Additionally there were developments that occurred without war, which illustrates that involvement in war was not the only cause for change. Therefore war was an important catalyst and factor to significant changes but was not the sole cause of change. The war that caused most change was Word War One due to its role in the February revolution in 1917 and the fall of the provisional government in the October revolution. The defeats of the war dwindled support from liberals and Octobrists for the Tsarist regime, which was further worsened by criticism from organisations including the Central War Industries committee and the union of Zemstva. This formed support and reason for the Progressive Bloc.
Source W is very similar due to the fact that it blames Germany’s strengthening of the military and navy to a large extent, however proclaims their ‘peaceful intentions’; whereas source X dwarfs Germany’s contributions as a state, placing more responsibility for the outbreak of war on Austria-Hungary. Even though I believe that aggressive German Foreign policy was a huge and significant factor as to why the war grew so much geographically and became so violent, like source X, I believe that the real cause of the outbreak of the war in 1914 was Austria-Hungary and their policies in the Balkans. Aggressive German foreign policy is considered by many historians the main cause of the outbreak of war in 1914 due to their military and naval expansion which had taken place since the early 1900s. As source V suggests, the Germans ‘felt encircled’ by members of the triple entente, their only ally being revealed as Austria-Hungary at the Algeciras Conference where they were the only other country (aside from Morocco) to vote in their favour. Germany’s relations with other Great Powers had started to deteriorate since the battle for expansion of
Why did the opposition grow between August 1914 and December 1916? “The events that took place on the Eastern Front...would have a profound impact upon world history for the remainder of the century.” This reference shows that the facts and historic value of the tsars ruling had a profound effect on history that century. In August 1914 Russia was facing hardship. June 28th Franz Ferdinand was assassinated which later started a war between Germany and Russia. The opposition against the Tsar grew due to the loss of war and other factors such as; the Tsar controlling the army, the refusal to co-operate with the Dumas and Rasputin being an advisor.
If Russia’s economy was relatively healthy in early 1914, how did it manage to be in such a sad state of affairs by 1917? There are many factors that contributed to this: the decision to go to war, the direction of the Russian war effort between 1914 and 1917, economic and social factors as well as political developments. So how did the Russian Empire manage to collapse so quickly? The answer lies in the changing nature of warfare after 1914, as well as the social and economic strains that a war of that magnitude imposes. This is implying of course that the decision by Nicholas II to go to war against Germany and it’s allies in 1914 was wrong, but this is not the case.
World History Since 1500 04/10/11 Chapter 27 Chapter 27 was about World War I and its economic and political consequences. There were a couple sections that interested me greatly throughout chapter 27. The first section that interested me a lot was the section titled “World War I.” The main section of this that I thought was interesting was the events that led up to the beginning of World War I. In the 19th century, Russia, and Austria competed to expand their influence into the Ottoman Empire. They openly disagreed on the building of railroads through the peninsula, and boundary revisions.
It is without a doubt that the great war was a major factor for the outbreak of the February revolution in 1917, however many other factors have to be taken into consideration when dealing with a complex issue such as this. Issues such as the decisions made by Tsar Nicholas II whilst in power, the lack of political reform since the October manifesto was issued in 1905, the socio-economic position of the proletariat which was ever worsening and the fact that this revolution was much more organized than the 1905 revolution all contributed to the outbreak of the February revolution. When Russia mobilised against Germany on its western front, families were to each send a male who was capable of fighting to conscript in the Russian military. The Russian military at the time was poorly trained and equipped compared to that of Germany. Russian train infrastructure was relatively new and underdeveloped, when war broke out the rail lines were used to transport troops and supplies for war, food shortages in cities were afflicting the masses, this caused discontent at home.
It can be argued that the outbreak of war in 1914 was a culmination of a series of wars and national incidences that affected Europe in the nineteenth century. The Napoleonic wars, the Crimean War, the Balkan Wars, German and Italian Unification, the French Revolution, together with growing military nationalism in the major European states all contributed to tensions and alliances that made major conflict inevitable. This essay will explore the five major players in this conflict and examine their role in what was to become the most devastating conflict the world had ever seen. We will examine how each country arrived at this state and evaluate their roles and responsibilities as they tipped into military conflict. We will also delve into the complex and intricate series of alliances that acted like a domino effect in 1914 and in summary we will interlink the complexities of the status of each country in relation to their allies and enemies in an effort to understand why Europe was plunged into four years of devastating conflict.
To what extent had Russia’s problems been solved by the time of Lenin’s death in 1924 ? Since the start of the 20th century Russia had a vast range of problems, which had to be sorted if Russia had any ambitions to be a powerful nation. These problems included a collapse of a whole social system as Tsarism was abolished in 1917. Nicolas ii was forced to abdicate because of his inability to make decisions and the critical economic state, Russia’s failure in the First World War didn’t help his popularity. This naturally led on to a power struggle.
The War also had massive social and economic impacts on Russia that resulted in a strike that ended with a revolution. The Tsar going to the front was the start of the clear path that lead to the revolution in February 1917; he had left his wife the Tsarina in charge of Russia and relied on her to tell him how things were going at home. While police reports in 1916 were saying that the country was in complete social unrest, on the brink of a revolution, while the Tsarina was sending letters to the Tsar saying that the unrest was merely some of the population acting like a bunch of teenagers and they would get over it. The Tsarist Autocratic system had managed to survive a revolution in 1905 but now that the Tsar did not really know what was happening it was doubtful that there wouldn’t be a revolution soon. The Brussolov offensive caused a major blow to Russia because the Tsarina advised the Tsar not to send any troops to the north as Rasputin had foreseen their failure in the north.
A few years later, a crisis arose in the Balkans, as a result of which, the Dreikaiserbund was terminated. In 1877, the Russo-Turkish war broke out with Russia defeating the Turks in 1878. After fierce resistance, the Turks surrendered and signed the Treaty of San Stefano. By signing this treaty, Russia acquired greater influence in the Balkans. Nevertheless, Austria-Hungary did not accept this settlement but on the other hand Bismarck was eager to prevent a