Overview of the Gallipoli Campaign

841 Words4 Pages
“A badly conceived, poorly executed fiasco.” How well does this describe the Gallipoli campaign? The Gallipoli Campaign was undoubtedly a badly conceived, poorly executed fiasco. It isn't surprising that the Gallipoli Campaign was such a failure, especially with these contributing factors; the hierarchies’ underestimation of the Ottoman Empire to think that they could simply sail straight through to Constantinople, the unforgiving terrain that the infantry had to fight in and the mere disorganisation and horrible planning of the whole campaign. Gallipoli was meant to be a purely naval campaign. The aim was to sail straight through the precarious Dardanelles unchallenged and capture the capital of the Ottoman Empire, Constantinople, therefore forcing the Turks out of the World War 1. This was a very ambitious strategy, which in retrospection was too simplistic. There were too many factors opposing the success of this campaign. The Dardanelles, being quite a narrow stretch of water, could be easily defended with only a few well placed sea mines and strategically positioned artillery. After the loss of 3 battleships on March the 18th, it was decided that the aid of the army would be required to defeat the forts that guarded the straits. This army had to fight in a very rugged, mountainous landscape and in horrible conditions. It was the planning behind these circumstances that greatly influenced the campaign and changed it from a planned “quick invasion”, to a bloody seven month struggle. Troops were landed on the shores of the Gallipoli peninsula in hopes to overrun the Ottoman defences that were preventing the Allied ships from passing through the Dardanelles. The maps provided for Allies were very misleading and didn't show the land effectively. This could have been one of the factors contributing to the ANZACs landing at the wrong place. The landing should have
Open Document