And I guess if we preserved the ruling house like the Brits and the spaniards did, and also some form of the Caliphate that acted like Vatican, maybe the things would be easier (I'm a secular agnostic, and I'm completely anti-nationalist). Nowadays there is no entity that is respected as a unifier of the Muslim world.
And further, maybe the Empire was better for middle-east. Here, the nation failed, for the bindings among people are mostly based on kinship, belonging to the same mahalle and memleket, and ultimately religion. But in Turkey you'll find many adjacent mosques and churches, for, AFAIK, it wasn't until nationalism took on that the major conflicts started. Under the Ottomans, yes, the muslim were a bit more advantageous, but not less subject to the sultanate than the christian subjects.
Only if you ignore the genocide of 1.5 million Armenians and other minority Christian groups.
Think before you write.
I say this, in the sentence before the one you quote:
> AFAIK, it wasn't until nationalism took on that the major conflicts started.
The genocide happened during the late nineteenth-early twentieth century. Armenians were under Ottoman rule since long before, so were Greeks.
I wonder, will Erdogan bring back Janissaries? Or has he already through his full control of the security forces?