2011, vol. 1, br. 2, str. 123-138
|
|
Neoosmanizam: Turska između juče i sutra
Neoosmanism: Turkey between yesterday and tomorrow
Moševac, Federacija BiH
Sažetak
Geostrateška cjelovitost Balkana i Podunavlja i strateška stremljenja velikih sila naslijeđena iz prethodnih vijekova odredili su polazne tačke evropskih kretanja XIX vijeka. Njemački Prodor na Istok, rusko širenje na Jug i težnja za primatom u borbi za tursko nasljeđe, nastojanje Turske da reformama svoju imperiju vrati iz mrtvih i ostane na desnoj strani savsko-dunavskog sliva, čuvajući ga kao svoju prirodnu granicu, te težnje balkanskih naroda za oslobođenjem, uobličili su geopolitička, strateška i državno-pravna obilježja fenomena nazvanog 'Istočno pitanje'. Osvajački pohodi sa jugoistoka na sjever i sjeverozapad i obratno, ukazali su da geostrateške osobine Balkana nisu razdvajanje i geografska nepremostivost, već spajanje i prožimanje koje otvara strateške puteve za dominaciju nad evroazijskim čvorom i toplim morima Sredozemlja i Bliskog istoka. Činjenica da Balkan nije jedina veza između Europe i Azije ne umanjuje njegovu geo-stratešku i geo-političku važnost. Naprotiv. Ovo pitanje, koje je za velike sile bilo istočno, a za narode jugoistoka Europe životno, seže duboku u prošlost. Formirali su ga i trasirali geostrateški položaj čitavog prostora koga se Istočno pitanje ticalo i sukobi interesa naroda, religija i čitavih civilizacija koje su se tu sučeljavale. Ako se, međutim, traži uži istorijski smisao samog pojma Istočno pitanje, naći ćemo ga u sudaru Evrope sa islamskim svijetom, koji je sa sobom donijelo prodiranje Turske u Evropu. U vrijeme uspona Osmanlijskog carstva bilo je to pitanje opstanka evropskih sila koje su bile na udaru turskih osvajanja, a potom, opadanjem moći Osmanske imperije, Istočno pitanje je preraslo u borbu za tursko nasljeđe. Danas je u tu borbu za osmansko-osmanlijsko nasljeđe snažno uključena i Turska. Turski angažman u borbi za vlastito istorijsko nasljeđe, dobio je jedinstveno ime:'NEOOSMANIZAM'.
Abstract
Geostrategic integrity of the Balkans and the Danube region and the strategic ambitions of powerful countries that were inherited from previous centuries define the start points of European streams in XX century. German 'drang nach osten', Russian spread to south and an ambition of primate in struggle for the Turkish heredity, Turkish strivings to bring its Empire out of death with reforms, and remain right-sided to Sava-Danube river basin, preserving it as its natural border, and the strivings of Balkan peoples for liberation, shaped geopolitical, strategic and state-legal traits of the phenomenon called 'Eastern question'. The conquests form south east towards north and northwest and vice versa pointed that geostrategic traits of Balkans were not separation and geographic in-connectivity, but connection and permeation, which open strategic ways to domination over the Eurasian knot and warm seas of Mediterranean and Middle East. The fact that Balkans aren't the only connection between Europe and Asia does not lessen their geostrategic and geopolitical importance. On the contrary. This question, that was an eastern one for powerful countries, and one of a life importance for the people of southeast Europe, goes back into deep past. It was formed and a geostrategic position of a whole area that it related to by conflicted interest of people, religions and whole civilizations that faced each others there. However, if looking for a more narrow historical sense of the term Eastern question, we will find it in a collision of Europe and Islamic world, which was brought by Turkish penetration into Europe. During the rise of the Ottoman Empire, it was a matter of survival of European countries that were struck by Ottoman conquest, and after the decline of the Ottoman power it turned into a struggle for Turkish heredity. Today, the Struggle form Ottoman heredity strongly includes Turkey as well. Turkish engagement in a struggle for its own historical heredity has got a unique name: 'Neoosmanism'.
|