It is not often that I cover murder mysteries, but I am making an exception given the unusual circumstances of an Ottoman Crown Prince’s death in 1916 and its possible link to Talaat and the Armenian Genocide.
The first clue was an article I came across in the April 3, 1921 issue of The Pittsburgh Press titled, "Patiently Tracked to His Hiding Place and Killed: How the Bloodthirsty Turkish Grand Vizier, Talaat Pasha, Who Planned the Murders of a Million Armenians Met His Fate." This news re
Or, subscribe now for unlimited access
By submitting your email address you agree for Hairenik Association, Inc. to send you communication by email.
Already a subscriber?Log in here
This story is FREE for you...
Create a free account to access this and four more articles, and get more sent to you with our e-newsletter.By submitting your email address you agree for Hairenik Association, Inc. to send you communication by email.
It is not clear, as to why Talaat or even Enver (the two prominent men of the Ottoman politics, Enver being more powerful), would be concerned with the Crown Prince, since the reigning sultan, or the institution of the Sultanate had become a puppet at the hands of the Young Turk government. I find the expression ” connection with Talaat’s career is that he paved his way to this supreme office by murdering the heir to the throne, Crown Prince Youssouf Eddine, a nephew of the reigning Sultan” misleading and not convincing. I believe, whether the prince had stayed alive or not, he could not have been perceived as a potential threat, since as I said, the Sultan himself was not a threat and was neglected in Political affairs, let alone the crown prince.
Dear Varak,
I disagree with your view which characterized the “expression as misleading and not convincing”. To the contrary, it is very convincing and makes perfect sense given the political climate in that era. The Crown Prince was a “political lose end” and a potential threat to the newly formed Ottoman government. He needed to be dealt with to eliminate any possibility of another revolution and possible takeover of the government. Besides, given their history of violent takeovers (15 out of 36) is further affirmation of their (Enver / Talat) modus opperandi. Your point about Sultan being alive and not a threat to the Young Turks is irrelevant. Sultan was old and weak. Whereas the Crown Prince was young and politically alert. He was a potential threat and it makes perfect sense that they had to whack him.
I find Harut Sassounian’s revelation fascinating. Whether the Prince was murdered by Talaat Pasha, or committed suicide out of probable desperation points out, in my view, to sharp differences between the Young Turks and the Sultan’s once High Porte, and that difference could only have been centered on the policies the Young Turk pursued during the WWI and hence has a profound implication on the window of opportunity the Young Turks created to depopulate Anatolia of its native inhabitants. The manner in which the Young Turks have announced the “suicide” of the Prince is not what would expect from grieving royal subjects of a reigning Sultan and his dynasty.
You see parskastani tagavorn iren kes yegbayrin spanets, vor iren pashtonn pahpaner. I would not put it passed anyone else to carry the same crime, all you have to do look at the kennedy yegpaynerin, yev koobayin.
The fact is power crazy politicians would annihilate any one who opposes them and stands in their way of power and money.