In the 18th century, Japan and the Ottoman Empire saw that they were left behind and started to modernize. Both societies realized their shortcomings in the military and intended to engage in social modernization efforts. The army has come to the fore as an aim and source of modernization.
The year 1853 also contains an interesting contrast for the modernization of the two societies. Since Japan did not open its ports to trade, it was forced out by American warships. By making this a matter of honor, the Japanese accelerated their modernization and began to be less dependent on foreign countries. However, the Ottoman Empire, which came together with the West for the Crimean War in the same year, started to be more dependent on foreign countries. While she thought she was getting support from the West, she was dragged into a foreign debt swamp. While the Ottomans borrowed in debt, the Japanese refrained from being dependent on foreign sources. The foreign debt quagmire caused the Ottomans to lose their voice in the face of the West, weakening their rule and lagging behind in modernization.
Both sides rejected the religion of the West and wanted to take its technique. Japan was not aware of the danger at first, but realized that the population, which started to become Christian, brought foreign intervention. He expelled Christian missionaries, outlawed Christianity, and killed those who resisted. However, the Ottoman Empire had Christian and non-Muslim minorities for a long time, and even lived with a Christian density in most of the provinces. The ancient nations of the Ottoman Empire became a tool for the threat felt by Japan and became an obstacle to modernization. The nations and inhomogeneous society of the Ottoman Empire caused it to be under the influence of foreign powers and to be left behind.
Although the original purpose was the opposite, while there were those who brought the morals of the West in the Ottoman Empire, the technique remained stubby, while the technique was well adapted in Japan, the existing morality was preserved. Both societies have a conservative structure. Japanese culture has been able to be pure and protective with the effect of geographical isolation. While the Ottoman Empire was located between the east and the west, it preserved its conservative structure in terms of beliefs, and attitudes and behaviors had to change. The situation of the two societies in the 20th century shows that the Japanese were more successful in preserving their moral structures.
Both societies brought foreign experts and wanted to protect those with technical skills. However, the Japanese are many times more successful than the Ottomans. The historical image of the Ottoman Empire in the West and foreigners who were afraid of the religion of Islam prevented him from obtaining expertise. A few experts who came to the Ottoman Empire approached the Ottoman Empire with an orientalist point of view, and the literati who came for adventure could not go beyond being a material for Europe.
It is seen that the two societies sent students to the West, and that although the Ottomans sent earlier and more students, they could not get the products they wanted. Understanding that western institutions also require western rules, the Japanese engaged in social and political arrangements on their own. In the Ottoman Empire, this work was forced, and harmony could not be achieved like the Japanese. For example, the Japanese occupied China, seeing the need for a market for the industry’s commodity needs and surplus production. Unlike the Japanese, who brutally exploited China, the Ottoman Empire has never looked at foreign land as a market or commodity since ancient times. However, the Japanese, who were able to grow their industry with the understanding of exploitation, were able to defeat the Russians, a western country, in the war, while the Ottomans were defeated.
One of the main differences between the Japanese and other eastern societies in modernization is the promotion of private enterprise. The Japanese quickly adapted to the capitalist understanding and liberalized the markets that were the driving force of modernization. In the Ottoman Empire, on the other hand, the Shari’a provisions did not allow an intervention that would disrupt social justice; tradition, custom and law prevented this. The structure of the religion of Islam, which surrounds the daily life of the individual and controls all activities, has already prevented the change of life style. As a result, while Japan, which learned to play with the rules of the West, remained independent, Ottoman, Afghan, Chinese and Iranian societies became semi-colonies.
In the modernization of the Japanese, their geographical isolation provided maximum benefit. The Ottomans had to swing between east and west like a bridge. It could not break away from the east, nor could it leave the west. However, Japan is an island country that can protect its own values compared to the Ottoman Empire, which was under threat from all sides. It is also effective that they have just emerged from a civil war campaign called Sengoku in protecting their own values. In the wars between the states that took place in the 15th and 16th centuries, it has reached a position where it can resist the West in terms of military accumulation and army equipment. The fact that they witnessed Britain’s exploitation of China in the geography created the tendency of resistance to imperialism. The Japanese developed the resistance to American intervention and coercion and used this as a motivation for modernization. It can be said that the Meiji Restoration took place from this point of view.
As a result, the Ottoman Empire and Japan are fit to be compared as eastern countries to be westernized. In the Ottoman Empire, as much trials were made, but the inadequate modernization efforts in the face of the greatness of society and lifestyle caused the difference of modernity among the two communities.
Resources
- The Long Divergence: How Islamic Law Held Back the Middle East
- Gülnaz GEZER BAYLI, French Experts Employed in Turkey and Their Contribution to Turkish Modernization, master’s thesis, Hacettepe University, 2014.
- Timur Kuran, The Long Divergence: How Islamic Law Held Back the Middle East, Princeton, 2011.
- Heinz Kimmerle & Ram Adhar Mall, Modernization in Intercultural Context: Russia, Japan, Turkey, Rodophi, 2004.
