Talk:Treaty of Lausanne

Comment

Link from main page On This Day is not quite right. This treaty modified Turkey's borders on the Europe as well, Karaagac Station. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.89.74 (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment

Dropped this link:

http://www.mfa.gov.tr/grupe/ed/eda/edaa/default.htm Full text of the treaty

As it appears to be broken. Ellsworth 22:54, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Intro

The lede should give a summary of the result of the treaty, or its clauses, beside the "international recognition of the sovereignty of the new Republic of Turkey as the successor state of the defunct Ottoman Empire". --Jerome Potts (talk) 04:25, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Constantinople-based Ottoman government?

It definitely was not "Constantinople-based Ottoman government", it should be and is "Ottoman-based İstanbul Government".

Nonsense.Ladnadruk (talk) 20:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The sentence "..superseded the Treaty of Sèvres.."

In the article there is a sentence "The Treaty of Lausanne superseded the Treaty of Sèvres which was signed by representatives of the Ottoman Empire" which is not soured. Could anybody please provide sourcing for it? Aregakn (talk) 15:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Greek refugees

The above article refers to the compulsory exchange of populations between Greece and Turkey (which certainly happened) being anticipated by the Treaty. However this article does not refer to that. Can any one fill this out? Peterkingiron (talk) 18:25, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

There was a convention between Turkey and Greece about compulsory exchange of populations, signed at Lausanne before the Peace Treaty was signed. It is not part of the Treaty of Lausanne, but it was agreed that it would come into effect as soon as the Treaty of Lausanne was ratified. That's the connection. It isn't clear that it belongs in this article. Zero^talk 09:31, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Dates of ratification

Somewhere there must be an official list of nations that ratified the treaty and when. Anyone know? I'll look at the LofN treaty series soon. Meanwhile, sources are needed for "ratified by the Greek government on 11 February 1924, by the Turkish government on 31 March, and by the governments of Great Britain, Italy and Japan on 6 August." I have good sources that both the Greek and Turkish governments ratified the treaty during 1923. Turkish ratification on Aug 23, 1923 is reported by The Times on the following day (page 8). Also British ratification was announced in the Commons on July 16, 1924 so that one seems wrong too. I suspect some mixup here. Zero^talk 03:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

In fact all the given dates are wrong. Perhaps they refer to some other treaty? Fixing the article now. I was not able to find dates for Bulgaria, Roumania or Serbia, if indeed they ratified it. Zero^talk 12:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Problem solved. The dates given were when the "instruments of ratification" were deposited in Paris. That is different from the date of ratification. Also Bulgaria was not a signatory. Zero^talk 09:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Language

The info-box gave the languages of the treaty as "Turkish, English, French, German" but someone just removed "German". In fact, the treaty itself says that there is only one original copy, and inspection of the League of Nation Treaty Series shows that copy to be in French. So I'm changing it. If anyone has a good source with different information, please bring it. Zero^talk 09:02, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

What is the similarities between the Treaty of Lausanne and the Treaty of Versailles?

I am doing a presentation, and I literally have no clue what each of them are about, so I would really appreciate some kind of help! Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elineyoyo (talk • contribs) 17:49, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Map is gutter.

The map which shows the Treaty of Sevres and Lausanne is utterly cluttered and not-helpful at all, also, the boundaries are not shown appropriately. Do you have some better map ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akashpaul21 (talk • contribs) 09:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

"secret" annex

Apart from the fact that its full text was published in 1924, further proof that the Declaration of Amnesty was not secret is that it was described in the press already before it was signed. For example, The Times, Feb 1, 1923, p9. Another discussion in The Times on July 18, a week before it was signed. Zero^talk 05:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

• Appreciate your clarification. I used the term "secret annex" because that was used in at least one reliable source (Scharf). (t · c) buidhe 07:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Borders

The articles indicated below the title of borders and the resource document (Lausanne Treaty) are not compatible. There is not even an imply that indicates the islets beyond 3 miles of Turkish coast cede to Greece in the original treaty. This is a fraud because there is a reference to the original treaty.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.209.32.73 (talk • contribs)

Signing

So who signed it? 104.153.40.58 (talk) 21:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Look in the box on the top right. Zero^talk 02:21, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Don't see any names there.... 104.153.40.58 (talk) 01:13, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Here are the "plenipotentiaries" of each nation.

• United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland : The Right Honourable Sir Horace George Montagu Rumbold, Baronet, G.C.M.G., High Commissioner at Constan­tinople ;
• France : General Maurice Pelle, Ambassador of France, High Commisioner of the Republic in the East, Grand Officer of the National Order of the Legion of Honour ;
• Italy : The Honourable Marquis Camillo Garroni, Senator of the Kingdom, Ambassador of Italy, High Commissioner at Constantinople, Grand Cross of the Orders of Saints Maurice and Lazarus, and of the Crown of Italy; M. Giulio Cesare Montagna, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Athens, Commander of the Orders of Saints Maurice and Lazarus, Grand Officer of the Crown of Italy ;
• Japan : Mr. Kentaro Otchiai, Jusammi, First Class of the Order of the Rising Sun, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary at Rome;
• Greece : M. Eleftherios K. Veniselos, formerly President of the Council of Ministers, Grand Cross of the Order of the Saviour; M. Demetrios Caclamanos, Minister Plenipotentiary at London, Commander of the Order of the Saviour;
• Roumania : M. Constantine I. Diamandy, Minister Plenipotentiary; M. Constantine Contzesco, Minister Plenipotentiary;
• State of the Serbs, the Croats and the Slovenes: Dr. Miloutine Yovanovitch, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary at Berne ;
• Turkey : Ismet Pasha, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy for Adrianople; Dr. Riza Nour Bey, Minister for Health and for Public Assistance, Deputy for Sinope; Hassan Bey, formerly Minister, Deputy for Trebizond;

The signatures of all of these people appear the end of the document except for Yovanovitch, and I don't know why he is not there. Zero^talk 03:37, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

British in Egypt 1914

"Egypt and Anglo-Egyptian Sudan (both of which had been occupied by British forces with the pretext of "putting down the Urabi Revolt and restoring order" in 1882, but de jure remained Ottoman territories until World War I) were given to the British Empire, which had unilaterally annexed them on 5 November 1914." Britain did NOT annex Egypt in 1914. It deposed the pro-Ottoman Khedive and then allowed his successor to declare Egypt to be an independent Sultanate, which was upgraded to a Kingdom in 1926. Britain of course retained de facto control until after World War II. Wikipedia's own article the history of modern Egypt makes this clear. Furthermore, the Treaty of Lausanne says nothing about Britain's position in Egypt. It refers to Egypt as though it was a sovereign state. Constant Pedant (talk) 10:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Not exactly, though I agree with the deletion. Article 19 says "Any questions arising from the recognition of the State of Egypt shall be settled by agreements to be negotiated subsequently in a manner to be determined later between the Powers concerned." So the treaty does not refer to Egypt as a sovereign state but as a territory whose status is not yet determined other than making clear that Turkey renounces "all rights and titles" there (Article 17). Zero^talk 03:23, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Why is "Declaration pf Amnesty" a separate section? It may very well be under "Stipulations" section.

It's shorter than the parts under Stipulations section and is part of stipulations. It doesn't make sense to have a separate section for that. 78.175.53.136 (talk) 15:07, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Effective date

This citation for "It officially took effect on 6 August 1924, when the instruments of ratification were deposited in Paris." does not support the evidence. There needs to be a different citation. UnsungHistory (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

After seeing no response in a few months,I decide to apply some WP:Be bold,and remove the effective date entirely until someone can find a proper citation for it UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 18:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

@UnsungHistory: This date appears in the League of Nations Treaty Series for 1924, page 18. The footnote there reads "The deposit of the instrument of ratification took place by Greece, February 11, 1924; by Turkey, March 31, 1924; by the British Empire, Italy and Japan, August 6, 1924." It also says "The registration of this Treaty took place September 5, 1924." Article 143 of the treaty is about when it comes into force:

The present Treaty shall be ratified as soon as possible.

The ratifications shall be deposited at Paris.

The Japanese Government will be entitled merely to inform the Government of the French Republic through their diplomatic representative at Paris when their ratification has been given; in that case, they must transmit the Instrument of ratification as soon as possible.

Each of the Signatory Powers will ratify by one single instrument the present Treaty and the other instruments signed by it and mentioned in the Final Act of the Conference of Lausanne, in so far as these require ratification.

A first procès-verbal of the deposit of ratifications shall be drawn up as soon as Turkey, on the one hand, and the British Empire, France, Italy and Japan, or any three of them, on the other hand, have deposited the instruments of their ratifications.

From the date of this first procès-verbal the Treaty will come into force between the High Contracting Parties who have thus ratified it. Thereafter it will come into force for the other Powers at the date of the deposit of their ratifications.

As between Greece and Turkey, however, the provisions of Articles 1, 2 (2) and 5-11 inclusive will come into force as soon as the Greek and Turkish Governments have deposited the instruments of their ratifications, even if at that time the procès-verbal referred to above has not yet been drawn up.

The French Government will transmit to all the Signatory Powers a certified copy of the procès-verbal of the deposit of ratifications.

It appears from this that Aug 6, 1924 has quite a good case for the starting date, though to be picky-picky "Aug 6, 1924 or soon afterwards" is more precise. If you don't have an objection, I'll add this with citation. Zero^talk 01:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to the citation please? UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 01:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Right here. If you go back up to the 1924 index and search for "Lausanne" you will also find a bunch of related agreements signed at the same time. There are more in the 1925 index and some in later years. Zero^talk 06:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Okay,I am convinced UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 22:52, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Will remove the propaganda entry about the borders section.

There is not a single article that states every island 3 miles from the Turkish coast ceded to Greece. Greece only gets islands 3 miles from its shores(article 6) + the ceded islands by Turkiye in article 12. The island which were not ceded by Turkiye remained as Turkish, just like the islands in the Sea of Marmara. Rumumiken (talk) 06:11, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Talking about Amnesty section without mentioning article 59

Article 59 is known as the first officially recognized modern genociding attempt tried by Greek army and administration in Asia Minor, amnesty mostly cover their crimes, will be added to the section. Rumumiken (talk) 06:18, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Citation needed or will be removed

`The major issue of the war reparations, demanded from Greece by Turkey, was abandoned after Greece agreed to cede Karaağaç to Turkey.` Rumumiken (talk) 06:27, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Greek war crimes

There is an urgent need to create a section for Greek commited warcrimes and genocide attempts which were be the subject of article 59 and officially recognized as one of the first modern time genocide, decades before what has been done by Germany. Rumumiken (talk) 06:49, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Do you have WP:RS to support this? If not your changes appear WP:OR and demand immediate removal.A.Cython(talk) 16:06, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

They just put it in article 59 for no reason, right?

ARTICLE 59.

Greece recognises her obligation to make reparation for the damage caused in Anatolia by the acts of the Greek army or administration which were contrary to the laws of war. Rumumiken (talk) 22:13, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing, but where exactly does it say "genocide" or that war crimes actually committed? Note that you made the claim "officially recognized as one of the first modern time genocide". All it says is that if there was damage caused by Greece then Greece is obliged to pay. These are two entirely different things. Now I am going to ask again, do you have WP:RS that explicitly support your statements or are you based your changes solely on this? Note that you have made additional changes. A.Cython(talk) 22:49, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

When was the term genocide invented?

Those naming in the article 59 was the definition of genocide, deliberate planning and action by military and civil authorities of Greece to eliminate Turkish presence.

If this legal agreement in which Greece confess its crimes against humanity, is not enough to prove the reports about the Turkish genocide done by Asia Minor and Balkans by the Greek army, the text below will be removed from the article on my next update as well because they cover the same context.

~ `The treaty thus put an end to the effort to prosecute Ottoman war criminals for crimes such as the Armenian genocide, the Sayfo, the Greek genocide, and codified impunity for these crimes` Rumumiken (talk) 07:31, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Ok so you got no WP:SECONDARY WP:RS. This means that all you did was WP:OR which is explicitly prohibited in WP. A.Cython(talk) 13:04, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

when i re-write that section in accordance with the original text of the treaty and exclude currently filled up history enthusiast entries , you will see if it will be prohibited or not! Rumumiken (talk) 19:44, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Apologies to burst your bubble but you just admitted that you are committing WP:OR. We are not supposed to draw conclusions from WP:Primary ssources. I would suggest to start complying wikipedia policies and produce WP:RS. A.Cython(talk) 19:58, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Apologies to end your falsified propaganda on a unmaintained article. Now tell us on your edit what article 59 is about, why there is no mention of any armenian or greek genocides in the original treaty but Turkish genocide done by Greeks... Rumumiken (talk) 22:54, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Unless you produce WP:RS that state these claims, the only propaganda is your own interpretation of the treaty. You have been reverted by several editors, which should signal to you the error of your ways. A.Cython(talk) 16:04, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Apply same prinsiples for your own edits... Rumumiken (talk) 17:52, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

I am not the person who is reverted by everyone else. Last time do you have WP:RS to share? A.Cython(talk) 17:55, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

You and others just wrote nonsense which has no relation with the treaty itself, again last time i ask, what article 59 talks about?

Greek or Armenian genocides or Turkish genocide done by Greeks? Yet you propaganda machines try to whitewash time crime and fill the article which is totally not relevant with the treaty.

https://avim.org.tr/public/images/uploads/files/eng.pdf Rumumiken (talk) 18:05, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Statements from a think-tank website that appears to be ideologically biased and which have not passed through peer-review is not WP:RS. A.Cython(talk) 18:16, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

All your sources are ideologically biased, they are mentioning some claims of Armenians and Greeks which was never mentioned in the treaty, thus they will have no place in this article.

Whereas article 59 is a concrete proof you cant be biased once you read it, Greece is the signatory under it while confessing its crimes against humanity...

Now you call signature of Greece as biased as well? Rumumiken (talk) 18:38, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Historical Mismatch of the source

``Secular Kemalist rhetoric relieved some of the international concerns about the future of Armenians who had survived the 1915 Armenian genocide, and support for Kurdish self-determination similarly declined. Under the Treaty of Lausanne, signed in 1923, Eastern Anatolia became part of modern-day Turkey, in exchange for Turkey's relinquishing Ottoman-era claims to the oil-rich Arab lands.``

Text added for propaganda purpose, citation from a document from 2009. Looks heavily biased and has no relation with the time of the signed era of the treaty, if not rewritten will be removed. Rumumiken (talk) 20:32, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

This editor has been indeffed, fyi. (t · c) buIdhe 22:40, 16 June 2026 (UTC)