Which Of Tsar Nicholas Ii’s Actions Were Proof Of His Poor Leadership Qualities And Speeded Up His Downfall And That Of The Romanov Dynasty?

WHICH OF Tsar nicholas II’s actions WERE proof of his poor leadership qualities and speeded up his downfall and that of the Romanov Dynasty?


CANDIDATE NAME: ANTONELLA LADOS
CANDIDATE NUMBER: 002410- 009
Word count: 1993

TABLE OF CONTENTS |

Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………..…………..…2
A. Plan of the Investigation……………………………………………………………………………….3
B.Summary of Evidence……………………………………………………………………………………4
C. Evaluation of Sources……………………………………………………………………………………6
D. Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………………………7
E. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….…………………………..…9
F. Bibliography...……………………………………………………………………………………………..10

A. PLAN OF THE INVESTIGATION |

Objectives: To identify and assess Nicholas II’s actions and examinewhich of them prove his unfitness to rule and accelerated his downfall.
Methods: I will explore and analyze primary and secondary sources obtained from books and Websites. Sources 15 -a cartoon that was published in Harper's Weekly, an American magazine- and 2 -an extract from the book “A People’s Tragedy” by Orlando Figes- will be assessed.

Words: 66

B. SUMMARY OF EVIDENCE |

NicholasII firmly believed in the principles of autocracy. His counselors were submissive and commited when he was present, but they knew of his indifference regarding public affairs and his tendency to act impulsively. The Russian Empire was vast and troublesome, and Nicholas was incapable of ruling it efficiently. Sergei Witte, the able and open-minded minister of finance, proposed to transform Russiainto a modern society, where personal and public initiatives would be encouraged and peace kept, to allow for Russia’s assets and manpower to be used for industrialisation. Consequently, when tensions arose between Russia and Japan, Witte warned that an armed conflict would bring catastrophic consequences. Witte’s ideas were sensible and he was highly respected by his peers, but Nicholas wasworried that he was becoming too powerful and prestigious, and eventually sacked him.
Witte’s deposition came at the critical time of negotiations previous to the Russo-Japanese war. Witte advised to accept the full terms of the prerequisite demanded by Japan in July 1903, if war was to be avoided. Contrarily, Plehve argued that what Russia needed was a short, victorious war to stem the tide ofrevolution, so, Witte’s warning notwithstanding, Russia confidently went to war to a faraway front, and was defeated. The humiliating failure was due to the lack of proffesionalism of members of the army and poor management of public affairs.
In his memoirs, Witte said that the Tsar was completely out of touch with reality; he called it “a mixture of cowardice, blindness and stupidity”. Nicholaskept writing about all kind of superficial and irrelevant facts in his diary, at times when Russia was on the brink of collapse. Soon, more vigorous discontented groups would present a greater challenge to Nicholas’ regime. Shortly after the war disaster, “the most influential event to weaken the relationship between the people and the Tsar” occurred; Bloody Sunday, followed by contagious socialunrest and violence. Again it was not the Tsar, but a minister who took political action to restore order. Nicholas was totally bewildered and told him that he acted as if a revolution was about to break out! Soon afterwards, in August 1905, Nicholas signed the October Manifesto promising certain civil liberties including freedom of speech, meeting and association. He also announced the creation of a“Duma” or parliament – whereby no law would be passed without its approval.
Another of the many questionable decisions taken by Nicholas was to leave the capital for the battlefront, to commandeer his troops in 1915. This not only meant a problem for his army, but also for all Russians left under the rule of Tsarina Alexandra and her advisor Rasputin. Their administration was loathed by...