Why could the Tanzimat reforms not save the Ottoman Empire?

In 1839 the Edict of Gülhane launched the Tanzimat, "Reorganization": decades of reform that lasted until 1876. Its statesmen wanted to reverse what they saw as the empire's decline by modernising its law, army and administration while promoting Ottomanism, the idea of equality for all subjects.

Why then? Defeats in the Russo-Turkish wars and in the Greek War of Independence (1821–1830) had exposed the empire's inability to compete with European armies.

The edict promised security of life, property and honour for all subjects, fair taxation and conscription, public trials and the end of tax farming. Its most significant clause enforced the rule of law for all subjects, including non-Muslims. Paper banknotes followed in 1840, then telegraphs and railways, and in 1856 a promise of full legal equality for citizens of all religions.

So why did it not save the empire? Reformers met resistance: conservative clerics opposed secular courts and schools, and Christians in the Balkans, who wanted autonomy, found it harder to win under centralised power. Money was the other trap. The first foreign loans came in 1854, for the Crimean War. In 1875 the Ottomans defaulted, and in 1881 a European-controlled administration was set up to collect what the empire owed.

Even so, the state grew stronger over the 19th century. Some historians say the Tanzimat built a powerful national government; others say it sped up the empire's break-up.