How far could the historian make use of Sources 3 and 4 together to investigate the
problems associated with the foreign intervention in Russia after the Bolshevik takeover?
In this essay I will be comparing sources 3 and 4 together to find if they could be effectively
used by a historian to investigate problems associated with foreign intervention in Russia
after the Bolshevik takeover.
Source three a confidential report by British diplomat bases in Russia to the British
Government, meaning that the report is likely non-bias and a honest account of the
situation, on the 22 December 1917. This source shows the Difficulty and hesitance that the
British government were showing towards intervention in the Russian civil war, “Does not
Commit us in any way”. The British Government at the time were unsure how and even if
they should aid the white forces against the Bolsheviks. The worry for the British
Government at this point on the 22 of December 1917 was that if they supplied the
Bolsheviks, they would put in to jeopardy the alliance that they had formed for the first
world war and a break down in relations would result in the possibility of Russia signing a
treaty with Russia which we know happens in 1918 at the treaty of Brest Litovsk’s. From this
source three shows some of the difficulty and reasons for hesitance in the British showing
problems associated with the foreign intervention. Another point that can be taken form
the source would be it shows what would have been a possibility if the Ally’s had committed
fully to intervention. The British diplomat who is Based in Russia and therefore has a first
had account of the situation and the mentality of the Russian people suggests that an
advantage of “Open assistance would be of great moral encouragement to all parties who
are opposed to the Bolsheviks.” And that it would help swell support from officers and
support from the people. Another problem with the foreign intervention that the source
shows is in aiding the white army’s through money and supply’s. “we can provide secret
assistance, chiefly in the form of money” the allies believed that simply providing aid in the
form of money and supplies would be enough. This shows the historian that the allies did
not fully understand the nature of the situation in Russia. The money that was supplied
proved to be useless as even in rare instances that peasants were willing to trade for
currency were was nothing of real use to the army’s other than bread to be bought. The
main problem the white armies faced was a lack of means of production meaning that it was
highly difficult to secure ammunition and guns. And in the cases were this was directly
supplied by the allies it was poorly distributed and even sometimes fell into Bolshevik hands
as in one instance Trotsky wrote a letter to the British government thanking them for the
supplies that had fallen in to their hands from retreating white armies.
Source four a memoir of R H Bruce Lockhart, a British secret agent is a direct account of
events in Moscow in the early days of August of 1918. It is clear that for the Bolsheviks the
prospect of large, allied intervention spelled the end of the Party, “Bolsheviks began to pack
up, ready for departure” this shows that if the ally’s had fully committed to the cause they
would have been able to crush the Bolshevik party. Just the news of a landing in Archangel
of 100,000 men was enough to have Bolsheviks preparing to leave Moscow. This could show
the precarious state that the Bolsheviks were In at this time in 1918 with army’s such as
Yudoniches North western army making considerable advances the prospect of a allied
invasion would have likely won the war. Instead however as the Agent finds in the following
problems associated with the foreign intervention in Russia after the Bolshevik takeover?
In this essay I will be comparing sources 3 and 4 together to find if they could be effectively
used by a historian to investigate problems associated with foreign intervention in Russia
after the Bolshevik takeover.
Source three a confidential report by British diplomat bases in Russia to the British
Government, meaning that the report is likely non-bias and a honest account of the
situation, on the 22 December 1917. This source shows the Difficulty and hesitance that the
British government were showing towards intervention in the Russian civil war, “Does not
Commit us in any way”. The British Government at the time were unsure how and even if
they should aid the white forces against the Bolsheviks. The worry for the British
Government at this point on the 22 of December 1917 was that if they supplied the
Bolsheviks, they would put in to jeopardy the alliance that they had formed for the first
world war and a break down in relations would result in the possibility of Russia signing a
treaty with Russia which we know happens in 1918 at the treaty of Brest Litovsk’s. From this
source three shows some of the difficulty and reasons for hesitance in the British showing
problems associated with the foreign intervention. Another point that can be taken form
the source would be it shows what would have been a possibility if the Ally’s had committed
fully to intervention. The British diplomat who is Based in Russia and therefore has a first
had account of the situation and the mentality of the Russian people suggests that an
advantage of “Open assistance would be of great moral encouragement to all parties who
are opposed to the Bolsheviks.” And that it would help swell support from officers and
support from the people. Another problem with the foreign intervention that the source
shows is in aiding the white army’s through money and supply’s. “we can provide secret
assistance, chiefly in the form of money” the allies believed that simply providing aid in the
form of money and supplies would be enough. This shows the historian that the allies did
not fully understand the nature of the situation in Russia. The money that was supplied
proved to be useless as even in rare instances that peasants were willing to trade for
currency were was nothing of real use to the army’s other than bread to be bought. The
main problem the white armies faced was a lack of means of production meaning that it was
highly difficult to secure ammunition and guns. And in the cases were this was directly
supplied by the allies it was poorly distributed and even sometimes fell into Bolshevik hands
as in one instance Trotsky wrote a letter to the British government thanking them for the
supplies that had fallen in to their hands from retreating white armies.
Source four a memoir of R H Bruce Lockhart, a British secret agent is a direct account of
events in Moscow in the early days of August of 1918. It is clear that for the Bolsheviks the
prospect of large, allied intervention spelled the end of the Party, “Bolsheviks began to pack
up, ready for departure” this shows that if the ally’s had fully committed to the cause they
would have been able to crush the Bolshevik party. Just the news of a landing in Archangel
of 100,000 men was enough to have Bolsheviks preparing to leave Moscow. This could show
the precarious state that the Bolsheviks were In at this time in 1918 with army’s such as
Yudoniches North western army making considerable advances the prospect of a allied
invasion would have likely won the war. Instead however as the Agent finds in the following
