağını düşünen ve İngiltere’ye duydukları antipatiyi her fırsatta açığa vuran İslâmcı yazarlar içinse İngilizler ile müzakere masasına oturmak ve onların Mısır’dan kendi istekleri ile çıkmalarını beklemek, hem devletin hem de Mısır halkının çıkarlarına açıkça ihanet etmek demekti. İslâmcı basın bu sebeple Muhammed Ferîd’in selefine göre tonu daha yumuşak olan retoriğini zafiyet olarak niteleyerek eleştirmiştir.
The occupation of Egypt first by the French in 1798 and then by Britain in 1882 made the issue of Egypt one of the main problems of Ottoman diplomacy. and II. With the proclamation of legitimacy and the administration of the Alliance and the Terakki governments, the relations between the Turkish and Arab peoples under the Ottoman superiority are re-formed, while the relations between the Bahá’u’lláh and Cairo have also gained a new form. The claims that the British consider Egypt as an alternative center to Istanbul for Hilafet are also mentioned among the elements that influence the course of relationships and sometimes cause it to look tensively. and I. At the time of the World War began, the attention of the Turkish public turned to Egypt again, and the intense writing activity in the Islamic mosquitoes about the near history of Egypt and the importance it carried for the Ottoman State began to draw attention. In the words of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). On the other hand, it is important to note that, in the case of a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, a non-governmental system, and a non-governmental system. The Mecca also commented that Egypt has a very important and privileged position in the Islamic civilization, and that the British intended the unity and resurrection of the Muslims by occupying Egypt. However, when it comes to the First World War, with Egypt officially leaving the hands of the Ottoman State, II. This crisis, with which the Islamic lights of the legitimacy are trying to face, has been relatively ended, and the Egyptian Ottoman identity has begun to be thought under the spiritual roof of the Islamic union. In the formation of this blood, the transformation that the Ottoman State has experienced within itself and the new conditions that the continuing Liberation War in Anatolia has also appeared to have been effective. The Egyptian press and the Istanbul press followed each other closely. During the legacy period, the authors of the Islamic Mecca also shared their queries to various media bodies in Egypt with their readers. Al-Mukattam is accused of serving the British interests, using the French perspective while addressing the issues of al-Ehram in Egypt, while the anti-English occupation attitude of the conservative nationalist journals such as al-Liva and al-Sha'b is often praised. The approach of the Islamic mosquitoes to the group of Patriots (Hizbü'l-Vatanî) led by Mustafa Kamil, who represented the conservative patriotic wing in Egypt, was also extremely prominent. Even among all the actors in the Egyptian political scene, the sympathy and support they gave to Mustafa Kamil and the Patriots was a matter that was frequently expressed in various occasions. However, the party's general president after Mustafa Kamil, Mohammed Ferid, was criticized by not being able to make an effective leadership as his predecessor, nor by developing an effective policy against the Egyptian Hiddivi nor the British. In this period, the nationalist tendencies in Egypt gathered around two main ideas. Of these, the Hezbollah-Umme group argued that it was more moderate against the British occupation and that the occupation should be ended through negotiations and only after the guaranteed healthy processing of the constitutional monarchy model, in turn the Patriots wanted Britain to immediately leave Egypt, and they had adopted a hard speech for that. For Islamic writers who thought that Egypt will be re-connected to the Ottoman State throughout the First World War and who revealed the antipaty they heard to England at every occasion, to sit on the negotiating table with the British and wait for them to leave Egypt with their own desires, it was to openly betray the interests of both the state and the Egyptian people. The Islamic press, therefore, criticized Muhammad Ferid's predecessor's rhetoric, which is more soft than the tone, as weakness.
The Egyptian Question was one of the main problems of Ottoman diplomacy during the 19th century as Egypt had been occupied first by the French in 1798 and then by the British in 1882. While the Turkish-Arab relations were being reshaped under the “Ottoman supra-identity” following the re-proclamation of the Constitution in 1908 and the administration of CUP governments, the relations between Cairo and the Porte were also reshaped. Claims that the British thought of Egypt as an alternative center for the Islamic Caliphate also influenced the course of these relations. At the very beginning of WWI, the attention of the Turkish public was turned back to Egypt, and it was noteworthy that an intense writing activity regarding Egypt’s recent history and the significance of the land within the Islamic tradition made its commencement. In particular, the journals such as Sabîl al-Raşād, Islām, Mahfil, Ta‘âruf-i Muslimîn, and Bayān al-hak have been observed to closely have been interested in the developments in Egypt and to have tried to stay in tune with the latest news by publishing articles and series about Egyptian political life. Ömer Rıza Doğrul, Tāhir al-Mawlawī and Abd al-Ghanī Saīd in Sabîl al-Raşād and Sâmizâda Surayya in Ta‘âruf-i Müslimîn, depicted their impressions of Egypt in their writings and through these meticulously promoted the thought that Egypt was still a part of the Ottoman sovereignty. Many Islamist journals of the era also advocated the idea that Egypt is a very important part of Islamic culture, commenting that the British had also aimed at ruining the unity and commitment of the universal Muslim body by invading Egypt. In the years following the Second Constitutional Era, the press organs both in Istanbul and Egypt took a close interest in each other. The authors of the Islamist journals shared their opinions about various media outlets published in Egypt with their audience until the late 1920s when the secular transformation of the young Turkish Republic began to take place. The prominent Egyptian newspaper al-Muqaṭṭam was accused of serving British interests and al-Ahrām of approaching Egypt’s affairs from a perspective which traditionally belonged to the French, while the anti-British stance of conservative patriotic newspapers such as al-Liwāʾ and al-Šaʿb was highly praised. The Islamist magazines’ approach to al-Ḥizb al-Waṭanī group led by Muṣtafā Kāmil, who represented the conservative patriotic wing in Egypt, was also extremely positive. However, Muhammad Farīd, the leader of the group after Muṣtafā Kāmil, was criticized for not being able to lead the patriotic sentiments as effectively as his predecessor and of being unable to develop an effective policy against neither the Khedive nor the British. Egypt was one of the urgent issues of Islamist press once again during the occupation of Tripoli by Italy. Topics discussed were the reaction made by the Egyptians to the occupation, the aid activities they initiated, the efforts they made to show their solidarity, and how the Ottoman efforts of intervening in the occupation resonated in Egypt. During the years of WWI, Egypt was on the front pages of these journals due to the effects of the proclamation of Cihâd-ı akbar and the predictions on how the British patronage of Egypt would affect the fate of the war. When the war was finally over, and the defeat was accepted, it became clear that Egypt was completely lost. Afterward, Egypt was rather regarded as a part of the Islamic spiritual union just like the other Muslim communities and states outside of Istanbul’s direct political influence, and this interest took place only in the news compilations that generally conveyed the news of these Muslim communities to the Turkish audience. This study aims to evaluate the Turkish Islamists’ perspective on the British occupation and the Egyptian identity by examining the news and articles related to Egypt in the Turkish Islamist press beginning from the Second Constitutional Era until the proclamation of the Turkish Republic.
Journal Type : Uluslararası
Article Detail 
Similar Articles
Download PDF
Journal Information
Listen Paper
Cite
Print This Page
Share
Mendeley
