Q Least Successful Leader You Have Studied?

472 Words2 Pages
Intro Tsar Nicholas II is the least successful leader I have studied because he ended 300 years of Romanov Dynasty. What makes this situation worse he was born into a position of power. He was the son of Alexander III. Also he led Russia in many disastrous wars and The Tsar found it hard to cop under the stress of war and losses. He was inexperienced in government and also he thought God had granted him the right to rule and autocracy was the only way. He failed to make reforms and political concessions. He also failed to take extensive ec onomic and political inequalities in Russian society and to make reforms to modernise Russia. One of the main reasons he was the least successful is his decision to take over the army and leave Rasputin and Alexander in Charge. Furthermore WWI exposed his weaknesses further and provided the main reason for his downfall. Para 1 A key weakness was his failure to make reforms even though he had many opportunities. This was shown in his failure to compromise after the events of Bloody Sunday. Forced to make Duma but shut down later. Sent army on crowd. Issued the Fundamental laws 1st law stated ‘To the Emperor …. belongs supreme autocratic power.’ Tsar Nicholas II is the least successful leader because of his belief in autocracy. Para 2 A further weakness was his failure to make reforms when he had the opportunity. Although Stolypin made some economic concessions not pleasing the peasants who were living in poor conditions Tsar Nicholas is the least successful leader because he failed to make reforms. Para 3 A further weakness was his decision to take control of the army and leave Alexandra in charge. WWI made the monarchy slightly stronger, because Russia was allied with France and Britain. Russia was unprepared for war but then Tsar made a fatal mistake of taking command of the army-
Open Document