The start of world war II was a shock for Stalin because Hitler was always a threat but when he introduced the attack plan of operation Barbarossa Stalin was worried. Operation Barbarossa involved 3 million German Soldiers in 153 divisions pouring across the frontier into the USSR. Within the first three months the Germans destroyed the entire air/ tank force in the USSR as well as taking 2million lives. By 1941 the German army was trying to siege Leningrad, and they had almost reached Moscow. Stalin was under threat in 1941, as well as being crushed by the German army he was seriously considering surrendering to the German army which would have destroyed the USSR. However German advance was halted by the Russian winter. This gave Stalin plenty of time to reform the red army rebuild his air force and tanks (T34, a very effective tank which could be produced in numbers), Stalin also gave the army more free doom to act there selves. By 1943 2/3 of the German radio messages were being interrupted by Russian troops. Harsh discipline was also used in battle, the “ Not a step back” technique was introduced were the soldiers had to fight for there lives and if they decided to run back to there officers they would be executed on the spot. This harsh discipline was unfair but very effective because the soldiers would be more brutal towards the Germans causing there moral to disappear. Kursk was the turning point of the War on the Eastern front because in may 1945 the Red army had pushed the Germans back to Berlin were Hitler committed suicide minutes before soviet troops reached him. So this war was a success for Stalin because the Red army has begun to put communists in control of country’s.
Stalin Begins to take control of eastern Europe in 1945- 48, Stalin turns Europe into Communists, Whilst gradually chopping off opposing countries, and things that will bring the countries down . In 1953 Joseph Stalin died of natural causes, he was at the peak of his power. Even after his death he was perceived as the man who changed Russia. I feel that in Stalin’s own terms I can official say that he was a success because every situation Stalin faced he always cam out on top.
Secondly, was Stalin a success in his own terms?: in Russia’s terms there are three points which prove him not to be a success. Firstly the Five-year plan. The five year plan never did much for the Russian workers , because the first five year plan concentrated on capital goods such as shoes clothes etc which was only good for yourself, which were not that important at that time in Russia. The other five Year plans concentrated on consumer goods such as coal, oil, railways and trucks etc which was good because it could help others. The five year plan also concentrated on military productions before during and after the war, which resulted in the workers being alienated from the system and there own productivity was low meaning that they didn’t benefit from any thing that was being produced. In the terms of Russia Collectivization was a failure because peasant motivation was destroyed during the modernization of Russia. There was a mass amount of brutally treated people who disagreed with the system (kulaks). The overall death rate of peasants and farmers consequently from collectivization was 7million in 1933. This Left the peasants/ farmers also alienated from productivity , because even though they achieved new farming equipment they still didn’t get given enough food to feed themselves ( peasant famine) . So only the upper classes benefited off the collectivization. Although the great terror introduced a sense of discipline into the USSR it completely destroyed the Russian military ,by taking there independent thinking and moral, leaving the USSR under threat from the attack of Hitler.
Secondly, the threat of Hitler left Stalin no choice but to trust Hitler after the Nazi- Soviet non aggression Aug19. So predictable caught by surprise in 1941 Hitler invaded the Soviet union and began to crush the country. But luckily enough the cold winter and the perseverance/ pure moral of the new red army defeated the Germans, giving themselves all the credit, not Stalin. Thirdly I feel that Stalin was to blame for the Cold war because of his inadequate spending in the arms race (which he started, between the Americans). The arms race was basically a childish game, seeing who could buy the best toy (weaponry). In Russia during 1945 the economical system was like a third world country, but its weaponry was first class. They had already secretly produced the A-bomb (which was used to bomb Hiroshima, 70,000 deaths), put the first rocket into space and produce 1st class military weaponry. This production of weapons etc costed 1/3 of Russian productivity which left the standard of living very low it also continued to alienate the low productivity- threatened by Regans “star wars” project. Stalin’s attitude towards his people proves that he was a bad leader because he was more interested in the weaponry he owned, than the welfare of his own people. The last communist leader after Stalin tried to reform the system but it just fell threw and the Soviet Union ended in 1991.
Lastly, was Stalin a success in the terms of Communism?: Stalin wanted to turn Russia in to a communist country due to the Carl Marx theory, which meant that the human race would one day reach the last stage of history he called “ Communism”. There were three points of authority, which came with Communism:
∙Equality, meaning that every one would help to build a better country.
∙Men would work for the common good and not the individual gains.
∙ Men would live in Freedom.
Stalin followed Carl Marx’s theory but he didn’t abide by the points because the introduction of the great terror which left the people with no freedom or equality. Stalin had completely transformed Russia into a Communist state , which after his death was tried be reformed by Khrushchev (1956-64), but made no impact , from 1964 to 1982 to communist system cruised along with no major changes made, until 1991 the Stalinist system collapsed.
After studying the three points I have changed my mind over Stalin being a major success. I feel that Stalin was a success in his own terms because every goal in which he wanted to achieve during his time of reign was meet. He economically changed Russia he produced a well-disciplined country and provided the country with safety from threat of invasion. However I feel that Stalin was not a success in Russia’s terms because the five year plans didn’t produce any productivity for the workers and the peasant farmers, this meant they had a low support in Stalin and no trust in the economical system, they only did things because they were forced to. The collectivization of the Farms were a disgrace because Stalin treated the Peasants as cattle: he produced them to collect their milk (grain and food etc) and if they died he would just use them as a bad example against the communist system. This technique was effective for the high food supply but it came with a price, 7 million deaths. Another key point that proves Stalin not to be a success in Russian terms, is “the arms race” and how Stalin got Himself into a war just because he couldn’t admit USA had a more advance weaponry and military. In the terms of Communism Stalin was both a success and a failure. He was a success due to the fact he Transformed Russia into a Communist country, but whilst doing that he put a whole new meaning to the word communism. Stalin turned Communism into to a ruthless, brutal system, which would control the deaths of many innocent civilians.
I have come to the verdict that all these reasons can be linked to prove Stalin to be a success For instance Stalin’s strong character shows a lot of perseverance, which is linked with the great terror because the reason he launched the great terror was to put across the image of a strong character, and his strong character continued throughout his reign until he nearly surrendered to the Germans. Both the five-year plans and the collectivization can be linked because they both involve producing goods for a better Russia, these productivity was meet but it left the people of Russia with nothing to gain. Finally I feel that Stalin was too harsh towards the Russian people because he could have succeeded in transforming Russia by using a less brutal technique, For example Bukharin’s plan were he motivates the workers and the peasants, whilst keeping a balanced productivity gain off there work.
