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

Russian failure during the Russo-Japanese war was the principal catalyst for Revolution in Russia in 1905. How far do you agree with this statement?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Transfer-Encoding: chunked ?Russian failure during the Russo-Japanese war was the principal catalyst for Revolution in Russia in 1905.? ? How far do you agree with this statement? The Russo-Japanese war, a conflict largely of Russia?s own making, began in 1904 and for which one of the main motives was to distract national attention from Russia?s domestic troubles by rallying the nation in a patriotic struggle. To assess its significance with regard to its part in acting as a catalyst for the 1905 revolution it is necessary to consider how other economic, social and political factors of this era would have influenced the minds of the Russian people and how this would have contributed to revolution. Russia?s humiliating defeat in this conflict would have certainly been a factor in causing national unrest in that it undermined national confidence and thus provoked a want for change in Russian society. Despite this, long term political problems in Russia caused tension for years prior to the revolution and it is this which I believe was a more significant catalyst for Revolution in 1905. In 1904 opposition to Tsarist rule was growing and consequently Tsar Nicholas II was advised by Plehve, the Minister of the Interior, that a ?small, victorious war? would ?avert a revolution.? This combined with the notion that Russia needed to further its expansionist policy in the Far East and a need to an ice-free port resulted in the Russian government rejecting Japanese proposals for the settlement of the Korea question in an attempt to provoke a military response. ...read more.

Middle

Sergei Witte, a highly influential Russian policy-maker, supported State Capitalism through which he believed modernisation could be achieved. He imposed heavy taxes and high interest rates at home in Russia and limited the import of foreign goods. Despite the fact that Witte?s aim of modernisation and urbanisation was largely achieved, this resulted in consumers being penalised as they had to pay the higher prices traders introduced and prices tended to rise as a result of tariffs making goods scarcer. The Trans-Siberian railway which Witte pioneered encouraged connection between the remote central and Eastern Empire and the industrial west, which in turn encouraged the migration of industrial workers to cities to work in factories. However, the living conditions in these factories were often appalling and thus it could be said that this contributed the emergence of events relating to the revolution such as Bloody Sunday, as they provided hardship which promoted social unrest. Moreover, he paid no attention to Russia?s agricultural needs, thus neglecting many of Russia?s peasants who lived in hardship and it could be said this further contributed to social agitation. Although it is certain that Witte?s Economic Reform did have positive benefits, it did also undoubtedly have negative impacts in Russia which could be said to have contributed to the Revolution. When comparing Russia?s humiliating defeat in the Russo-Japanese war to the negative effects of Witte?s economic reform, I would agree with the statement in that I feel Russia?s maritime defeat was a more significant catalyst for revolution than economic reform. ...read more.

Conclusion

The long term effects of mistrust in the Tsar?s government policies and the opportunity this provided for revolutionary groups to inspire a vision of change seem to have provided the basis and thus principal catalyst for Revolution, whereas the end to the Russo-Japanese war seems to have come at a convenient time which provided a final force to ignite Revolution. To conclude, it is my belief that the principal catalyst and predominant reason for Revolution in Russia in 1905 was in fact a combination of political factors leading to social unrest, as opposed to Russian failure during the Russo-Japanese war. Having said this, the war was indeed important in that it came at a crucial time for igniting revolution. These political reasons for agitation in Russia, including a dislike of the Tsarist government, affected many members of society which allowed revolutionary groups to essentially inspire revolution. Although Witte?s economic reform could be said to play a part in political issues given his high position in government, alone I believe that reform brought more prosperity to Russia and was a just attempt to avert Revolution. Finally, with regards to Russia?s failure in the Russo-Japanese war having been a principal catalyst for Revolution in 1905, I feel that although humiliating for Russia, it wouldn?t have had such a significant effect as it seems to without Russia?s economic and political issues alongside it and thus was not the principal catalyst. ...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 Modern European History, 1789-1945 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 Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Stalins Russia, 1924-53 revision guide

    * Some items needed for Industrialisation needed to be imported from the West, and could only be paid for in the short term by food exports, again increasing the need to raise productivity in the countryside. * Of course the peasants were happy to produce more food.

  2. How far was the Russian Japanese war of 1905 the cause of the 1905 ...

    It again demonstrated the ineffectiveness of government's ideas. Hence, it provided another reason for a change in the government. The intelligentsia especially blamed the government for the industrial backwardness. All this exacerbated the grievances of the people and turned them against the government.

  1. Vietnam war

    or even triple that', and advised Johnson not to try to completely rout or destroy the enemy forces. * Broke the US policy of escalation, and furthermore their hopes of an outright militaristic victory in Vietnam. * Deepening pessimism in of the US public in regards to the Vietnam War.The

  2. Russian Revolution Sources Questions

    Stalin would go to in order for Stalin to destroy all opposition 'He is a monster who will kill us all' sums up how worried they are about Stalin's actions and how far he would go to secure his place as party leader.

  1. How far do you agree that the Russo Japanese war was the biggest cause ...

    Even the Tsars most supportive biographer concluded that this ?disastrous and unnecessary war with Japan was more Nicholas? fault than anybody else?s.? This horrendous defeat gave the public a welcomed opportunity to openly criticise autocracy. Autocracy had caused Nicholas to blunder into the war.

  2. How far did Russia undergo economic and political modernization from 1881-1905?

    He didn?t know whether to industrialize so he could keep up with countries such as Germany and Britain. However the disadvantage of industrialization and modernisation would mean he might have to delegate some of his power. The Russian economy was also unable to advance as it had a poor banking

  1. The Somme Offensive Failure - analysis of the sources.

    The third reason for the failure of the barrage was that the British guns were placed too far behind the front lines, and were therefore very inaccurate. In some places, the German lines were virtually untouched. Source 1.2 (Adrian 1986, p.

  2. Alexander III bequeathed Russia a revolution. How far do you agree with this statement?

    One way in which dominating, repressive control was brought in was through the establishment of The Statute of State Security. This was issued by the new Interior Minister in August 1881. This statute included the return of government controlled courts and the establishment of the Okhrana (the secret police).

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