* Lost terriorty in Poland & Western Russia – PG were blamed for losses just like the Tsar was when took charge. * War made finical problems – Inflation still a problem and food shortages were high. * Russia expected these things to be stored out – PG short-lived because they were full of empty promises. Promised land reform to the peasants ( made up a large amount of the population , Bolshevik priority was to keep them on their side) no action was taken * Couldn’t guarantee food supplies as because soviet controlled the railways. * Political reform also promised political reform in an attempt to stop the revolutionaries but no action was taken.
The Tsar made many failures as Commander in chief of the army especially at the battle of Tannenburg where the majority of the Russian second army was destroyed which forced the Russian army to retreat. This coupled with other military defeats led to mass desertions towards cities. It also led to many soldiers knowing of the Tsars failures which would have supported the claim for a revolution. The war effort also caused the Zemstva and the Congress of Representatives of Industry and Trade to grow which were used to help stimulate production and provide medical facilities. The government failed to efficiently incorporate these into the war effort which resulted in them becoming a symbol for the shortcomings in the war effort.
All Russian governments in this period faced strong opposition to their regime with the period as a whole punctuated by riots, disturbances and revolutions. Political change was expected in Russia during this period, particularly during the Tsarist regime where the growth of the revolutionary intelligentsia, ironically an effect of the Great Reforms, led many to question the need for a Tsar or a royal family at all. The first main success of political opposition is widely considered to be the assassination of Alexander II at the hands of the People’s Will in 1881. Although they assassinated their Tsar, it is very likely this did not actually lead to their desired outcome, it being greater political freedom/democracy. Many historians have said Alexander II was considering the formation of a parliament in Russia.
There were many factors in the survival of Tsarist rule from 1881 – 1905. The divisions among it's opponents played a part, as it meant that Tsarist opposition had no common goals, and couldn't work together to achieve it. The October Manifesto is another factor, it split up Nicholas' opposition even further by dividing the Liberals into two groups. Pobedonostsev & his repressive policies played a large part in the Survival of Tsarist autocracy, as he was able to keep the people down, not giving them enough ground to start a successful revolution. Lastly, Russia's backward society is one of the main reasons Nicholas II survived after 1905.
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. The decision of Tsar Nicholas II to lead his troops on the front line is a debateable one, however I believe that due to his lack in military training and knowledge on how to lead troops, coupled with the fact he left the Tsarina to rule in his absence with the assistance of Rasputin , that this decision was a terrible one. Tsar Nicholas II dismissed his uncle as the head of the military and made the fateful decision of leading his troops himself. He believed that his presence would inspire the troops, however his lack of military expertise proved disastrous for the Russian war efforts. The Tsar left his wife to rule in his stead with the aid of Rasputin who was an advisor to the Romanov family.
Trotsky described war as the ‘locomotive of history’. How far can it be argued that change in Russia in the period 1855-1964 was caused only by involvement in wars? During this period the biggest change that happened was the move from Tsarist autocracy to communist dictatorship as well as the short lived provisional government, which was a form of democracy. Furthermore there were changes to economic policy, which had a great impact on society. The wars that occurred did bring change but were not the only causes of change.
Some peasants left to work in the cities as the Tsar wanted Russia to be an industrial power, however the living conditions there hardly improved, which matched their dreadful working conditions. This poor treatment is what led to the 1917 strikes that helped force the Tsar to abdicate from the throne. This was an important factor in bringing down the Tsar because with so many people opposing him (over the years, because of food shortages and war failures, they were supported by women and army members, and the number of workers on strike rose to 250 000), he had no choice but to give up. However, I believe there is more causes behind this so I wouldn’t label it the most important factor of the Tsar’s abdication. Russia’s poor performance in WW1 played a very significant role in bringing down the Tsar too.
Both soldiers and civilians blame the defeats in the war and the growing crises on the home front on Tsar. Even the Tsars only army stated it wouldn’t support him if a revolution occurred. Explain the importance/significance of World War 1 to the downfall of the Tsar WWI was a very significant event on the rule of Tsar Nicholas 11. Although it initially bolstered his position, it then became a large factor that contributed to Nicholas’ downfall. The Country was ecstatic when the Tsar made the announcement that Russia was going to fight against Germany in WWI.
‘The First World War had a more significant impact on the development of the Russian government than any other war in the period 1855-1964’. How far do you agree? Undoubtedly across the period from 1855 to 1964 Russian government developed significantly in a number of key aspects as a direct consequence of its wars. However, the issue over which war should be considered most pivotal in its impact on the Russian government’s development is less clear-cut. Examining the impact of wars on the issue of who ruled Russia, its ideological basis, its level of democracy and the level of repression that accompanied it, it seems fair to say that the First World War indeed had the most significant impact, though rivaled closely by the Russian Civil War in particular.
Communism and capitalism was not really a big issue, the big issue was the Axis Powers. Conflicts started escalate when Germany was defeated. Germany was unified among the allies after the war but there were two distinct groups. Russia wanted control over Germany because they suffered the most out of anyone and they were the main reason the Nazis were defeated. They feared of a future German invasion.