(Turkey ka Mustaqbil aur Musalmanu ka Farz) and 
(Mu‘ahadah Turkiya aur Musalmanu ka ’Ainda Rawaiyyah) and can be found in Volumes IV and V of Anwar-ul-‘Uloom.Spanning from the end of the First World War to 1924, the Khilafat Movement was a pan-Islamic protest campaign on the part of certain Indian Muslims. It opposed the dismemberment of Turkey following its defeat in the war and sought to pressure the British government to safeguard the authority of the Ottoman Khilafat. The movement was spearheaded by the brothers Shaukat and Muhammad Ali and by Abul Kalam Azad and found support from various other Indian Muslim leaders including Maulana Mahmud al-Hasan, Barrister Jan Muhammad Junejo and Syed Ata Ullah Shah Bukhari.
Though the fate of Turkey was not directly related to the politics of India, its future was a cause of grave concern for the Muslims of the region as they viewed the Ottoman Khilafat as symbolising the political and temporal power of Islam, as well as the international unity of Muslims.
In the initial stages of the movement, various conferences, meetings and gatherings were held to determine its aims and objectives and decide upon a manifesto.
Though invited to attend these events, the then head of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Deen Mahmood Ahmad (ra), declined the requests citing the obduracy and intransigence of the members of the movement. He did, however, communicate his views on the issue at two of the conferences, by way of written addresses which he sent through a small envoy of representatives.
These addresses have been brought together and published in this book.
Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Deen Mahmood Ahmad (ra) primarily argued that one of the major flaws of the movement was that by insisting on the acceptance of the Sultan of Turkey as the true leader of the Muslim world, it disenfranchised vast swathes of the Muslim community from rallying around the Turkish cause and sent a message to the Western powers deciding on the future of the country that there was no unity amongst the Muslims on this issue. He also asserted that for the movement to succeed, it needed to respect the newly found independence of the Arabs and not demand that they remain under Turkish control.
Huzoor also urged the Muslims of India to cooperate with the British government, rather than agitating against it. He warned that it was only the British who were expressing the concerns of the Muslims before the Allies and, therefore, it would not serve the interests of the Muslims to antagonise their primary ally. Any domestic agitations would also distract the British from peace negotiations by turning their attentions to internal concerns within the Empire.
Instead, he advised that instead of setting out short term goals, the Muslim community ought to unite together and work towards acquainting the Western world with the message of Islam, so that the animosity many of them held against the Muslim world could be extinguished. Huzoor argued that until this happened the West would always be hostile towards Muslims. Thus this was a struggle not just for the future of Turkey, but for the future of the entire Islamic world. These addresses not only offer a great insight into the political struggles faced by the Muslims of the time, but also reflect the conflicts and tensions which afflict the Muslims of today and are, therefore, an essential read for their historical importance, and their contemporary significance. They were originally published in Urdu under the titles (Turkey ka Mustaqbil aur Musalmanu ka Farz) and (Mu‘ahadah Turkiya aur Musalmanu ka ’Ainda Rawaiyyah) and can be found in Volumes IV and V of Anwar-ul-‘Uloom.