Robert Kite
Student no: 024118736
Course code:5HY021
Assignment 2
“What role did Russia’s performance in the First World War play on the origins of the February Revolution?”.
The real question is was the February revolution of 1917 inevitable? We must therefore make a contrast between past military undertakings and determine if the spirit of national solidarity against the Romanov Dynasty was because of the effects of the First World War, or by the impact of the Russian people and the revolutionary opportunist political groups they formed.
In order to understand events from 1914-1917, it is first important to understandRussia’s background. Russia’s reputation has to be said to be an odd one. Towards its European brethren, Russia portrays itself as one of the Great powers, eager to show achievements and greatness. However its vast territoryis its greatest weapon and weakness.
The shear size of Russia makes it is hard to govern, meaning that poor communications, transportwas the result. Although industrialisation had started in Europe in the first part of the 19thcentury, Russia was half a decade behind.
Russian lacked identity, its territorial span which stretched from Europe to Asia, was made of different religions, nationalities and languages. Its only unity was then by default was the Romanov dynasty, which was neither a strong nor decisive.
The quality of the Russian government before 1905 was non-existent. The “Duma” had no power, whilst the Tsar Nicholas II remained in sole control of the empire and the Tsar had little interest in sharing power. He was not a strong or charismatic leader.
This meant that the masses were unrepresented and not enough political reform had taken place to improve life for the Russian people.
Thepopulation was made up of urban workers but mostly peasants, both whom were poor and illiterate and whose standard of living was low. Peasants worked and lived in villages using out of date farming methods, whilst the workers dealt with poor factory conditions as well. The middle class where small in number and increasingly wanted a say in the government. Fewer in number were the landowners, the autocracy whom were in favour of then notable unfair distribution of wealth as most of the land was owned by the nobility. The approximate population of Russia by the turn of the 20th century was approximately 126 million, and considering that over 90 percent of that was made up out of the oppressed masses, it becomes clear for most of the Russian population does not have a high standard of living.
In 1904, Japan declared war on Russia, as both empires tried to expand into Eastern Asia. The Tsar was extremely confident. Its army was the largest of the entire world, but suffered from poor leadership, as the generals tried to out-perform each other as well as hinder each other.
The portion of the army that fought in the Russo-Japanese war was a conscript army, low in morale. Although the Trans-Siberian Railway had been constructed between 1891-1904, the army was crippled by poor transport facilities and was re-enforced slowly. A limited number of troops and supplies were crushingly defeated by the Japanese. The Tsar humbly signed the treaty of Portsmouth he end the war in 1905.
The Tsar was humiliated, and a rift begun to tare between himself and the people, it was the beginning of social unrest. Asuccessful war would divert the discontent of the Russians from his despotic rule, instead its highlighted its industrial and agricultural and corrupt inefficient government.
The consequence of the Russo-Japanese war was revolution. In the major cities such as Petrograd, the workers went on strike due to inflated food costs.
In January 1905 a priest father Gapon and 150,000 workers staged a peaceful protest outside the WinterPalace, asking for an elected duma, freedom of speech and assembly, guarantee of fair trials and an amnesty for political prisoners. The WinterPalace guards responded by shooting into the crowds.
This event was very significant as its shows that the Russian population wanted to change Russia.The incident became known as “Bloody Sunday”, and laid the rest The Tsar reputation as the “Father”. By October 1905, a general strike engulfsRussia which ends when the Tsar promises a parliament. The Tsarforgot the lessons of the 1905 Revolution. Once the Revolution had ended he loyally returned to his beloved autocracy.
Between 1906-1917 there had been four Duma parliments. The first Duma consisted of the Cadets (Constitutional Democrats), Octoberists, SocialRevolutionary Party and the Social Democratic Party showing that the Tsar was not short of political competition. However, the Duma had been dismissed in 1906 after 73 days of office, dissolved when it produced an anti government majority even though elected on a narrow franchise. The second was dismissed within 3 months.
This indicates that the Tsar knows he is in trouble but does not want to admit it. The third and forth Duma lasted 5 years each from 1907-1912 and 1912-1917. The reason that these Dumas lasted longer was because the Tsar changed the franchise of the votes by a class basis, meaning that 60% of the Duma was allocated to the Landowning Autocracy, and lesser percentages to peasants, merchants and workers. The Duma itself had no power, and little room to make political reform.
It becomes clear, that the Tsar does not want change, but rather stuck in a “dream bubble”, where all is fine as it has always been. The outside world does not exist and therefore is ignored. Believing still that rule should remain in the hands of the Autocracy.
The Romanov dynasty did enjoy a brief “comeback” because of the tercentary celebrations of 1913, but it was not to last. In 1914, Russia entered the First World War. The Tsar again is accused of not having learnt the lesson of the past. The military is still the least organised, supplied and led. It simply lacked the necessity equipment for modern war.
The Russian war effort was laughable, and the Germans made short work of the Russians. The Germans managed to invade the Balkans, the Baltic and Eastern Europe was on the cusp of invading “White” Russia. The biggest military lost was at the battle of Tannenberg and Masurian lakes, 200,000 fatalities were recorded. Military morale was low and the desertion rate was high.
By 1915 Tsar Nicholas II had appointed himself commander-in-chief of the army. This was a niave move. This linked himself with the countries failures.
Whilst the Tsar was “on the front-line”, Tsarina Alexandra was in charge of domestic affairs. She was very unpopular as she was of German descent and corrupted by Rasputin.
The economic situation was at an all time low. The country did not have to industrial capacity to fight a war nor the economy for it. Russias industrial output could found it hard to equip the army, so it was devised that Russia would fight a war of attrition. This lead to a labour shortage meaning that industrial output was low. Food was also in short supply, as the war took 15million men from farms and trains to bring food to cities, and the central powers blockaded goods entering the country. By late 1915, casualties reached 3,800,000 (in 1917 Russian casualties were 9,750,000).
Having lost a large portion of its labour and peasantry workforce, this explains why in 1916-17 there was famine in the cities due to food shortage. Rise in prices stirred unrest and anger in the population.
In February 1917, Russia reached breaking point and Revolution exploded. In the cities such as Petrograd, large crowds rioted throughout the streets chanting anti-war slogans. In Petrograd the workers demanded higher wages and led by Bolshevik agitatorstook to the streets. The Tsar ordered the Petrograd Garrison to disperse the demonstrations and did so unwilling and refused. This is because they to had lost faith in the government and thismuntiny led to many regiments joining the striking workers.
On the 26th February, the Tsar shut down the Duma, but the Duma refused. Michael Rodzianko president of the Duma , wrote a telegram to the Tsar, in an effort to persuade him to form a new Duma government, with the powers to make reforms and restore the confidence of the people.
Once again, Tsar Nicholas II was offered an olive brand of hope but refused it. This shear arrogance and total lack of intelligence crops up throughout his reign as Tsar. He was not prepared to compromise or learn from past mistakes, of which there had mean many. It is unbelievable that he “got away with it” for so long. The strong belief in his own Dynasty.
The Tsar never replied to Michael Rodziankos plea, however, the Duma nominated a provisional Government lead by Prince George Lvov. On the 28th February Russian Army command feared a violent revolution as in the cities that people suffered most from food shortages, and the Petrograd police department was reporting that shortages would cause an popular uprising. Recommendedthe Tsar abdicate and that Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich take the throne, but he refused.
1st March, 1917, the Tsar abdicated leaving the Provisional Government in charge.
Many comparisons arise if one was to compare the Russo-Japanese war with the First World War. The outcomes of the war revealed the vulnerability of the Autocratic regime. War brings society together; if victorious. If not, then society cries in outrage, and denounces the government. The 1905 revolution, was a clear indication that change needed to be made and It was sheer luck that the regime was not toppled.
Although the First World War was a catastrophe for the Russian people, it was the actions of the Tsar Nicholas II that were to blame for revolution. It had been his political incompetence and his blind faith in the Romanov dynasty that led to the ever increasing unrest of the Russian people. The First World War was not the reason behind revolution; it was the catalyst. It made the Russian Tsar the beginnings of the end of the monarchy with the 1917 February and October revolution and the call for the end of the idea of absolutism which culminates in the revolutions in 1917 and the Tsar's death and the royal family in 1918.
Bibliography
Carr, E, The Russian Revolution from Lenin to Stalin, Penguin, 1979
Carr, E, The Russian Revolution from Lenin to Stalin 1917-1929, 2004
Clay, C, King, Kaiser, Tsar: Three Royal Cousins Who Led the World to War, 2007
Figes, O, A People’s Tragedy: The Russian Revolution 1891 -1924, Pimlico, London 1996.
Fitzpatrick, S, The Russian Revolution, 2nd Edition, 2001
Miller, M, The Russian Revolution, 1899-1919, Fontana, 1995
Moorehead, A, The Russian revolution, 1984
Pipes, R, A Concise History of the Russian Revolution, 1996
Pipes, R, The Russian revolution, 1991
Wood, A, The origins of the Russian Revolution, 1986-1917, Methuen 1992