• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

'British failure at Gallipoli contributed to the collapse of Imperial Russia'.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

'British failure at Gallipoli contributed to the collapse of Imperial Russia'. Gallipoli has previously been crudely blamed for the Russian Revolutions of 1917, like many critical events in history, there is always more than one event that triggers such action. This paper will examine the lead up to the battle of Gallipoli the main events that took place during this period, Britain's part in the Gallipoli operation, the impact and consequences of the decisions made by British military in charge. It will also look at its involvement and by the nature of its decisions whether Britain had a part to play in the aforementioned revolutions. Britain and France were fully aware the importance of staying neutral with Turkey, in the event of any hostilities. Both were greatly distressed when two days before the outbreak of the First World War, Turkey formed an alliance with Germany against Russia, although Turkey was not committed to any military action. Britain could predict the disastrous affects this would have on Britain as grain was transported from Russia through the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles, which was under the Turkish Ottoman Empire. It also hindered the export of military arms and supplies from Britain to Russia, the Ottoman Empire had a history of repressive rule under the Hamid family, when in1877 Sultan Mohammed V Hamid took over the rule from his brother he was merely a ...read more.

Middle

Seaplanes used as spotters to enable the fleets gunnery to range on the shore batteries, were constantly hindered by weather conditions, this prevented most of the time the beneficial use of these seaplanes. The mounting pressure caused from these delays and the insistence by Churchill to Carden for 'urging haste in the operation', resulted in Carden to suffer a nervous breakdown. De Robeck took command of the fleet, although there was a more suitably experienced Rear Admiral by the name of Rosslyn E. Wemyss, de Robeck took command; a questionable decision like many others made by the military during the Gallipoli operation. De Robeck made his first attack on the 18th March 1915, what was of great concern was his inconspicuous plan, when he led HMS Queen Elizabeth with the first wave up the channel towards Kephez minefield, he was in full view of the Turkish and German Artillery spotters, who could quite clearly see what was happening. The plan was to pound the forts at Kale and Kilid Bahr from a distance of approximately eight miles believing the forts would not be able to reply, this was not the case as the coasted and mobile batteries kept up a constant fire, damaging the structure of many of the ally battleships. ...read more.

Conclusion

The revolutions of 1917 would have taken place regardless of the outcome in Gallipoli, if munitions had of reached Russia sooner, they would have kerbed Russia's hunger or gave ammunition to its soldiers, but it would not have taken away the feeling that time had come for tsarist rule to end and a political power that represented the people to begin. There were large no of casualties for all countries concerned, but for Britain Gallipoli was a major defeat, not only in the lives of the many British troops, but it also destroyed Britain's reputation for navel supremacy. The people of Britain could not believe the defeat and the French navel commanders no longer trusted British navel intelligence. Gallipolis legacy is bitter sweet for the negative backlash against Britain for its lack of military leadership but here is a positive side for the Australian and New Zealand troops who had entered the war for the first time, their courageous fight and solidarity amongst its troops was tremendous and hence is celebrated on the 25th April every year and is known as ANZAC day. The British Gallipoli plan was seen by both politicians and military authorities of the time as being the only truly innovative strategic concepts of the entire war, unfortunately its allied commanders were less than innovative their lack of planning military tactics and the absence of competent leadership was the real essence behind the failure at Gallipoli. . ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Moon Landing: Conspiracy or Reality?

    In this essay I have analyzed the physiological, political and technological views surrounding the controversy around landing on the moon in July 21st 1969.

  2. Dunkirk - A success or failure?

    Also to ass to facts source 9 is also writing taken from another history text book about Dunkirk, written by 'John Harris' called the storms of war in 1988, this source is created from one of the naval officers who was at Dunkirk during the war, to tell us about

  1. Many peoples have contributed to the development of the United States of America, a ...

    Outbursts of patriotic celebration and cries of loyalty to the crown infused the Americans. The tremendous cost of the war itself and the huge responsibility accompanying the new possessions, however, left Britain with an immense war debt and heavy administrative costs.

  2. How Significant were the Normandy landings in Defeating Germany in World War Two?

    I know this because it says so in bold at the bottom of the source. The fact that he is from Normandy is a great factor to his perspective of the attack itself. He isn't going to be bitter about the landings as the allies came to liberate France, not invade it.

  1. Why did tsarism collapse?

    happened in 1914-1915 while the divisions between the officers and the men once the patriotic euphoria had died down were ignored as causes for failure. As Norman Stone says 'constant talk of shell-shortage, and the blaming of everything upon it, concealed a much more important factor: the increasing crisis of authority in the Russian army.'

  2. American History.

    Unfortunately for the Indians the settlers soon realized that rum was a useful gift. *Colonial Families* - Families constituted the basic units of colonial society, but their forms and structures varied widely during the 18th century. The types of families included...

  1. How Stable Was the Tsarist Autocracy in 1914?

    In fact it was the failure to realise the rising economic and political expectations and the peasants' assertiveness of those goals that would ensure tensions only got worse and instability flowered. The Neo- Populist Revisionist historians also point out that Stolypin's reforms of the Commune were pointless as major innovations had taken place in villages where communes prevailed.

  2. After the collapse of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, the world ...

    But must this anarchy be explained through environmental concerns that increase the misery of the poor part of the world and cause social unrest, eventually producing an anarchic society or can it be explained by other ideological or cultural factors.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work