History 19/02/20 frame of filmimage whether the White army to win the Civil war
the Genre of historical alternatives was not born in the last decade, but much earlier. The loser in any conflict, then was taken to analyze the mistakes, the reasons for their failures and to find ways that would lead to victory. This was highlighted in the white emigration after the civil war in Russia. The assumption of such alternatives was not alien and early Soviet historiography, while it has not yet become a public myth-making.
Alternatives that memoirists and historians of the Russian Diaspora were invited to the White movement, can be divided into two categories. Some referred only to military-strategic aspects and argued that only the wrong choice of direction or time of shock to prevent the victory of the Bolsheviks. Others have found the reasons for the defeat in the political events, starting from the axiom that the civil war is primarily a political conflict and in the second place – the battle of the armies.
in the Summer of 1918 the Red army was organized. However, the strength of its opponents were in their infancy. However, the chances of the whites to win at this time was probably above all, if they could properly dispose of their forces.
this was written in 1925, the red army commander, former Lieutenant Colonel of the tsarist army Nikolai Kakurin. He drew attention to the different times of these demonstrations against the Soviet regime as a revolt of the Czechs on the TRANS-Siberian railway (may-June 1918), rebellion in several cities of Central Russia, prepared by the SR Boris Savinkov (July 1918) and the landing of British troops at Arkhangelsk (August 1918). If all these actions occurred simultaneously and in concert, in the relative vicinity of Moscow – Upper Volga region could fussKnut the North-Eastern front of the civil war. And then the chances of the retention of Soviet power would be very shaky.
At the same time, in the summer of 1918, different prospects opened before the Volunteer army of General Denikin in southern Russia. She could relocate to the North of the don region, rebelled against the Bolsheviks, and from there to start the March on Moscow, as proposed by the don ataman Pyotr Krasnov. Also grouping with don could go to Tsaritsyn, then to Saratov and to connect with the white guard armies East of the country. This idea was made “Supreme head” of the Volunteer army General Mikhail Alekseev. But Denikin chose to move away from the vital centers of Soviet Russia and help to break free of the Cossack regions of the North Caucasus.
once again the prospect of a unified white front occurred in the spring of 1919, when he launched his offensive of the army of General Denikin and Admiral Kolchak in the South and East of Russia. However, both commanders, instead of having to move to a compound in the district of the Lower Volga, chose to advance on diverging directions. Your main attack Kolchak was applied in the direction of Kazan — Nizhny Novgorod — Moscow, and Denikin was moving along the route Donbass Kharkov — Moscow.
About the importance of the lower Volga direction has consistently said Denikin, General Wrangel, who offered to throw the main forces of the Volunteer army in the Tsaritsyn — Saratov. But Denikin provided troops for this direction only after Kolchak’s army was already defeated in the Middle Volga and began to retreat.
However, in the summer of 1919 Denikin’s army seemed strong enough alone to capture Moscow. In June, after the capture of Kharkov Wrangell proposed to concentrate all the cavalry units of the white forces of southern Russia to attack in the direction of Moscow along the shortest direction. But Denikin’s army instead moved to Ukraine, where he was involved in the fighting Petlura and Makhno at once turned from enemies of Soviet power in its FAticheskih allies. The March on Moscow was able to deploy only in the autumn, when the Bolsheviks managed to consolidate their power.
the Choice of strategic directions has been caused, as a rule, a policy. So, only because Denikin in 1918 went to the North Caucasus, that he has not got the Germans. The split of the anti-Soviet movement in 1918 on the “German” and “Entente” orientation prevented concerted action of its various parts. When the factor of Germany because of its defeat in world war II, has disappeared, the Bolsheviks managed to create a powerful Red army.
Denikin, and a number of leaders of the white movement were accused after the war the Western powers that they did not have any White movement sufficient military aid, although the overthrow of the Bolsheviks were in their direct interests. There is no doubt that more extensive intervention of the Entente could lead to the fall of the Soviet regime. I think, however, that the rulers of England, France, USA, etc. better than Denikin, understood their interests in Russia.
Many saw the defeat of the White matter that Kolchak and Denikin with his dictatorial claims and support for extreme right-wing circles alienated all democratic forces. It was noted that the Cossacks were unwilling to fight outside their Cossack lands, as Whiteguards more reminded them of the restoration of the tsarist regime left a not the best memories. Denikin and Kolchak, of course, has not found common language with the national movements striving for autonomy from Russia.
However, the biggest political miscalculation of the White movement was, of course, the reluctance to meet the interests of the masses of the peasantry. The government of the former tsarist generals and admirals returned to the landlords the land selected by the farmers in 1917-1919, and where they could not – compensate for its loss at the expense of the peasants. The result: those peasant rebels who fought against the Reds, with the arrival of the whites turned their weapons against them. Only 1920 year Wrangel in the Crimea and Northern Tavria has issued a decree securing land for the peasants (though the redemption in installments), but this turn in the white guard politics came too late.
amid the multimillion-dollar relationship of the peasantry to the struggle of the parties in the civil war, all other factors – the vagueness of the slogans of the White movement, lack of democracy, the attitude towards the nationalities, the personality of leaders, the choice of the main blow, etc. – played a minor role. White has not gained mass support.
of Course, impossible to say, what do the leaders of the white armies one or the other step and victory would be assured. But for her, it would surely be more.
in General, it is obvious that, in the presence of mass resistance to Soviet power by all segments of the population in all regions of Russia, the White movement clearly failed to use many presented him a chance to win.
© Russian Seven
Recommended statesalaska… Share: Comments Comments on the article “Could the White army to win the Civil war” Please log in to leave a comment! br>
Share on Tumblr