When I was
invited to speak to an audience in the highly prestigious
University of Toronto, my first thought was that it has
to be a grand commemorative speech. But then I realized
that in the audience may be people, who may not be too familiar
with the fine points of the Bulgarian history, due to the
fact that they have not received their education in Bulgaria,
or because they simply are not historians. Therefore I decided
to speak in detail about the events leading to the signing
of the treaty of San Stefano on March 3rd, 1878, the signing
of the treaty that unofficially granted Bulgaria its independence
from the Ottoman Empire.
Today many people in Bulgaria are asking the question –
why is the signing of this particular treaty such an important
event in the history of Bulgaria. Why have we chosen this
specific date to be our national day? Why have we not chosen,
for instance September 6th, 1885, the day of the unification
of North and South Bulgaria, or September 22nd, 1908, the
date Prince Ferdinand officially declared the independence
of Bulgaria from the Ottoman Empire?
Since the demise of the second Bulgarian kingdom in 1396
under the relentless expansion of the Ottoman Empire, the
Bulgarian people have endured a long Odyssey, at the end
of which they again became people with their own national
identity and their own country. The first steps on the long
road towards national rediscovery lead from the work of
the Monk Paisii and his “History of the Bulgarian
people”, through the struggle for an independent Bulgarian
church and culminated in the organized political, cultural
and armed struggle for national independence.
March 3rd is celebrated because it is the beginning of the
road leading to the establishment of sovereign Bulgarian
state.
In the mid-nineteenth century Bulgarian national movement
is faced with two possibilities. The first is the achievement
of independence, by legal means and reforms, through the
continuous expansion, of the political autonomy of Bulgaria
within the framework of the Ottoman Empire. In this scenario,
the use of violence and unnecessary bloodshed is avoided,
and at the same time the integrity of the Bulgarian ethnic
territories is guaranteed. Unfortunately, this also means
that the date of achieving independence can be delayed indefinitely.
The other course of action relies on massive armed rebellion,
the aftermath of which would bring a political solution
to the Bulgarian Question. It has one important drawback
– the plan does not guarantee the integrity of the
Bulgarian ethnic territories, as the final phase does require
intervention of the Great Powers. In essence, the fate of
Bulgaria depends on their good will, and even more important,
on their regional interests. This radical approach means
also fighting and countless casualties, but makes the goal
of liberation tangible.
For the Bulgarian society, longing for freedom, these arguments
are not a deterrent to choosing the second option. In 1876,
the April rebellion erupts. It is defeated in blood, but
it achieves the expected political effect. The lives of
30 000 people are the price the Bulgarian people pay for
the attention of the world to be focused on the events occurring
in Bulgaria during April and May of 1876. The brightest
minds of the time voice their support of the Bulgarian cause
– Victor Hugo, Charles Darwin, Oscar Wilde, Leo Tolstoy,
Dostoyevski etc. This provided Russia with a pretext to
declare war on Ottoman Empire on April 24, 1877.
In the course of two centuries - 18th and 19th, the Russian
tzars fight thirteen wars with Turkey, which have one thing
in common – they are governed by the goal of gaining
control of the Balkans and the straights between Europe
and Asia Minor. For the Russian monarchs, the road for establishing
Russia as world power always leads through the Bosporus
and the Dardanelle’s, toward the Aegean and Mediterranean
seas, and the Oceans. For this purpose, they systematically
build the reputation of Russia as guardian and defender
of the Balkan’s Christians and all Slavs within the
Ottoman Empire. The influence Russia is gaining grows in
proportion to the trust of the people of the Balkans in
its mission of liberation.
The thirteenth, “our” war, between Russia and
the Ottoman Empire, is different from its predecessors.
It is not motivated by the previous policy of expansion
by force and Russian diplomats make real efforts to avoid
it.
Our interests – writes the Russian Prime Minister
Gorchakov – in this particular moment ask for the
preservation, not the break up of the Ottoman Empire. We
will do all we can to help the Christian people of the Balkans,
through political pressure of the Supreme Porte, but will
not, in any instance, approve off, nor tolerate any uprisings
against their rightful ruler – the Sultan”
But in 1876, not only Bulgaria, but also Bosnia and Herzegovina
are engulfed in the flames of rebellion. In defense of the
people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Kingdom of Serbia
and Montenegro declares war on the Ottoman Empire. The Eastern
Crisis erupts again with new strength. The Russian diplomacy
undertakes very active steps to defuse the situation. The
result is an Ambassadorial conference in Istanbul in the
beginning of 1877 and the signing of the London Accord,
which the Sultan categorically refuses to accept.
This put Russia in real danger of permanently loosing its
credibility in front of the Balkan’s Christians, if
it fails to act in this very critical moment. The price
of inaction and passive disinterest would be the loss of
the powerful position it has gained through its many military
campaigns against the Turks. This could be clearly seen
in the words of the War Minister Milyutin in a special memo
to Tsar Alexander II:
”The outcome of the Istanbul conference, clearly indicates
that multilateral influence of Europe over Turkey is out
of the question. The passive agreement of the European powers
sacrifices the fate of the Balkan Christians. But we should
not hide from ourselves the importance and the danger of
such course of action. The impotence of combined European
efforts can only encourage Turkey, and turn this weak state
in great weapon against our interests. We can not tolerate
the constant humiliation of our pride and the erosion of
our material interests, until the last trace of influence
we have in the Balkans is gone.”
After stormy debates in the Imperial Council, the arguments
of Milyutin finally win, and on April 12, 1877, Russia declares
war on Turkey.
In only 8 months the Russian forces manage to drive the
Turks from all Bulgarian territories and reach Constantinople.
On the memorable for all Bulgarians date of March 3rd, 1878,
in the small village of San Stefano, 12 kilometers from
Istanbul, the peace treaty between Russia, and its allies
– Rumania and Serbia and Montenegro, and Turkey, is
signed. Points 6 through 11 in this treaty cover the agreements
related to the solution of the Bulgarian Question. Bulgaria
is to be a vassal princedom, which pays tribute (taxes)
to the Sultan. The principality must have a Christian as
a ruler and its own military. The borders are identical
with the borders of the Bulgarian Exarchate, which are established
by Sultan’s Ferman from 1870, when the Exarchate achieved
its independence. These borders include Northern Bulgaria
(Misia) without North Dobrudja, which is given to Rumania,
the whole of Trace, without the regions of Gumurdjina and
Edrine, and Macedonia without the city of Thessalonica,
and the Mount Athon Peninsula.
In the end, all this remains only on paper. Shortly before
the signing of the treaty, the Russian Ambassador in Constantinople,
Count Ignatiev, who single-handedly drafted the treaty documents,
receives secret encoded telegram from the Prime Minister,
Gorchakov, instructing him that the treaty has to have “simple
preliminary” character:
“There would always be rift between me and Gorchakov.
– writes in his diary Ignatiev – While I was
waging political war for the liberation of all Slavs from
Ottoman yoke, in San Petersburg Slavic lands were carelessly
given away to Austria… Gorchakov was against the San
Stefano peace treaty…. It seams that his ideas were
reflecting the ideas of Great Britain, not ours. He ordered
me, with special instructions, to give the San Stefano peace
treaty preliminary character, because Austria had objections
against the treaty and planed to organize Pan European Conference
for finding a final solution of the Balkan Question “
The obvious conclusion is that the high level dealings of
Russian diplomacy, including information about secret arrangements
with Austro-Hungary and promises to Great Britain, which
could not be broken, were not for the ears of such small
pawns in the Great Game, as Ambassadors.
Even the best Russian diplomat at the Time, Count Shuvalov,
Ambassador to London, did not know the whole truth. On one
hand, he did know about the fact that Russia has agreed
in advance to split Bulgaria in two parts. On other, that
the San Stefano Peace treaty was nothing but a diplomatic
bluff, was unknown to him. He writes:
“The Peace treaty of San Stefano is a catastrophe
for us… It is the biggest misunderstanding, which
we could create. Now we would be forced, in front of the
eyes of whole of Europe, to retreat from our positions.”
In fact, the San Stefano Peace Treaty is not a misunderstanding.
It is a tactical move by the Imperial government. In a memorable
letter to the Emperor (only recently discovered in the personal
archives of his wife), written just before the Berlin Congress,
Prime Minister Gorchakov writes:
“The internal weakness of the states does not give
us grounds to believe that we can defend by force the conquests
of the war. From the very beginning I was looking on the
preliminary treaty with the Turks as a useful tactical step,
which corresponds with the Russian strategy on the Eastern
Question. Through this step, Russia once again demonstrates
its good will towards the Balkan peoples, and specifically,
in this case, towards the Bulgarians, and reinforces our
image of the defender of their interests. Through this we
will preserve our reputation as their benefactor and defender.
As far as the inevitable failure of the treaty, under the
pressure of the other great powers, is concerned, this will
be beneficiary for us, as the influence of the others on
the Balkans will be eroded while ours is increased.”
With the signing of the treaty of San Stefano, the Russian
government achieves the objective set by the war. Tough
and very risky, but victorious nevertheless, the war of
1877-1878 brings the highly publicized Peace Treaty of March
3rd. Russia gives abundant proof to the Bulgarian people
of its good intentions and this is received with deep and
sincere gratitude. There is no foreseeable way for the people
of Bulgaria to know that the treaty they believed in is
just a preliminary and temporary document, destined to be
revised. The truth is deeply hidden by the intrigues of
the high diplomacy. It is just a matter of time before the
truth about the revision becomes known, but in the eyes
of the Bulgarian people, all unfavorable outcomes are due
to the interference of the Great Powers. Their anger and
frustrations are targeted towards the adversaries of Russia
– Great Britain and Austro-Hungary, while the Russian
influence gains permanent hold in their collective consciousness.
The infamous, in the eyes of all Bulgarians, Berlin Congress
begins its proceedings on June 13th, 1878. Among the participants
are Russia, Great Britain, Austro-Hungary, France, Germany
and Turkey. (The Delegations are headed respectively by
Prime Minister Gorchakov, Lord Benjamin Disraeli Earl of
Beaconfield, Count Andrashi, the Foreign Minister of France,
Wadington, Councilor Bismarck, and representing Turkey –
two pashas.)
The Berlin treaty, signed by all the dignitaries, defines
the new geopolitical reality in the Balkans and establishes
the Bulgarian borders. The Bulgarian lands are divided into
three parts. Princedom of Bulgaria, the autonomous territory
of East Roumelia and the province of Macedonia, which is
returned to the Ottoman Empire.
The outcome of the Berlin Congress is a shock to all Bulgarians,
but looking back in time with all the facts available to
us, the outcome should not surprise us. The problems in
the Balkans have never been solved with the interest of
the Balkan peoples in mind. In retrospect, the Berlin treaty
is not much different from the countless other diplomatic
treaties, so characteristic of the Great Game played at
the time. The Serbs, after two decades of armed struggle,
gain an independent state, encompassing no more than one
third of their ethnic territory. From 1821 to 1828, Greece
is engaged in a bloody war of independence with the Turks
and, in the end, only gains Attica and Peloponess as state
territories, again only a third of their ethnic boundaries.
Romania started its decades long struggle for independence
at the time of the Greek revolt of 1821 and was not involved
in armed conflicts. Vlahia and Moldova are united in an
independent state after the Crimean war, and their territory
only covers half the Rumanian ethnic boundaries.
The Bulgarians are no exception. They even gain more than
can be expected. The borders of the Principality of Bulgaria
and Eastern Roumelia incorporate close to two thirds of
all Bulgarians. The two parts have different level of autonomy,
but in 1885 they manage to unite into one state.
The San Stefano Peace treaty, which we celebrate, even if
short lived, has its significance.
For the Bulgarians, March 3rd is a symbol of one beginning.
On this date the first political step towards a sovereign
Bulgarian State has been taken. Step, for which countless
Bulgarian sons and daughters have sacrificed their lives.
This day proved to the Bulgarian people that the sacrifices
of the April uprising two years earlier were not in vain.
This day proved that the lives of the 15 000 volunteers
in the liberation war, were not sacrificed in vain. This
lead to the Treaty of San Stefano, finally did tore down
the wall that separated Bulgaria from Europe. The Treaty
was the beginning of the third Bulgarian state, the state
which history has fated to be on the crossroads between
the West and the East, between Europe and Asia, and the
crossroads where the interests of the great powers met and
intertwine through history.
Dr. Zara Kostova, PhD
Specialist
in History of the Ottoman Empire;
Author, Rulers of the Ottoman Empire, 2002;
Editor, Studia in Honorem Professoris Verae Mutafchieva,
2000;
Editor, Macedonian Question, 2002;
Dr. Kostova has also numerous publications on the history
of the Middle East and the Balkans
Toronto, tel.: 647.438.9420
March,
2005
|
