resources of the Imperial Russian army in the heartland
· The Reds had a years start in the race to prepare for civil
war
· Fighting on interior lines, they were able to deal with their
ring of enemies one at a time
· The anti-Bolsheviks found themselves on the periphery of the
battle front
· The harsh realities of geography meant that they could not
give mutual support to one another due to poor communication
· In the case of the Whites (conservative military elements)
there was political paradox - Great Russian nationalists and
advocates of a restored and unified Great Russian states were based
in regions dominated by non Russians and autonomy minded Cossacks
· The Whites did not have access to the seas and Allied
support. Allied help did not figure much if this was measured by
involvement of troops in fighting
· The British provision of material to Denikin and Kolchak was
substantial but not sufficient when compared to the Reds who
inherited the tsarist stocks
· The White armies could not establish political stability.
They could not develop effective or politically reliable armies
· The Whites had very limited capacity for state building or
for the rallying of popular support
Pipes: "Whites enjoyed superior general ship and morale. They lost
because they were outnumbered and outgunned,"
Why were the Reds win the Civil War?
The Bolsheviks' victory could chiefly be attributed their superior
understanding of modern warfare. They made a total war, a war which
combined military operations with economic, psychological and other
activities. Trotsky, the Commissar of War, was chiefly responsible
for the successful military operations. He exercised a central
command over the whole army, emphasizing discipline and obedience.
The commanders of the Red Army were staffed with former Tsarist
officers who were willing to co-operate. Officers were punishable by
death if they were defeated in a single battle. Fear of death
compelled the Red Army to fight bravely. In contrast, the White Army
had poor discipline. They were uncoordinated in their war efforts.
The White Army took food from the peasants and so did not have
economic support from the peasants.
The workers rallied behind the Bolsheviks. They peasants did the
same because they feared that once the Whites were in power, they
would repudiate the Bolsheviks' decree of giving land to them.
1. Disunity of the White armies
Pipes: "the critical advantage the Reds enjoyed was that they were
one and their enemies many."
· The various White armies fought as separate detachments. The
White General often acted independently and were thus unable to
coordinate his command
· They had a common aim: to overthrow the Bolsheviks, that was
all. They were never bound together by a single aim.
· The Whites were geographically scattered - thus not able to
bring sufficient pressure to bear on their enemy.
2. Reds were in control of strategic areas
- The Reds controlled a concentrated central area of western
Russia which they were able to defend by maintaining their inner
communication and supply lines
-
· The Reds had control of Petrograd and Moscow
· They held a strong hold on the industrial centres of Russia
· This gave them access to munitions and war supplies that were
denied to the Whites.
-
- Pipes: "The Whites who had access neither to tsarist arsenals
nor to defence industries, depended almost exclusively on what the
Allies sent" When the civil war got under way, the Bolsheviks ruled
some 70 million people whereas Kolchak and Denikin governed no more
than 8 or 9 million each." The Red Army enjoyed at least 2-1
superiority in manpower and sometimes double that
3. Whites not in control of strategic areas
- No major strategy or tactic to hold on to strategic areas
- No control over railways
- Relied on supplies from abroad.
- Assumed dubious reputation for being in league with foreign powers
[implication that they were traitors].
- "The Civil War had produced a paradoxical situation in which the
Reds were able to stand as champions of the Russian nation as well as
proletarian revolutionaries."
4. Reputation of the Whites
· Although the Reds imposed a reign of terror, the Whites were
unable to capitalise on this in propaganda terms
· Their own record of ill treatment of local population was as
notorious as that of the Reds
· " It was not, therefore, that the Reds were genuinely
popular. Indeed, by the end of the Civil War whatever initial peasant
sympathy they had gained had been lost by the severity of their grain-
requisitioning methods. It was that the Whites failed to present
themselves as a better alternative
· The Whites advocated the return to the pre-revolutionary past
· The Reds spread the propaganda that the lands which the
peasants seized would be forfeited if the Whites regained power
5. Morale of the army of the Reds and Whites were badly affected by
poor leadership and infighting I
· Trotsky created an army which proved capable of fighting;
they had an unshakeable belief in their own victory
· Whites on the other hand, uncoordinated collection of
separation forces
· The Red Army was the military arm of a civilian government
whereas the White armies were a military force that also had to act
as a government
· The political differences between the uncertain grouping of
dispossessed socialists, liberals and moderates made sure that they
stayed disunited; in fact led them to bitter disputes
· Hence, the Whites deeply divided: those who were fighting for
local separatism versus those who wanted a return to strong central
government
· The Whites lacked leadership. No White leader of the stature
of Trotsky or Lenin emerged, around whom an effective anti-Bolshevik
army could unite