Part:3 Macedonian Reforms and the Escalation of the Turmoil

The Christians in Macedonia expressed their satisfaction with the Murzsteg Scheme, except for the Bulgarians, who were disappointed because they had hoped for at least an autonomous Macedonia with a Christian Governor General. But the Macedonian Greeks and Serbs, though satisfied, did not relent in their activities, partly in order to extend their sphere of influence in the provinces and partly to prevent Bulgarian expansionism in the region. In the Macedonian lands, the authorities were more tolerant of the activities of the Greek, Serb or Vlach groups and their propaganda organs than of their Bulgarian counterparts. Ottoman officials genuinely thought Europeans were sympathetic to the Bulgarian cause in the provinces and they also believed that dividing the Christian races was one of the means to fight back. For a similar reason, the Sultan issued in September 1903 for the Serbs and in May 1905 for the Vlachs, respectively, irades to be recognized as separate communities in the Ottoman Empire.

After the failure of the Ilinden Uprising, the Bulgarian movement lost many of its supporters in Macedonia and the popularity of the Exarch and Exarchist clergy and teachers also declined. This was mainly due to the methods of the Ottoman officials, but also the Exarchist civilians were losing faith in the movement. Hilmi Pasha did not permit Patriarchates to convert to the Exarchate and even issued orders to close down some of the Exarchist churches and schools. He stated that only when rebellious activities ceased would transfer to the Exarchate be allowed. On the other hand, Exarchists who applied to convert to the Patriarchate or Catholicism never faced any obstructions. As the situation for the Bulgarian elements deteriorated further, the Exarch appealed to the Grand Vizier, stating that Bulgarians were constantly being killed by Greeks, forced conversions to the Patriarchate were taking place and Exarchist teachers and bishops were being sent into exile. According to the Exarch, Ottoman and Greek officials were co-operating to suppress the Bulgarian race and only through the intervention of high officials in Constantinople could this situation be improved. On the other hand, the Exarch knew that the activities of the Bulgarian rebel bands were much to blame for the unfortunate conditions of the innocent Exarchist civilians in Macedonia and it was very unlikely that his demands would be given any consideration.In the meantime, there was an increase in mutual aggression between the Muslims and Bulgarians in Macedonia as well as in Bulgaria and Eastern Rumelia. The Ottoman documents state that it was not only the insurgents but also Bulgarian officers who attacked the Muslim civilians. On the other hand, more and more Muslim rebel groups were forming to fight the Bulgarians. The rumours were that these groups had many supporters among the high-ranking officers of the Ottoman army and the influential local Beys. There were also cases, especially in the kazas of Monastir, of Muslim civilians and soldiers forcing Bulgarian civilians to convert to Islam.

While the Bulgarian movement was in decline and the tension between the Muslims and Bulgarians was escalating, the popularity of the Greek movement was growing in Macedonia. The Greeks increased their activities through the clergy and the professional classes, and also through the Greek consuls, to further their influence over their kinsmen in the Macedonian lands. The Greek movement also had the support of Greek businessmen who wanted to weaken Bulgarian competition. In Salonika, the Bulgarian fighters could not be successful against the Greek fighters, mainly due to the economic and cultural advantage of the Greeks in Salonika and along the coast. In addition, some prominent members of the Greek movement, such as Doctor Zannas, were very close to Ottoman officials, notably the governor of Salonika, Hasan Fehmi. Zannas's close relations with the Ottoman authorities enabled him to play a prominent role as an informant, passing information to Greek officials. Greeks and Muslims also carried out intelligence work against the Bulgarians, and Ottoman officials were even in touch with some members of the Greek Hellenist movement to obtain information about the Bulgarian rebels. They were usually professionals or members of the clergy who believed that it was difficult to deal with the Bulgarians alone and therefore co-operated with the Ottoman officials. Obviously, this collaboration played a significant role in the increase of Greek activities.

In the meantime, the Serbs and the Vlachs also stepped up their activities. The Serbian activities were mainly directed against the Exarchists in Monastir and the Muslim Albanians in Kossova. The Serbs were always opposed to the idea of an autonomous Macedonia and they wanted the provinces to be divided between Montenegro, Bulgaria and Serbia after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. On the other hand, the Vlachs only wished to be recognized as a separate community and use their language in their schools and religious practices. They never wanted to separate from the Ottoman Empire or establish their own church. The Greeks, especially the Patriarch, opposed the Vlachian demands because they threatened to weaken the Greek element. The Exarchists, on the other hand, accepted the Vlach community, and the Exarch even offered them assistance in the Exarchist church. The Ottoman officials favoured the Vlach cause both because the Vlachs were loyal to the Empire and, more importantly, because recognition of them further split the Christian population and promoted the ends of Ottoman policy in Macedonia.

Among the Muslims, the Albanians in particular were unhappy with the European reforms and resented the fact that the Berlin Treaty left them out of the project. They believed that the Austrian-led scheme would only benefit the Slav races, especially the Serbs, and diminish the powers of the Sultan. The Albanians were particularly dissatisfied with the admission of Christians to the gendarmerie and the police force. Also in Kosovo, where the Austrians were in charge of reorganizing the gendarmerie, there was constant tension between the Muslim Albanians and the reform officers, and demonstrations were mounted by the local Albanians including the Eshraf and the Ulema.Still, the major hostility of the Albanians was directed against the Serbs. The correspondence between the Governor of Kosovo, Mahmud Sevket Pasha, and the Governor General states that there was frequent Serbian emigration to Serbia from the Albanian districts due to the hostile attitude of the Albanian insurgents.In addition, some of the Italian officials residing in the Macedonian provinces were trying to influence prominent Albanian landowners. According to S. Skendi, the Italians were trying to prepare the Albanian-oriented villages for the creation of an autonomous Albania under their leadership. The foreign policy of Austria-Hungary was also similar to that of the Italians. The Austrians tried to encourage Albanian national consciousness and intended the establishment of an independent Albania under the influence of Austria-Hungary. However, the Europeans' favouritism towards Christian Albanians only resulted in increased tension among the community.

In the early years of the reforms, the Albanians co-operated with the Vlachs for autonomous rights in the Ottoman Empire and against the dominance of one of the Balkan states over the Macedonian provinces. In Romania, there were prominent Albanians, such as Ibrahim Temo and Nikolla Nico, who worked for the cause of both communities. Nico especially was very active in the struggle against the Greeks. At the same time, there were some local Albanian uprisings for purely local goals, for example against the increase of the tithe and for the abolition of the newly introduced cattle tax. However, none of these incidents had a direct connection with the formation of the secret Albanian Committee in Monastir. The aim of the Committee was to prepare the Albanians for an armed uprising using similar techniques to those of the guerrilla bands. Their struggle was against Ottoman maladministration and domination, and they demanded privileges similar to those granted to the rest of the communities in the region. Nevertheless, the Albanians never wanted to separate from the Ottoman Empire and always emphasized their loyalty to the Sultan. The Committee was founded by B. Topulli, the director of a high school in Monastir, and quickly spread to other towns and gained many supporters, especially in Kossova. The importance of the Albanian Committee with regard to Macedonian political developments was twofold. First, this Committee co-operated in its early years with Christian revolutionary organizations and contributed to the escalation of the turmoil. Secondly, and more important, was its co-operation with the Young Turk movement in Macedonia and the role it played in the July Revolution. As expected, the reforms, far from bringing any improvement, contributed to the increase of the already existing struggle between different nationalities and religious groups in Macedonia. Furthermore, the presence of Europeans in the provinces diminished the role of the Ottoman administration, another factor that contributed to the escalation of the existing unrest.The Sultan and the Ottoman authorities considered that the origin of both the Macedonian problem and the emergence of the Bulgarian national movement was the establishment of the Exarchate in 1870. They were convinced that the reforms only encouraged Bulgarian insurgents, as the project proved to be protecting them. The Sultan never forgot his worries about the possibility of Macedonia becoming a united province and falling under Bulgaria, as had happened in the case of Eastern Rumelia in 1885. He also believed that the participation of foreigners in the civil and military administration would inevitably threaten his powers as Caliph and Sovereign. His only hope was that the reform officers would be withdrawn once the Ottomans proved that they were capable of implementing the reforms without the Europeans. Therefore, the Ottoman officials and the Sultan developed a tactical policy to please the Great Powers by being as precise as they could in the implementation of the reforms.

In early 1903, the Sultan appointed Ferid Pasha as the new Grand Vizier, mainly because of his background. Ferid Pasha, an Albanian by origin, acquired a good reputation as Governor of Konya through his implementation of reforms in that province. To many, Ferid's appointment was also a concession made by the Sultan to the Albanians who had been excluded from the project. The Sultan hoped a pro-Albanian Grand Vizier could prevent the growth of Albanian opposition to the reforms.

From the start of his appointment, Ferid Pasha adopted the role of the middle man between the administration in Macedonia and the embassies of the Great Powers and tried to convince the Europeans that the Porte was doing its best to implement the project. In the early years of the reforms, Ferid expressed his satisfaction at the improvements in Macedonia, but at the same time he was worried about the increasing popularity of the European officials among the Christians. He therefore continually warned Hilmi Pasha not to obstruct the reforms and to try to gain the trust of the Christians.

In the Macedonian provinces Hilmi Pasha was in full control of the Ottoman administrative machinery. The civilian Ottoman officials had little independent power and were under his control, though his actions were in turn controlled by the Reorganizing General and the two European supervisors. As expected, this situation from the start caused problems between Ottoman and European officials in Macedonia. Nevertheless, in the early years of the reforms, Ottoman and European officials made genuine efforts to improve conditions in the provinces. There was progress in the fields of tax collection, corruption control and the opening of new schools for Muslims as well as Christians, and even improvements in the gendarmerie. Hilmi Pasha encouraged the opening of new schools, especially for the Bulgarians, with instructors appointed from the non-Muslim communities in Constantinople in order to prevent members of the Bulgarian movement coming from the Principality to teach Bulgarian children in Macedonia. In contrast, he closed down many Bulgarian schools which he thought were run by pro-unification Exarchists. In the main, the Ottoman authorities did not obstruct projects such as opening new schools or infrastructural work. But in matters concerning the security of the Empire, such as assigning army recruits to the reformed gendarmerie or providing necessary equipment, they caused delays or cancellations, mainly because they did not want the Europeans to interfere in these issues.

With the increase in budgetary problems, in early 1905 Hilmi Pasha approached the embassies of the Great Powers and suggested that the Ottoman Empire should be allowed to increase custom revenues from 8% to 11% and use the receipts for the Macedonian deficit. Instead the European Powers, at the instigation of Great Britain, decided to form a Financial Commission and demanded further reforms from the Ottoman government. When the Ottoman officials refused to accept the proposals, the Powers, with the exception of Germany, exerted pressure through increased naval threat, under which the Ottoman government had little choice but to accept the establishment of the Financial Commission.

The formation of the Financial Commission and the executive control granted to foreign agents were serious threats to the existence of the Ottoman Empire and the sovereignty of the Sultan. It was not the decisions taken in the Financial Commission but the extending of the Macedonian reforms that made the Ottoman authorities believe that Macedonia had become, in effect, a semi-autonomous province run by international commissions.

Another area of tension created between the Ottoman officials and the Europeans had been the gendarmerie reforms. From the beginning there was tension between the Ottoman forces stationed in the Macedonian provinces and the European-led gendarmerie. After the introduction of the reforms, the Ottoman authorities decided to increase the number of educated officers drawn from the Nizam to serve with the reformed gendarmerie or the Ottoman Army in Macedonia (the Third Army Corps). They thought that as soon as these officers proved their ability, the presence of a large number of foreign officers would not be necessary. Officials believed that if foreign officers were not replaced by Ottomans, national feelings and resentment would eventually be provoked among the various communities, particularly the Muslims. As expected, in Muslim circles the arrival of the foreign officers was looked upon with displeasure and created irritation. They believed that the foreigners should not have any right to command Ottoman soldiers and interfere in the internal affairs of the Ottoman administration. The main protest against the European officers took place in Kosovo, which had a large Muslim Albanian community. There was often mutual provocation between the foreign officers and the civilians. The foreign officers, including the instructors at the training schools, made regular checks among the population regarding their behaviour and whether they carried guns. These officers had no executive rights to interfere with the civilians, but the authorities did not want to antagonize the foreign officers and it was usually the civilians who were punished when confrontations occurred. The Albanians were already disappointed at the presence of the Austrians in Kosovo, and the attitude of Austrian officers only contributed to the escalation of the existing discontent. Also, in Monastir, where Italian officers were in charge, they failed to make any progress, mainly due to difficulties inherent in that province. For the Muslim Albanians knew that the Italians were giving moral and financial assistance to the Christian Albanians, and so they were hostile to the Italian officers from the start. There was also serious tension in Salonika, in the Russian sector: the Greeks accused them of being partisan, the Bulgarians believed they were not helping their cause and the Muslims resented their mere presence.

It was not only foreign intervention and the resentment caused by the reformed gendarmerie; the continual operations against the rebels provided another reason for discontent. Often gendarmes and Muslim civilians had to join the detachments or even fight alone against the insurgents. In these circumstances, the civilians and the security forces developed a close relationship, and the civilians were encouraged to form 'Turkish bands' to fight against the Christian insurgents. On the other hand, there were cases of maltreatment of the Christian civilians by the armed forces. The Ilaves and the Basýbozuks had a particular reputation for misbehaviour. There were complaints that on some occasions the damage they did was worse than the damage the rebel bands ever did and the representatives of the community brought their complaints to the foreign officials in the area, a circumstance that created further antagonism between the Europeans and the Ottoman officials.

The reforming Powers genuinely wanted to improve the quality of the force. However, their demands did not take the nature and realities of the Ottoman administration and society into consideration because the reforms were mainly designed for the Christians. In consequence, Ottoman officials and the Sultan misinterpreted the real nature of the gendarmerie reforms. They considered these developments as evidence that the Europeans were working towards the formation of an army independent of the gendarmerie and believed that the reformers were interfering in the affairs of the Ottoman military establishment. Therefore, as far as their power allowed, the Ottoman officials intended to prevent these developments and cause obstacles to the implementation of the gendarmerie reforms.