Turkey Warns of War on Montenegro

July 31, 1911: In response to increasing attack of Albanians Christian tribesmen, know as Malissori, on Turkish troops, and their fleeing to the mountains of Montenegro, where many ethnic Albanians live, the Ottoman government has threatened action again the tiny country of Montenegro.

TURKS MENACE WAR ON MONTENEGRINS

60,000 Troops Massed on Border and Ultimatum Ready, London Correspondent Says.

TO RISK INTERVENTION

Assert That King Nicholas Must Cease Harboring Malissori or Have His Realm Invaded.

Special Cable to THE NEW YORK TIMES.

LONDON. July 31. — The correspondent of the London Times at Constantinople says the Council of Ministers has decided to telegraph to Sadreddin Bey, Turkish Minister at Cettinje, instructing him to summon the Malissori to surrender by Thursday and to inform the Montenegrin Government that if it continues to harbor them the troops, who are much excited, will be obliged to pursue the Malissori as far as the frontier.

Malissori: fighting for Albanian homeland

   A dispatch from Salonica to the Daily Mail says:
   "The appointment of Abdulla Pasha to the command of the Turkish troops in Albania, with title of Commander in Chief of the Western Army, may be regarded as the first step on the part of Turkey toward putting an end on the northwestern frontier. Abdulla Pasha will be in command of  a force of 60,000 men, with three mountain batteries and three field batteries, and I am able to state on good authority that immediately Abdulla Pasha has reached his headquarters on the Montenegrin frontier the Ottoman Government will send an ultimatum to King Nicholas of Montenegro demanding the cessation of hospitality toward the Malissori tribe.
   "Should the presence of 50,000 or 60,000 Turkish troops ready to cross the frontier fail to convince the King of the desirability of a change of tactics, the Turks intend to declare war and invade Montenegro, disregarding the possible result of European intervention. All the little Balkan States are keeping a careful watch on the situation and are ready to take a hand in the game in case of the outbreak of hostilities."

French Prime Minister Undermines Negotiations in Moroccan Crisis

July 27, 1911: Another communique between Prime Minister Caillaux and German Foreign Ministers, soon to be intercepted by French Officials.

Only after German codes were obtained during World War I, could the full texts of dispatches between the German Foreign Minister in France and German Officials show the extent of secret negotiations between French Prime Minister Joseph Caillaux and the German Government. In dispatches between July 26 and 27th of 1911, Caillaux feared that ceding the entire Congo coast, in exchange for German recognition of French authority in Morocco, would be humiliating to France and would infuriate the English, who wished to limit German colonial growth.

Through the mediator, Hyacinthe-Alphonse Fondère, French Colonial Explorer and businessman, the secret negotiations, which possibly lead to great monetary gains by the prime minister, eventually did lead to Germany expanding their territorial gains in the Congo.

Intercepted by French officials, the French Foreign Minister of Foreign Affairs, Justin de Selves, would become furious at the Prime Minister.  The documents were ultimately obtained by the French newspaper, Le Figaro, leading to speculation that Caillaix's wife murdered the editor of the paper to prevent release of these very explosives communiques, in 1914. Ultimately, their release was suppressed until after the war.

To the Foreign Office, Berlin

Alfonse Fondère

 "Caillaux has charged  Fondère to inform the embassy that he is moved by a sincere desire to come to an understanding with us, and that he would prefer to bring an agreement on broad lines, settling all differences which have arisen between us during the past years. This would help bring him to justify before public opinion the cession of Colonial territory, by pointing out the great advantage of suppressing all matters of friction with us.
   The greater the extent of the agreement and the larger the number of different objects embraced by it, the more able would France be to show a spirit of accommodation in the cession of Colonial territory; whereas a deal limited to Morocco and the Congo would cause here an impression of humiliation and could hardly be achieved in a form satisfactory to us.

Wilhelm von Schoen

   Caillaux asks for an inquiry to be made in Berlin as to what would be desired n the most different possible directions. What he is thinking of - although these would be but small concessions - is a German Chairman of the Ottoman Debt, the retrocession of 30 per cent. of the stock of the Bagdad Railway to the Paris Bourse (stock exchange) and an understanding about railways in the East. He has also considered the possibility of ceding to us the French possessions in Oceanica (Oceania). I am sending at midday tomorrow the Counselor of Embassy in order to give you a verbal report.

Caillaux urges strongly that nothing about these overtures should be communicated to Cambon(French Ambassador to Germany)."  Signed Schoen (Wilhelm von Schoen German ambassador in Paris)  

Germany Favors Treaty with U.S.

From the New York Times: Continued Arbitration by The Hague

Berlin, July 24, 1911. - The German Government has finished its study of the American-German arbitration treaty proposals and has formulated its comment thereon, which comment has been forwarded to Washington as a basis of negotiation. An official statement of the nature of the German views cannot be obtained here, but there is reason to believe that they are favorable.
   Though the arbitration negotiations between the United States and Germany are not so far advanced as those between the former country and Great Britain and France, this is explained by the fact that Germany received the American proposals later than the other countries, and is not to be construed as due to a hostile attitude on the part of this Government.

Sun Yat-Sen visits San Francisco

Statue of Sun Yat-Sen

July 22, 1911: San Francisco - Dr. Sun Yat-Sen, with a purported $325,000 bounty on his head from the Chinese government, visited the Chinese community in San Francisco. The head of the Young China movement stayed for some time, disregarding Chinese spies and government inspectors. The purpose of the visit was to strengthen  the Chinese Revolutionary movement by uniting different Chinese social and political groups.

Emperor Puyi

The secret organization was gaining strength inside China, lead by the Western educated doctor, who sought a representative government for the Chinese people, currently led by the Qing or Manchu Emperor Puyi, and ruled by his regent the Dowager Empress Longyu. The doctor surreptitiously moves throughout the United States, strengthening his forces and instigating disturbances, such as that reported in Shantung.

One example of a reported meeting was with the Gee Gong Tong, the ancient Chinese Masonic Society, that had recently adopted the constitutional ideas of the Young China leaders..

Lloyd George's Mansion House Speech

July 21, 1911:
In response to Germany's perceived aggressive actions at Agadir in Morocco, and French compromise in settling the dispute by negotiating Germany's expansion of Togo and Kamerun (Cameroon), in exchange for the acknowledgement of the Morocco as a French Protectorate, David Lloyd George, future British Prime Minister during World War I, at the behest of the British Foreign Minister, Sir Edward Grey, dedicated a portion of his now famous Mansion House Speech, to remind both Germany and France, that England would not be left out of world affairs:

Personally I am a sincere advocate of all means which would lead to the settlement of international disputes by methods such as those which civilization has so successfully set up for the adjustment of differences between individuals, and I rejoice in my heart at the prospect of a happy issue to Sir Edward Grey's negotiations with the United States of America for the settlement of disputes which may occur in future between ourselves and our kinsmen across the Atlantic by some more merciful, more rational, and by a more just arbitrament than that of the sword.

But I am also bound to say this -- that I believe it is essential in the highest interests, not merely of

this country, but of the world, that Britain should at all hazards maintain her place and her prestige amongst the Great Powers of the world. Her potent influence has many a time been in the past, and may yet be in the future, invaluable to the cause of human liberty. It has more than once in the past redeemed Continental nations, who are sometimes too apt to forget that service, from overwhelming disaster and even from national extinction. I would make great sacrifices to preserve peace. I conceive that nothing would justify a disturbance of international good will except questions of the greatest national moment. But if a situation were to be forced upon us in which peace could only be preserved by the surrender of the great and beneficent position Britain has won by centuries of  heroism and achievement, by allowing Britain to be treated where her interests were vitally affected as if she were of no account in the Cabinet of nations, then I say emphatically that peace at that price would be a humiliation in tolerable for a great country like ours to endure. National honour is no party question. The security of our great international trade is no party question; the peace of the world is much more likely to be secured if all nations realize fairly what the conditions of peace must be. And it is because I have the conviction that nations are beginning to understand each other better, to appreciate one another's point of view more thoroughly, to be more ready to discuss calmly and dispassionately their differences, that I feel assured that nothing will happen between now and next year which will render it difficult for the chancellor of the exchequer in this place to respond to the toast proposed - of the continued prosperity of public peace.

France and England plan for mobilization against Germany

 July 20, 1911: On this date, Sir Henry Wilson, Director of Military Operations on the British General Staff, met in secret with General Auguste Dubail, French Army Chief of Staff, to formulate an  agreement for a joint plan to mobilize 150,000 men in the event that Germany declared war on either nation. Though the Dubail-Wilson plan did not become necessary in 1911, it would be used three years later when World War I broke out.

Per the Dubail-Wilson agreement, the British were to mobilize following intervention, specifying 150,000 men and 67,000 horses to be landed at Havre, Boulogne and Rouen between 4th-12th day of mobilization and be sent to Mauberge region and ready for action on 13th day.

Although it may appear that the agreement had been a result of Germany's actions in the Agadir crisis, it may also had been a result of war games,which indicated that Germany would have moved easily through Belgium and France unless there was early commitment of the British Expeditionary Force ^[1] .

^[1]Sanders, Charles W, Jr. "No Other Law: The French Army and the Doctrine of the Offensive", The Rand Corporation, 1987

Deposed Shah of Persia Returns to Reclaim Throne with Russian Aid

Shah Qajar of Iran

July 18, 1911:  Mohammad Ali Shah Qajar, the deposed Shah of Persia, landed at the Caspian Sea port of Astarabad (present day Gorgan, Iran) with an army in an attempt to regain the throne that he had lost in 1909. Apparently disguised, and carrying a fake passport, the Shah escaped to Persia with Russian-supplied guns, cannons and munitions, and Austrian cannons procured on a trip to Vienna, that had been packed in crates labeled "mineral water"^[1].

The Shah, based on an agreement between Russia and England, lived in exile in Odessa in Russia, after abdicating his throne to his 12 year old son. He had wanted to rescind the recently established Persian Constitution, and a civil war ensued, in 1909, between the constitutionalists and monarchists.  Russia had agreed to prevent the Shah from participating in political and other activities which could weaken the newly established monarchy and constitutional government. In exchange, the shah would receive an annual stipend of $82,500 ($2 million, today). Russian and England would have spheres of influence in Persia, as a result of the agreement, with Russian influence in the Northern part of the country, and England in the south, with the central part of the country under autonomous rule.

Upon landing, the Shah's brother and advisers, contacted loyal supporters and tribesmen, to march on Tehran and reclaim the throne.

Persia would be at the crossroads of World War One, with mixed allegiances and occupying forces in all parts of the country. Of particular interest are the newly developed oil fields.

Armenian Patriarch Hovhannes Arsharuni presents grievences to Ottoman Government

The Armenian Patriarch of Constantinople, Hovhannes Arscharouni (Յովհաննէս Արշարունի Իսթանպուլցի) presented a list of grievances to the Turkish government, demanding improvements on education, use of the Armenian language, the right to participate in military service, and the right to present Christians as witnesses in court proceedings in the Islamic nation. The government pledged reforms, which were blocked in the Ottoman parliament. In a letter to Turkey's Minister of Justice, the Patriarch also informs him about the illegal actions of the Turkish officials in the Armenian provinces, including murders and confiscation of property.

The jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople included 52 dioceses. The dioceses of Baghdad, Cyprus, Egypt, Bulgaria, Romania and Greece were among these dioceses.

• Agadir crisis: Germany's Foreign Minister Alfred von Kiderlen-Waechter summoned French Ambassador Jules Cambon to the Ministry and made the surprise demand that France cede its colony in the French Congo to Germany as a condition of German withdrawal from Morocco.^[30]

Anglo-Japanese Arbitration Treaty may be revised

 July 11, 1911: An article published by the Associated Press, reports on treaties negotiated between countries that would have disputes arbitrated by Court of Arbitration located in The Hauge, Netherlands. Difficulties in ratification by the U.S. Senate were caused by, among other concerns, that the agreement "...[takes] for granted that the proposed treaty is for the purpose of offending Germany".

The most interesting part of the article is Japan's stance that they would never war with England or the U.S.

From Tokio, Japan,
A revision of the Anglo-Japanese alliance is regarded as the inevitable outcome of the Anglo-American arbitration treaty. There is reason to believe that negotiations for such revision have been going on for several weeks.

Komura Jutarō 

It is reported that Great Britain propose to modify the clause providing for mutual assistance in the event of war, making the provision in applicable if either party to the alliance is fighting a nation with which the other has concluded a general arbitration treaty.
It is understood that Japan readily agreed to this proposition, and the Associated Press is informed that the readiness of the Japanese Government to accept the suggestion was due to its entire confidence that Japan will never be at war with either the United States or England.
The revision will probably involve the extension of the treaty alliance for fifteen or twenty years.

The alliance between England and Japan ends in 1923.

Royal Australian Navy formed

King George V, of Great Britain, granted the title of "Royal" for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) and its Permanent Commonwealth Naval Forces (CNF) and the Royal Australian Naval Reserve.  Rear Admiral Sir William Rooke Creswell CNF,  was Australia's first Admiral to occupy the position, and would maintain the rank of Chief of Navy throughout WWI.

Under the Naval Defense Act of 1912, in the event of war, The Royal Australian Navy would be led by the British Royal Navy. The RAN would become the Australia Squadron of the Royal Navy with all ships and personnel under the direct control of the British Admiralty.

The new units of the Royal Australian Navy

New York Times presents the backdrop for the Agadir crisis

MOROCCO INVOLVES POWERS FROM TANGIER TO BAGDAD

Germany Cancels Her Agreement with France Concerning the Western Bulwark 

of Islam --- England Behind France, Berlin Aroused

By Stephen Bonsal. The Moroccan imbroglio is interesting from many points of view. Perhaps the most interesting is the belief held by so many foreign offices and editorial studies that all the bother and pother is really not about Morocco at all, but about the Balkans and the railway or Monsieur (Théophile) Del Cassé's return to public life; for it is by such indirect ways as these, unknown to our so slightly held shirt-sleeve diplomacy, that European statesmen proceed upon that terrible business in which the lives of so many millions of people - mere food for powder - are involved.

It was only yesterday (July 8) that Maximillian Harden, the great Berlin editor, announced that Germany had renounced all political pretensions of Morocco and would content herself with the open door, and his pronouncement, which seemed to inaugurate and era of good feeling that would soon overpass the limited sphere of the Moroccan question, was received by all the Western powers with much enthusiasm. For it is not forgotten by them, if it is by us, who only took part in a platonic and academic way in the Algeciras Conference, that six years have barely elapsed since France and Germany, or rather the two great groups of powers respectively associated with them, were about to fly at each other's throats, seemingly for the sake of Morocco - that decrepit kingdom, the last Western and wasting fragment of the once great Mohammedan Empire.

However this laboriously-built-up quarrel which many think had no very deep roots in real national interests, was composed. At first here was the Algeciras Conference, and later the Franco-German agreement which, to the minds of some optimists, settled the vexatious matter for all time. Germany, it was understood as a result of the agreement,  gave France a free hand in the military and political sense. She would acquiesce in any arrangement France saw fit to make with the unfortunate Sultans who had been succeeding one another on the throne of Malai Edriss in such kaleidoscopic succession. She was apparently perfectly agreeable to any regime in Morocco so long as her commercial interests in the country - not very important at the moment, but of great potential value - were safeguarded.

Not three years have passed since this apparently happy arrangement was made, and the fat is in the fire again. German public opinion is, or seems to be, terribly excited because of the dispatch by the French of a flying column to Fez, where it is feared, at least in Paris, that the officers of her military mission in that last citadel of Islam are in danger of meeting the fate of Gordon at Khartoum; certain it is that the rebellious tribes are on the warpath, and the little Sultan is powerless to keep them in check. A large fraction of the German press is  greatly vexed, and those papers that are supposed to be in closest touch with the German Foreign Minister do not hesitate to give the lie direct to  French assurances. They assure that the French Embassador has been talked to very solemnly by Herr von Schoen; that the German Foreign Office is convinced, and has not hesitated to say so, that nothing worth protecting in Morocco is in danger; that there is no sign of anarchy - that is, not more than is usual in this trouble-ridden country; that no European lives are in jeopardy, and that the probable fate of Fez and its European colony, militarily as well as civil, should excite no misgivings.

The German press, divided on the other questions, is united in saying that the situation is one without danger, except from the fear of unconsidered action on the part of France. "France is not merely trying to pacify the country," say the wise editors, "but she is hoodwinking Europe while she seeks to 'Tunisize' it."

Even in the Prussian Chamber Deputies the Moroccan bogey has been trotted out again and Herman von Rath, who is described as having served many years in the German diplomatic service, announces amid great applause that the facts of the situation contradict the conciliatory words of the French Foreign Office. He announces that France has not respected either the letter or the spirit pf the Algeciras agreement, consequently, Germany is released from her obligations incurred under this treaty, and that a free hand is restored to her which should be actively used for the preservation of such German interests in the country as have not been destroyed by French control.

Herr Von Rath denounces the dispatch of the flying column of French calvary to Fez as merely a pretext for her scheme of military interpenetration of Morocco. He says the German policy should be somewa=hat as follows and while, of course, the policy represents only a deputy's point of view, it has been received with such popular favor that it may at any moment be taken up by the Government as its own. He does not believe that the rebellion in Morocco is dangerous, or that anarchy is near; but, if he is mistaken, he says let the rebellion be crushed and order restored by French troops. Then let us, we Germans, insist upon the Shereefian sway being restored independently of any single power, and that it then be supervised and influenced, so far as possible, by the totality of the States which are commercially interested there, France not being allowed to put forward any special claim. France, as well as other countries, has often pulled the chestnuts out of the fire. But probably never has this been done after such fair warning has been given that he of the burnt paw is not allowed to enjoy the savory nut!

The facts of the Moroccan crisis, in so far as they have to deal with the Moroccan situation and not with the Bagdad railway or with Monsieur Delcassé, are embodied in the Franco-German agreement, which was signed in 1909 by Von Schoen, representing Germany, and Jules Gambon, representing France. In this exchange of notes the Imperial German Government acknowledged explicitly France's special rights in Morocco, the exercise of which, of course, is only possible in the tranquil, and not in a disorderly Sultanate; and it was certainly understood that Germany would not seek to handicap France in any measures it might be found necessary to take for the preservation of her interests and those of the other powers concerned. From the agreement that was reached, it is clear that Germany admitted at this time she possessed only economic interests in Morocco, and that, consequently, France is bound only to bestow upon German commerce and industry the same rights and the same protection that are bestowed upon every other nation doing business in the country. This treaty of 1909 was certainly a far reaching concession on the part of Germany toward France, and, as was suspected at the time though never definitely known, France paid heavily for her free hand in Morocco by concessions in other quarters. In view of the agreement, it seemed certain that the Emperor of Germany had completely abandoned the nagging policy toward France in Morocco, which had been pursued for so many years anterior to the Algeciras agreement. The only problem that the Moroccan question seemed still to contain was weather the French policy of peaceful penetration would be crowned with success and Morocco become a Gallic dependency without passing through the preliminary stage of long-drawn-out guerrilla warfare on the Algerian frontier and in the Atlas fastnesses. This dream is now rudely dispelled. Germany interferes again in Morocco. She sends the Panther, that stormy petrel of Germany's overseas policy which has raise trouble in Hayti and in Venezuela, and now again appears at Agadir, Morocco's open roadstead on the Atlantic Coast which, however, gives access to the rich Moorish province of the Sus.

Having shown her hand in sending the gunboat Panther to Agadir, Morocco, Germany is awaiting the action of France, which, it is expected, will be taken only after consultations with Great Britain and Russia.

Turkey began military preparations to suppress a revolt in Montenegro

July 5, 1911: From the New York Times news sources:

TURKEY PREPARES FOR WAR.

But Officials Affect to Believe Montenegro is Bluffing.

CONSTANTINOPLE, July 5.— Preparations have been advance a further stage for the general mobilization of Turkish troops, in view of the continued refusal of the rebellious Albanians to surrender and of the activity of the Montenegrin forces along the frontier.

The Government officials at the same time continue to express optimism regarding an ultimate peaceful outcome. They assert that the Montenegrin Government is bluffing. The recall of the Turkish Minister at Cettinje is considered not probable.

from the Toronto World: 
VIENNA, July 5. — Telegrams received here to-say from Centije, the capital of Montenegro, say that King Nicholas is sending 7000 troops to patrol the border passes and prevent the Albanian rebels from entering Montenegro. The king declares his intentions are entirely pacific, and that he will keep peace as long as he is not attacked.


BUDAPEST, July, 5. — Premier Count Khuen von Hedervary, speaking in the lower house to-day, said that the powers closely associated with the Albanian question had come to an agreement for the purpose of bringing about a solution. He believed therefore that no differences were likely to arise that would result in a war.

SMS Berlin Deployed/ Cartoons of Moroccan Crisis

July 4, 1911:  On this date, the German Foreign Office announces that the recently arrived gunboat SMS Panther, into the port of Agadir, on the Moroccan Atlantic Coast, will be relived by the much larger cruiser SMS Berlin. The Berlin is three times larger that the Panther. The German response is to the deployment of French and Spanish forces to quell an uprising against the Moroccan Sultan. The move by German is in an attempt to prevent a land-grab by the French, further isolating Germany in what they considered another act of encirclement.

As these events play out, the world press presents a more humorous aspect to characterize the Moroccan Crisis of 1911

Moroccan Crisis Deepens

July 3, 1911: On this date, the German gunboat SMS Panther reaches Agadir. There is fear that Germany may use this port to establish an Atlantic base.

From the New York Times dated July 3:
"Having shown her hand in sending the gunboat Panther to Agadir, Morocco, Germany is awaiting the action of France, which, it is expected, will be taken only after consultations with Great Britain and Russia.
It is hoped here that the step taken by the German Foreign Office will lead to a general discussion of the Moroccan situation by the four principally interested powers, through which discussion the question will be definitely settled. Otherwise the Germans will remain in Morocco until the Franco-Spanish expeditions have been withdrawn. A general European conference is not expected.
France thus far has confined her comment as an expression of "disagreeable surprise" over the dispatch of the Panther."

In the English House of Commons, prime minister Herbert Henry Asquith when asked by Lord John Lyttelton, who will fight in Gallipoli, responds:

Mr. LYTTELTON

May I ask the Prime Minister whether there is any information which he can usefully give to the House with regard to the reported action of Germany in Morocco?

  Mr. ASQUITH

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will kindly postpone the question until to-morrow.

The response is consistent with the prime minister's outlook on foreign and war time affairs.

World Stands Aghast at Albanian Atrocities

 July 2, 1911: The New York Times publishes a detailed account of the atrocities against Albanians. Just days after the region's tour by Sultan Mehmed V, the plight of the Albanians, seeking independence from the Ottoman Empire, was presented to the American public. Descriptions of Ottoman actions to control the Albanian uprising, with the subtitle, "Massacre and Pillage by the Young Turks in their War to Curtail the Province's Ancient Rights Rival the Awful Scenes of Horror in Bulgaria and Armenia", offer great insight into what actions the failing Empire would take against rebellious ethnic groups in the Balkan War of 1912, as well as the massacres of World War I. The title hearkens to the brutal suppression of the Armenians in the late 1890's, where an estimated 100,000 or more Armenian citizens were slaughtered.

Faik Bey Konitza was a primary focal point in the article, as he sought to raise funds for the Albanian nationalists, from an estimated 30,000 Albanians in the U.S. as well as immigrated Greeks and other regional ethnic groups, "inclined to look with favor on anyone fighting against the Turks"

"In the three years that this insurrection has been going on", the famous Albanian writer Konitza recounted, "over three hundred Albanian villages have been destroyed by the Turks". From ten to fifteen thousand of my fellow countrymen have been massacred - seven hundred of them children. Fifty thousand men, women and children are starving to death - the crops have been laid to waste by the Turks."

In one particularly chilling statement, "...the Albanian women would rather commit suicide than fall into the hands of the enemy. For the young Turks are morally decadent, and only one fate awaits the women captives."

Just a few years earlier the Albanians had hope the the Young Turks take over of the Ottoman Empire would lead to less repression. However, the new leaders reneged on their promise to give regional ethnic groups more autonomy and became as repressive as any previous regime.

German gunboat Panther dispatched Morocco Port

Location of Agadir in Morocco

 July 1, 1911: At noon in Paris, Germany's Ambassador to France, announced that Germany had sent a warship, the gunboat SMS Panther and troops, to occupy the port of  Agadir, Morocco. This sparked the second Moroccan Crisis.

A Berber rebellion against the Sultan earlier in 1911, led to the deployment of French troops to protect interests as well as French nationals in Morocco. This move was strongly dissuaded by the British, as this move would encourage the other European powers to also reinforce their colonies with more garrisons. While the French were transporting troops to Morocco, the Spanish used the upheaval to occupy territory in French Morocco. Germany used to opportunity to send the gunboat to protect German citizens, although there were no German citizens in the port of Agadir and the port was closed to European vessels.
 

In a second hand account, published after the death of Alfred von Kiderlen-Waechter,  in 1912 by the New York Times, the then foreign secretary of the German Empire when asked for the reason for sending the Panther, was allegedly quoted as saying: "My reason for sending was simple...In case of conflict, which was very near, the first thing the French would have done should be to attack and capture the Panther. That means that the first shot would have been fired by France, making her the aggressor and Germany the attacked. In such a case our allies would have been bound by their treaties to assist us."

This incident is considered the most famous case of "gunboat diplomacy", in which foreign policy objectives are aided by overt displays of military power.