Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
ULUSLARARASI ILISKILER-INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, 2022 (SSCI)
In the sixth article of Special Agreement which is annexed to Anglo-French-Turkish Treaty of Mutual Assistance dated 19 October 1939 it is expressed that Turkey cannot be forced to fulfill its obligations set down by the treaty, if the arms and credits that are committed by the second, fourth and fifth articles of the Special Agreement are not granted. As Britain and France wanted Turkey on Allied side, they accepted this Suspensive Clause to be laid down by the treaty but they immediately began to work on removing it. Yet the Allies couldn???t supply Turkey the anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons it requires for the front of Thrace. The British gave up such effort and embraced another approach that underrates the significance of said clause. Despite all, in a short span of time Turkey ??? whose economic and security concerns raised ??? and the Allied front ??? who could not risk losing Turkey ??? came to a mutual understanding. As it was agreed that the credits that were promised to Ankara would be given and that Allied countries would purchase chromium and dried fruit from Turkey, on 26 January 1940 Government of Turkey issued a cabinet decree announcing the Suspensive Clause abolished. However it appears Turkish historians have not recognized this development and consequently it has been considered that the argument Ankara put forward, in order to preserve its nonbelligerent status, that Turkey is ???not adequately equipped,??? was based upon this (essentially non-existent) clause. On the other hand, Ankara abolished this clause even though it received only a small part of the arms that were promised, and delivery of the remaining part was not possible in the short term. The fact that Ankara thus removed such important barricade on its way to the war is a development crucial enough to revise the foreign policy Turkey followed at the beginning of World War II.