1978-06-03 — Page 26

頁二第張七第 日八十月四年午戊曆夏 WAH KIU YAT· PO

歷史科建議答案

Section B

胡應亮

Europe, 1870 ± 1962

5. Explain the circumstances

in Russia which led to

the 1905 Revolution and examine its effects upon the future of Tsarist Government.

In the early 20th century, Tsarist Russia experienced two revolutions, one she managed to survive, the other she did not.

The causes of the Russian Revolution in 1905 (as those of the Russian Revolution in 1917) were deep social and economic stresses, an obdurate: and apolitical Tsar, the lack of political reform, political leaders who were fanatically determined to make revolution, and above all, a disastrous war. These factors, be they impersonal historical forces or personal with, mutually influenced óne. another. In the end, the culmulated effect was revolution.

Towards the ending years of tsarist rule in Russia, socio-economic problems were getting increasingly serious. Despite the/ Emancipation Act of 1861, the agrarian problem was far from solved. The serf (slave), though literally freed"

often

did not receive the land he had expected.

In general,

he was even overcharged as tax for his agricultural yields. Rural grievances were thus unlifted. The

serf's ignorance and inefficiency were prolonged, his dissatisfact- ion with the regime. intensified. For example, the mir (comune) which was responsible for « HEY

collecting the peasant's redemption obligations for freedom, tended to replace

oppressive landowning class as an instrument to enslave the former serfs. Many these serfs escaped from the mir into the cities, and such an influx of peasants into urban areas only created job problems or great demand for housing --- in short, more social problems.

Оп

the other hand, population growth was rapid, resulting therefore in continued low standard of living. Factory working conditione were no less problematic. As worker's welfare and security legislations were hopelessly inadequatej. factory accidents were numerous. Society, in short, was pervaded with poverty and discontent.

The blame for all such suffering was naturally. put at the door of the Tsarist government, It was justly so. Political reform was lacking. The Tsarist autocracy permitted little or no democratic représentation. This had the effect of intensifying political oppositions to the regime. Nicholas II, who ascended the throne since 1894, answered them with increased repression. The peaceful liberal movement was thus rendered ineffectual. The liberal gentry were mindful. of safeguarding selfish, local interests, while the liberal intellectuals only pursued highsounding, impractical goals. resultant political" frustration radicalized

The

anti-tearist political

activities. · Illegal political organizations

like the Union of

to

Liberation were set up to campaign for more liberties. Towards the late 19th century, there were even. Marxist-inspired groups

like the Social Democrat Party. In view of the

government's uncooperative

attitude which made peace-

ful reform unrealistic,

many such radical grouping:

resorted to desperate. terrorist acts of assassination, Alexander II was assassinated, attempts were made on Alexander IIT's life, and several thousand lesser:: officials and private citizens were murdered. Social discontent combined with political radicalism to undermine Tsarist rule.

Had the Tsar realized the imminent situation and done some thing to pacify it, revolution might have been avoided. Yet Nicholas was authoritarian-minded- and reactionary, trusted Piehve, Minister of the Interior, who was a police bureaucrat fond

Government of repression. became more and more paternalistic, at times even tyrannical.

He

In Society, industrialization produced.

a working class that became an effective instrument for political action under the guidance of the radicals. To modernize the country, the government decided on industrialization at all. cost, even at the expense. of the peasant's welfare, Unorganized, angry, widely dispersed, illiterate and poorly led, the peasants were a reservoir of unrest.

The Russo-Japanese. War of 1904-05 was in part

the result of Tsar Nicholas a belief that Russia had a grand mission

It to perform in Asia. was Plehve who argued that "a small victorious war would stop the revolution- ary tide" As it happened however,

that sparked off & revolut

ion.

As Russian forces met with defeat by the Japanese, public anger over government.

it was the war

inefficiency and impotence was mounting. A strike

in the Putilov armaments works in Moscow broke ont. Soon, all workers in the capital were involved.

Father Gapon was their leader. When they marched to the Winter Palace trying to petition the Taar on Sunday, January 22, they were shot at by the royal police. It was the "Bloody Sunday". The revolutionary movement began.

The effects that this. 1905 Revolution left behind

were many.. First, it provided much valuable experience for future successful revolutionaries like Trotsky, who worked in St. Petersburg when the First Soviet was founded there. Through the 1905 Revolution, solidarity among the Russian workers was strengthened. Worker's Councils (Soviets) grew powerful in cities like. St. Petersburg, Lenin realized that in any future revolutionary uprising, the Soviets were a determinant of success. He was correct as far as the 1917 Revolution was concerned, In this sense, the 1905 Revolution was a prologue to the 1917 one.

Secondly, a growing segment of the political nation began losing trust and faith in the Tsar. Thus Father Gapon said, "Nicholas Romanov, formerly Tsar and now destroyer of souls"

Indeed, in the

1905 crisis, the government had shown itself both weak and shortsighted. The prestige of Tsarist rule in Russia was shaken. Thirdly, the Russian liberals were given a chance to press for political reform. The

報日僑華

Tsar was forced to give way, andan Imperial

manifesto proclaimed a grant of civil rights,

六期星

the institution of a Duma' (parliament) in the election of which all social classes would participate, and a guarantee that all laws would be enacted only with the Duma's approval. Though constitutional concessions proved limited, the Duma truly went a long way towards democratic government. Fourthly, land reform was introduced by the government which recognized the seriousness of the agrarian problem. Thus Stolypin, Minister of the Interior after 1905. allowed industrious peasants to leave the communes and to hold their land as individual owners. Redemption payments were ended, Also, the government encouraged both industry and peasant resettlement of the Siberian lands.

The problems remained unsolved.

They were to exacerbate during the First World War. Then the 1917 Revolution exploded. Seen in this way, the 1905 Revolution proved to be the last warning for the Tsarist government to reform itself.

The aftermath of the revolution proved to be the last chance for it do 90.

1905 was no doubt a turning point in Russian history.

Trace the formation of the Triple Entente and show how the Alliance System contributed to the outbreak of World War One

By the Alliance System" we refer to the Triple Alliance and the Triple Entente, both of which were formed before World War I and thus related to it. The Triple Entents, the completion of which was in 1907, condisted of Britain, Russia and France.

It was one of the two alliance camps that European Great Powers were divided in

Its the years 1870-1914. formation was in direct response to that of the Triple Alliance between Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy. Bismarck was generally believed to be the one responsible for creating the Triple Alliance. By allying with Austria and Italy, be aimed at

isolating, France on the. European diplomatic scene. By concluding » Reinsurance. Treaty with Russia, he' made sure that the Russian government would not ally with France, an alliance that would threaten Germany on two fronts. While Britain remained in "splendid isolation", Germany would continue to dominate European affairs.

But things did not continue to work so well as expected, Firstly, after Bismarck's fall from power in 1889, Kaiser. William II, who was young and ambitious, dropped the link with Russia and refused to renew the Reinsurance Treaty. Russia, in search of an ally, fixed her eye on France. Franco-Russian relations had been good in the early 1890's. For example, French loans were extended to help Russia with famine relief and the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway. Indeed, both powers were interested in an alliance as a counterweigh against the Triple Alliance. And so, in 1893-4, overcoming some mutual dislike of each other's form of

日三月六年八七九一腿公年七十六國民華中 育教僑華

government' (French

Republicanism versus

Russian autocracy),

Russia and France reached an alliance known as the Franco-Russian Alliance. They promised military support for each other if attacked by Germany. The first step towards the formation of the Triple Entente was taken.

Secondly, Britain began to consider the abandonment of "splendid isolation". Different reasons explain her willingness to do so, among which the decline of British world power, the gradual loss of British commercial and industrial aupremacy, the increasing colonial rivalry among European Powers, and the expansion of German military might that threatened to upset Europe' Balance of Power could be included.. The most suitable ally for the British seemed to be Germany. Afterall, Britain had traditionally been opposed to Russia and was unfriendly with France in colonial matters. Yet German policy served to make it unlikely for an Anglo-German alliance. There was not only an active promotion of colonial expansion by Germany, which increased conflicts with Britian the colonial giant, but also German naval armament buildup, which challenged British-mastery over the sea. Thus despite negotiation between Germany aud Britain for the possibility of an alliance in the late 19th century,

no such alliance in the end materialized. Britain began turning to France. This was natural, for both of them were alarmed at the growth of German power. Besides, their colonial rivalry had by the early 1900s settled. In 1904, they signed the Entente Cordiale. To be sure, unlike the Dual Alliance between Germany and.. Austria, it was not a military pact. However, there was an ̈ unwritten" understanding that Britain and France would support each other if assistance was necessary. Thus during

the Moroccan crisis of 1906, Britain secretly guaranteed France against any German naval attack.

France now tried to draw Russia and Britain together, Again, it was the fear of Germany that provided the impetus for an Anglo-Russian agreement. For example, Germany was building the Baghdud Railway to Persia, which threatened. British and Russian interests there. In 1907, the Anglo-Russian Entente became a fact. Anglo-Russian colonial disputed over Persia and Afghanistan were patched up. The formation of the two alliance camps, between the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria and Italy) and the Triple Entente (Britain, France and Russia), was in this way complete.

Whether or not the Alliance System brought about World War I was difficult to decide. The plain facts in 1914. had it that it did not. In that fateful summer, Russia mobilized against Austria and Germany because of Austrian declaration of

war

on Serbia, not because France, Russia's ally, was attacked, France declared war on Germany. and Austria because she was attacked, not because Hussia, France's ally, was militarily threatened. Britain declared war on Germany and Austria because the neutrality of

Belgium was violated by

German invasion, not. because Britain wished to honour any obligation of

the Triple Entente. In fact, British participation Gin the First World War was

uncertain to the last, Countries that be longe to neither of the two alliance

like the camps, USA, entered the war 10. the course of time. Italy. who belonged to the Triple Alliance, fought on the side of the Triple Alliance instead in the. end. In short, the Alliance System did not automatically and mechanically bring about the First World War,

But taken for its long- term effects, the Alliance System did contribute to the outbreak of World War I.

For one thing, great- power relations were strained by hostile confrontation between powers of the two alliance camps. Suspicion, distrust nud jealousy were nurtured. Secondly, the Central Powers, Germany and Austria, changed the nature of their Dual Alliance from originally being defensive to being offensive in 'nature after 1908. In that year, during the Bosnian crisis, Germany promised.. Austria armed support to annex Bosnia and Herzegovina. in the Balkans. In other words, instead of

on the Dual Alliance

a mechanism to prevent⠀⠀ war, Germany andAustria made use of it to forward aggressive designs. Likewise, after the assassination of the Austrian archduke in the summer of 1914, Germany gave Austria full support ("a blank

increase

pressure.

to

on Serbia. Thirdly, instead of being restrained, members of an alliance might be paradoxically emboldened to engage in more diplomatic ventures, there were friends to depend on for support. Risks were shared rather than borne alone if a

This power had an ally. in part explained why⠀ Russia dared to mobilize against Austria and Germany in 1914; the Taar realized that France and Britain were on Russia's side. Fourthly, each succeeding international crisis in the 1900s and early 1910s tended to tighten the bonds within each of the two alliance blocs. In the Bosnian and Moroccan crises, for example, Britain was drawn closer: to France, Germanu closer to Austria. The result was diminishing hope of peaceful understanding, as the gulf between the two alliance camps grew wider and deeper. Fifthly, for fear of appearing disloyal, members of an alliance camp had often the habit of uncritically supporting their allies. This happened as regards Germany and Austria. Sixthly, as mutual fear mounted, the powers built up their armament as a preparation for war, which was one of the underlying causes of the First World War. Military links were getting closer, witnessed, for example the Franco-Russian Naval Agreement of 1912 and the Anglo-French or Anglo- Russian military talks.

Still, World War I was not the directTM outcome of the Alliance System alone. Otherwise, men would have become the helpless agents of an impersonal mechanical system.

The powers fought with one another because they wanted or they thought they were.