Impact of the War on Russia!

The initial popularity of the war!

 The declaration of war in 1914 was undoubtedly popular in Russia. Briefly, the Tsar enjoyed more popularity than at any other
point in his reign. For once he could pose convincingly as the personification of all Russians. For a few weeks at least, the
grievances of workers were doused by a rousing wave of patriotism. The Tsar, who weeks before had been jeered and
despised, became the subject of nationalistic affection.
 Yet within 3 years he was Tsar no more, his prestige worn away in a succession of failures and miscalculations.

Impacts!

 During 1914, Russia entered the 1st World War. War put the character and structure of Russian society to test in an intense
way. During the years 1914-1917, the political, social and economic institutions of Russia proved increasingly incapable of
meeting the demands that war placed on them, further exacerbating the plight of civilians.

 Impact of World War One on Russia 1914-1917!

Social/ Inflation –
Economic  The remarkable financial stability Russia had achieved by 1914 was destroyed by the war.
Impact!  There was a significant increase in government spending, which rose from 4 million in 1914 to 30 million
roubles in 1917.
 Russia also needed to raise more capital and thus it heavily taxed its citizens and borrowed money from
abroad.
 Due to these techniques not being sufficient enough to raise the capital Russia needed, Russia abandoned
its gold standard and starting to print more money to pay wages and allow commerce to continue.
 However, in the long run this resulted in severe inflation, as evidenced by the fact that by late 1916
inflation had reached almost 400%, and between 1914 and 1916 average wages doubled whilst the price of
food and fuel quadrupled.

Food supplies and transport –

 During the war years, there were many problems pertaining to food supplies.
 Inflation had made trading unprofitable and thus peasants stopped selling food and began hoarding their
stocks.
 Moreover, the military had the priority in the use of the transport system and commandeered the railways
and roads, and thus food supplies to civilian areas became difficult to maintain.
 The disruption of transport systems further exacerbated food shortages. Whilst the railways in
Russia had grown from 13,000 to 44,000 miles between 1881 and 1914, this was still not enough to meet
the demands of war and moving grain proved to be a problem.
 The attempt to transport millions of troops and masses of supplies to the war front created unbearable
pressures. The railways were overloaded and the signalling system on which the railway
network depended broke down and trains were let stranded on lines due to engine failure or lack of
coal. In fact, less than 2 years into the war, the Russian railways had virtually collapsed. By 1916, some 575
stations were incapable of handling freight.

The war caused acute distress in large cities in particular - deterioration in living standards –
 There were problems of serious overcrowding in cities and towns and a deterioration in living standards as a
result of the expansion of the workforce in factories and mines servicing military needs and the influx of
refugees from Germany’s occupied areas. Making matters worse, shortages (as a result of transport issues)
were at their worst in towns and cities. By 1916, Petrograd and Moscow were receiving only 1/3 of their
food and fuel requirements. For instance, by February 1917 Moscow received 700 wagons of grain per
month, compared to an average of 2200 prior to the war. Similarly, by February 1917 Petrograd was
receiving only 300 wagon-load of grains instead of the 1000 it needed. Furthermore, a secret police report
said that in 1916 workers in Petrograd were on the verge of despair, with the cost of living having risen by
300%, food almost unattainable and long ques outside most shops. It was also reported that death rates
were rising due to inadequate diet, unsanitary and cold lodgings. Strikes broke out in 1915 and they
increased in number and militancy during 1916.
Impact of the War on Russia!

 Impact of World War One on Russia 1914-1917!

Military Problems in the army:

Impact!  shortfall of equipment, compounded by
 poor leadership from generals and officers

 Russia had the largest army of all the countries in the war and gained some early successes against the Austro-
Hungarians. However, whilst vast in number, the Russian army had a crippling weakness – poor leadership.

 For starters, many of the top officers were appointed because of their loyalty to the Tsar despite having no
experience of fighting and little military expertise. There was no clear command structure and no war plan was
developed.
 Secondly, the breakdown of the distribution system compounded by the acute shortage of supplies and
equipment, especially rifles, ammunition and boots, made situations dire. In late 1914 Russia’s general
headquarters reported that 100,000 new rifles were needed monthly, but that Russian factories were capable
of producing less than half this number (42,000 per month). Mikhail Rodzianko, the President of the Duma,
reported this to the Duma, noting the lack of ammunition and poor equipment, as well as the army having
neither wagons nor horses nor first aid supplies. He also pointed out that their military fire was weak, with
shells falling short and dropping amongst the men.

 Consequently, the Russian army suffered heavy defeats and losses from Germany.
 There were occasional military successes, such as those achieved in 1916 when a Russian offensive under
General Brusilov killed or wounded over half a million Austrian troops and brought Austria Hungary to the point
of collapse. However, the gains made were never enough to justify the appalling causality lists.

 For instance, they suffered 30,000 casualties at the Battle of Tannenberg in August 1914 whilst another 100,000
soldiers were taken prisoner. A week later the Russians suffered even heavier losses (170,000 casualties) at the
Battle of the Masurian Lakes, which forced them to retreat from German territory (were driven back). Between
May and December 1915, 1 million Russians were killed and a similar number were taken prisoner, and yet the
Russian army hadn’t gained any significant territory. Such heavy defeats led to disillusionment and
anger about the way the Tsar and the government were conducting the war and public morale
and support for the war started dwindling. By 1916 the initial enthusiasm and high morale of soldiers in
August 1914 had turned into pessimism and defeatism. This is evidenced by the fact that these ill-
equipped and under-fed ‘peasants in uniform’ deserted in their thousands. 1.5 million deserted
the army in 1916.

 However, it can be argued that the historians have tended to overstate Russia’s military weakness in 1917 and
that the effect of the breakdown in morale is often exaggerated. Research by E. Mawdsley and Norman Stone,
has shown that the Russian army was not on the verge of collapse in 1917.* Whilst mutinies had occurred,
these were not exclusive to Russia but also occurred in Britain and France, thus showing that the strain of the
war was felt universally. Stone argues that with all its problems, *the Russian armies were still intact as a
fighting force in 1917.
 Stone also points out that by 1916 the Russians were matching the Germans in shell production and there had
been a 1000% growth in output of artillery and rifles. They had success against the Austrians and contributed
significantly to the Allied victory by mounting attacks on the Eastern Front to relieve pressure on the Western
Front. For instance, in 1916, Brusilov saved the French at Verdun.

Link between socio-economic impact and military impact–

The suffering that the food shortages and the overcrowded transport system brought to troops was worsened by the
incompetence of the soldiers’ officers and the lack of regard for their welfare, as well as heavy military losses, which led to a loss
of morale.
Impact of the War on Russia!

 Political impact of World War One on Russia 1914-1917!

The Role of the Tsar in the War –
 As military defeats piled up, support for the Tsar faded.
 The food shortages, inflation, incompetence and inability of the government to effectively organize supplies for the
military at the Front and people in the cities became apparent. This highlighted the inadequacies of the current Russian
government.
Duma demanding its own recall, formation of non-governmental organizations!
 Russia’s poor military showing led to the Duma demanding its own recall a year after it had voted for its own suspension in
August 1914 as a show of support for the Tsar. Nicholas II bowed before the pressure and allowed the Duma to
reassemble in July 1915.

 One major political mistake that the Tsar and his ministers made was their refusal to cooperate fully with non-
governmental organizations, such as the Union of Zemstva and the Union of Municipal Councils which at the beginning of
the war had been wholly willing to work with the government in the national war effort.
 These unions formed a joint organization called Zemgor and started providing medical care, hospitals and hospital trains
for the thousands of wounded soldiers. They went on to supply uniforms, boots and tents. The success of the
Zemgor/non-government organizations highlighted the government’s own failures and hinted that there might be
a workable alternative to Tsardom. The Tsarina regarded these non-governmental organizations with contempt, viewing
them as revolutionary bodies undermining autocracy.

The formation of a progressive bloc –

 Progressive elements (236 of the 422 duma deputies) in the Duma formed the ‘Progressive Bloc’ composed of the Kadets,
the Octobrists, the Nationalists and the Party of Progressive Industrialists.
 Initially, the Bloc did not challenge the Tsar’s authority directly. They wished to be fully involved in the war effort and
wanted to prevent the country from slipping into revolution and anarchy. The Bloc called for a ‘ministry of national
confidence’ in which elected members of the Duma would replace the incompetent ministers to form a new government.
Details!

 Whilst this offered a real chance for the Nicholas to be working with the people and offload some of the
responsibility for the war, the Tsar wouldn’t countenance it and suspended the Duma. In doing so, he destroyed the
last opportunity he would have of retaining the support of politically progressive parties.
 One of the Bloc’s members, Vasily Shulgin, an ardent monarchist, noted that the Tsar was short-sighted for viewing the
Bloc as an enemy rather than a friend, pointing out that the whole purpose of the Progressive Bloc was to prevent
another revolution so as to enable the government to finish the war.
 With the Tsar and his government refusing to work with the Progressive Bloc whilst simultaneously proving incapable of
running the war, the Bloc became increasing frustrated by the Tsar’s intransigence. As a result, the Bloc’s support for the
Tsar waned, and whilst it initially wanted to work with him for political stability, it became a source of political resistance.

August 1915 – The Tsar took charge!

 In August 1914 the Russians were forced to order a massive retreat from Galicia and Poland. The outraged Tsar made a
telling error, removing his army commander-in-chief, Nicholas Nicholaevich, and taking direct control of the army himself
in August 1915. He left St Petersburg and went off to military headquarters in Mogilev, 600 km away from Petrograd.
 Nicholas’ generals and several of his civilian advisors opposed this move. This was because the Tsar’s only military
experience was confined to cavalry training; he had no practical experience of strategic warfare or commanding infantry
and artillery in combat.
 The impacts/consequences of this move for the Tsar were significant.
 Nicholas’ decision to take command of the military had no significant effect on Russia’s war effort; he rarely intervened or
countermanded the decisions of his battlefield generals. However, this decision meant that the Tsar now became
personally responsible for the conduct of the war – if things went badly he would be directly blamed.
 Furthermore, this decision meant he also abandoned Russia at a time of domestic crisis, the reins of government left with
Nicholas’ ministers, the incompetent Tsarina and Rasputin.
 This is significant because the Tsar’s decision to leave the Tsarina in charge created chronic instability in the government.
Details

This is evidenced by the dismissal of competent ministers such as the War Minister, Polivanov, who was rebuilding the
army and supply system after the disasters of 1915. Furthering this is the frequent change of ministers between 1915 and
1917 – there were 4 different Prime Ministers appointed, as well as 5 different Ministers of Internal Affairs and 3 Ministers
Impact of the War on Russia!
of War. This constant change of ministers created political instability and led to the situation in cities further deteriorating,
with food and fuel in short supply [use statistics about Petrograd’s situation in 1916]. Consequently, by the end of 1916
support for the Tsar was rapidly waning, as all classes in society became disillusioned by the way the government was
running the war. The government elite was in disarray and even some of the nobility were supporting the Progressive Bloc
in the Duma. This is significant as it conveys the extent to which the Tsarist autocracy was thought to
be incompetent.

Link between political impact and military impact –

 The Tsar’s decision in August 1915 to take direct control of the army meant that all the military defeats would be
blamed on him, which further highlighted his incompetence to the already weary civilians and troops who’d
become disillusioned by heavy military losses.

Link between political impact and socioeconomic impact –

 The Tsar’s decision to leave the Tsarina in charge led to chronic instability within the government. This is
evidenced by the constant change of ministers between 1915 and 1917, with 4 different prime ministers being
appointed, as well as 5 different ministers of Internal Affairs. As a result of this constant change of ministers, the
situation in cities further deteriorated, with food and fuel in short supply. This in turn led to a loss of support for
the Tsar, as all classes in society became disillusioned by the way the government was running the war.