Higher History - Russian Civil War

Alternative transcript:

that the Reds' strength helped secure their victory as they had control of Russia's main engineering and armaments factories making them not only larger, but more armed than the Whites. By controlling the railway, this enabled the Bolsheviks to keep their forces supplied and to rush reinforcements to battlefronts where they were threatened. However, it can be pointed out that a large population was not beneficial as many peasants resented signing up to war. This led to 4 million men deserting the Reds army during the course of WW1. In evaluation, Red strengths were a key reason for their victory. Michael Lynch argues that: 'the troops who believed sincerely in the Communist mission made a vital contribution to the relatively high morale of the Reds'. This suggests that because the soldiers shared the same ideology, they were more committed and effective in battle as they were working for the same goal. Weakness of the Whites Another reason why the Reds secured victory was because of the Whites' weaknesses. The Whites were weak as there was no one person in charge of them, instead they had 4 leaders such as Denikin and Wrangel. The Whites were a coalition of different groups, united by the desire to get rid of the Bolsheviks. White army forces were brutal, and many deeply anti-semitic leading to up to 50,000 Jews being massacred by White armies. It can be argued that the Whites' weaknesses led to the Reds victory as the Whites had little chance of developing a coordinated military strategy as they had four leaders who fought with their armies independently. This led to White generals often not working together because they did not trust each other, and as a result, there was virtually no cooperation between the various White armies, and also striking fear into peasants which led to them refusing to support their army. . However, it can be pointed out that their weaknesses were exaggerated. The whites were not poorly led, they had superior generalship and morale compared to the Reds. This therefore meant that what really undermined the Whites was the number of soldiers and access to weaponry. In evaluation, the strength of the Reds were more important than the weaknesses of the Whites in securing the Reds victory as the Whites' army was not structured, and was smaller in size. Historian Evan Mawdsley argues that "but more important was the fact that, in terms of manpower, the Whites were greatly outnumbered". This suggests that the Reds had an overwhelming superiority of numbers, where they controlled the vast terrain of central Russia and the core of the Railway network, enabling them to shift their forces from Front to Front. The Whites by contrast, were smaller and were divided by several different Fronts, making it difficult to coordinate their operations, where they were dependent on the untrustworthy Allies - such as France - for much of their supplies. The Leadership of Trotsky Another reason for the Reds victory was the leadership of Trotsky. Trotsky recruited 75,0000 ex-Tsarist officers, where he insisted they would bring expertise, essential to winning the civil war. Political Commissars were drafted into army units to spread socialist ideas and ensure loyalty to the Bolsheviks was maintained. Officers that were found guilty of cowardice or treachery were executed, and the death penalty was reinstated for orindary soldiers too. It can be argued that the leadership of Trotsky secured the Reds victory as Trotsky was the one who made the decision to save Petrograd when it was under threat from the Whites. Trotsky disagreed with Lenin's view that they would have to give up Petrograd, as the capital had been moved to Moscow, so he raced off with his train and after a fierce fight, turned the White army away. However, it can be pointed out that Trotsky made major mistakes in foreign policy in early 1918 as he tried to disarm a group of Czech soldiers. This then led to them launching a determined campaign against the Reds, and in economic policy in 1920. In evaluation, the leadership of Trotsky was more important in securing the Reds victory as Trotsky was more strategic than Lenin. Historian Peter Oxley argues "with his dedication to the cause, Trotsky inspired uncertain officers and men, and his ruthlessness against waverers became legendary". This suggests that Trotsky was indeed a better leader as he visited the front line occasionally, where he kept in close contact with the front line and also took his special troops to the points where fighting was firecest. Lenin in comparison was some-what feared by the Reds as the Red Terror threatened the unity of the Reds as they were horrified by the wave of executions carried out, and the abandonment of peasants who were left to starve. The Leadership of Lenin Another reason why the Reds secured victory was due to the leadership of Lenin. Lenin's most significant decision during the war conflict was to introduce War Communism. Lenin used Cheka, who were his secret police to combat threats from enemies. The Cheka unleashed what became known as Red Terror, the name given to the wave or arrests and executions, which were now a rule in Russia. The most famous victims or Red Terror were Tsar Nicholas II and his family, who were shot in July 1918. It can be argued that Lenin's leadership secured the Reds victory as having one undisputed leader meant Bolsheviks had a clear command structure. Also, whilst the famine in the countryside was a terrible human price for the policy, the aims to feed workers and supply the Red army were achieved, which were vital in helping the Reds to win. However, it can be pointed out that these actions had negative consequences for the Reds' war effort as War Communism alienated a huge number of peasants. This in turn may have contributed to the high dissertation rates faced by the Red army. In evaluation, Lenin's influence on the military conduct of war was not as high as people have made out. Historian Evan Mawdsley argues "Lenin's role in the Red victory was not as universal as Soviet historians now maintain". This suggests that Lenin did not maintain consistent cooperation in military decision making at an operational level, in fact he never visited the front and rarely consulted the high command. Conclusion Overall, the main reason for the Reds winning the Civil War was due to their own strengths. Whites's weaknesses were significant as they did not share the same ideology, where some wanted the return of the Tsarist regime, others a democratic republic. However, the Reds were a stronger force as they shared the same ideology (establish a Communist Russian state) and had one leader meaning they had the power to overcome any threat faced by the Whites. Trotsky's leadership was significant as he was a strong leader for the Reds, can be seen by the fact he travelled in an armoured train to the front line to encourage the troops. However, the Reds' own strength was more significant as without their strength and power, Trotsky would have nothing to show from his leadership. Lenin's leadership was significant as the Cheka killed around 300,000 people under his leadership, protecting the Reds from threat. However, his leadership was too brutal, and the Reds did not feel the need to use a brutal strategy, their sense of unity made them a more committed and determined fighting force. Therefore, the Reds' strengths cannot be faulted and are therefore the main reason why they won the Civil War.