This article clarifies several points related to the Ottoman entry into the First World War. First, the Young Turk leaders mistrusted deeply Great Britain which had occupied Egypt in 1882, and appeared disposed to satisfy French and Italian ambitions at the Ottoman expense. Yet, most of the Unionists, not to speak of the public and Parliament, were opposed to war. Indeed, the British and French tacitly agreed to divide the Ottoman state. For this reason, Cemal paşa, a friend of the French, even tried to conclude an alliance with Paris but was unsuccesful. Second, the decision to enter the war came as the consequence of stiff German pressure upon the Unionists leadership and became immediately a fact after the fleet under admiral Souchon's command bombarded the Russian ports. Only four Unionist leaders at most were informed about the German plans to attack Russia. Leading Ottoman officials such as Kazım Karabekir, Hafız Hakkı and many others were against early Ottoman entry into the war. Most of them wanted to wait until spring so as to have time to complete the necessary preparations for the battlefield. Probably, if the Ottoman entry into the war had been postponed for six months or so, Istanbul would have not entered the war at all since by then the hopes for a quick German victory would have vanished. Indeed, after the German offensive in France was stalled at Marne the Unionists seemed to develop second thoughts about the wisdom of fighting on Berlin's side. Consequently, the German diplomatic mission in İstanbul increased its pressures on Enver paşa, who acceded to Kaiser's war demands, still under the illusion that a German victory was imminent. In sum, the Ottoman entry into the war was not the consequence of careful preparation and long debate in the Parliament (which was recessed) and press. It was the result of a hasty decision by a handful of elitist leaders who disregarded democratic procedures and lacked long range political vision and fell easy victim to German machinations and their own utopian expectations of recovering the lost territories in the Balkans. The Ottoman entry into war prolonged it for two years and allowed the Bolshevik revolution to incubate and then explode in 1917 which in turn impacted profoundly the twentieth century world history and the Republican Turkey.

Birinci Dünya Savaşı'nın henüz devam ettiği yıllarda Osmanlı toprakları İtilâf Devletlerince paylaşılmak istenmiş, bu maksatla aralarında gizli antlaşmalar imzalanmıştır. Rus devrimi bu gizli antlaşmaları açığa çıkarınca, İtilâf Devletlerinin gerçek yüzü ortaya çıkmıştır. Birinci Dünya Savaşı döneminde, Türk hakimiyetinde bulunan topraklar üzerindeki emellerini gerçekleştiremeyen İtilâf Devletleri, Mondros Mütarekesi ile sonuca gitmek istemişlerdir. Mondros Mütarekesi'nin elastikî hükümlerine dayanarak, bir çok Türk toprağı işgale uğramıştır. İşgal edilen bu topraklardan biri de Trakya topraklarıdır. İtilâf Devletlerince Trakya topraklarının işgali ve İstanbul'u tehdit etme görevi başlangıçta Fransa'ya verilmiştir. Bu araştırma, arşiv vesikaları ve diğer literatürdeki bilgilerin değerlendirilmesiyle ortaya konmaya çalışılmıştır.

Maraş, Osmanlı Devleti döneminde Halep Vilâyetine bağlıydı. O dönemde Maraş yöresinde ve özellikle Maraş'ın Zeytun (Süleymanlı) kazasında küçümsenemeyecek miktarda Ermeni nüfusu vardı. Ermeniler, Gregoryen, Katolik ve Protestan mezheplerine bölünmüşlerdi. 1908 Halep Vilayeti Salnamesi'ne göre, Maraş merkezinde 4 Ermeni (Gregoryen), 3 Protestan, 2 Katolik, 1 Latin kilisesi ve 15 Hıristiyan mektebi vardı. Zeytun'da 6 kilise, 2 manastır, 1 gayrimüslim rüştiye ile 5 iptidai mektebi bulunuyordu. Elbistan'da 3 kilise, Göksun'da 1 Ermeni (Gregoryen) kilisesi ile 4 Protestan mektebi görünüyordu. Şehir merkez nüfusu toplam 67.974 olan Maraş'ta, 46.557 Müslüman, 11.180 Ermeni (Gregoryen) ve 3.567 Katolik yaşamakta idi.

Birinci Dünya Savaşı sonunda imzalanan Mondros Mütarekesi'ni takip eden günlerde Türk yurdu yer yer işgallere uğrarken Çukurova yöresi de 1918 yılının Kasım ve Aralık aylarında Fransız ve İngiliz ortak işgaline uğramıştı. Çukurova bölgesi, ortak bir işgale uğramasına rağmen, bu bölgede İngilizlerle Fransızlar arasında nüfuz yönünden siyasi bir çekişme kendini gösteriyordu. Fransa, İngiltere üzerinde yaptığı baskıdan başarıyla çıkacak, Suriye ve Kilikya bölgesini kendi nüfuzu altına alacaktı.

Tenacious and systematic attempts are being made by a number of Armenian 'scholars' to sway, especially Jewish public opinion, that there is a link between the experiences of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during World War I, which they label as 'the first genocide of the twentieth century', and those of the European Jewry during World War II. By their persistent attempts, skilful manipulation of the feelings of some Jewish and other sympathisers, and masterful use of distorted, tendencious, and even forged 'documents', they have succeeded in winning over some of those who are the real victims of the Holocaust, and a number of younger generation Jewish writers, such as Yehuda Bauer, Leo Kuper, and a few others. Is there such a parallel? Let us examine the arguments for and against before we answer this question.

Sarton, who was born in 1884 in Belgium, came to the United States in 1915. He gave a few lectures and courses during his first years in America, and in 1918 he became associated with the Carnegie Institution of Washington. He had already founded Isis in 1912, while in Belgium, and although its publication was interrupted during the four years of World War I, it began to reappear in the postwar years when Sarton established himself in the United States.