Perhaps, the history of the Civil War in Russia is a very instructive page of the tablets of people's memory. These events remind us of what should not be allowed under any circumstances, because this category of wars is the most senseless, cruel and bloody. Whatever it was, but these events have sunk into the maelstrom of history. But they left behind an impressive number of questions. One of the most interesting and important: "Why did the white movement lose?" It will not be possible to describe the reasons for the defeat of the “whites” in a nutshell, since a whole range of factors unfavorable for them led to this outcome.
Instead of intro
Strange as it may seem, but the historical division into "reds", "whites" and "greens" during the war years was practically absent. What is it connected with? In a period when there is a terrible discord, it is difficult for a person to unequivocally join any of the parties. For one "ideological" follower of the monarchy or revolution, there are a hundred people"Waiting". And this is normal, since such a situation existed at all times and under any government.
Easily changed the side of the conflict, not only loners, but even entire military units! Moreover, many moved back and forth several times during the war.
The myth of the "Red Terror"
In many modern sources, one of the most significant reasons for the defeat of the "whites" is considered to be the "all-consuming red terror", which allegedly "threw a frightened country at their feet." Alas, there was terror. It’s just that all parties to the conflict practiced it, and you shouldn’t look for “right” and “wrong” among them. In conditions when civil society has collapsed, when there is a critical level of tension, people have nothing to lose, and therefore they easily go to the most extreme measures.
Besides, one should not assume that the entire territory of the former Russian Empire overnight turned into a flaming furnace of revolution: initially, the Reds and Whites were small islands surrounded by whole seas of an absolutely inert peasant mass. It's funny to say, but both Reds and Whites (not to mention the "Muddy Greens") practiced mass recruitment of supporters abroad. Moreover, the famous "royal officers" sometimes did not want to fight at all. There are cases when officers became waiters in restaurants in Kyiv, and they worked with all the awards. So more served.
Why are we all talking about this? Everything is simple. So that you understand what terrible confusion reigned in the first months and even yearswar. There was no "overwhelming superiority" in manpower among the whites, this was not noted among the reds either. Most of the population simply wanted to live in peace, quickly changing "color" in accordance with political realities. So what knocked down the white movement? The reasons for his defeat lie in several details at once.
What does the army need?
Either side, roughly speaking, needed two things: manpower (that is, conscripts) and bread. Everything else will follow.
Both resources could be taken only in the countryside, only from the long-suffering peasantry, which no longer wanted to give anything to anyone. Hence the practice of terror, which was resorted to by both sides, just as the Provisional Government of Kerensky used the same instrument before them. The result was constant peasant unrest, which again was suppressed by all sides of the Civil War, and by the most cruel methods.
And therefore the "terrible red terror" was not something outstanding. In any case, he did not stand out from the white terror. So the Bolsheviks did not win at all thanks to “power actions”. Thus, the reasons for the defeat of the white movement were:
- unity of command;
- poor organization;
- imperfect ideology.
Here are 3 reasons for the defeat of the white movement. Let's take a closer look at each of these points, each of which hides a whole complex of difficult problems. Each of them could knock down the white movement. The reasons for the defeat lie in the fact that they actedat the same time.
One day a swan, a crayfish and a pike…
Actually, initially it was much easier for the Reds to act. They are used to playing in situations where there are Okhrana agents around, when everyone can betray, but at the same time they need to obey a single “command center”. In Civil War, they had to do exactly the same thing, but under these conditions, the Bolsheviks themselves could establish the required rules of the game. They had to maneuver, but it was much easier to do it.
Effective Managers
But White could work much worse in such tense conditions, and they had several times more points of view on what was happening. At the peak of the war, more or less a single camp of the Reds actually fought more than a dozen Whites, and many of their formations pursued a frankly opposite policy. All this did not add to the adequacy of what was happening in the least.
In general, all this mess and "uniqueness" deprived the white movement of the chance to win. The reasons for the defeat lie in the inability to negotiate and eliminate frankly dangerous people in time. So, for example, the situation with the Entente. At one time, the Bolsheviks were frankly weak, weak and disunited, as Vladimir Ulyanov wrote with bitterness. It would seem, ask your allies for weapons and shells, taking advantage of the fact that all these orders have already been paid for by tsarism, and solve the problem once and for all…
Abandoned and forgotten
But they decided to ask the Germans for the same shells. The latter, having lost the First World War, quietlydisappeared from the scene, and the "allies" from the Entente, outraged by the behavior of the Whites, were in no hurry to provide them with effective assistance. In 1919 they preferred to bring in interventionist troops. For what? And what could give them a white movement? It was easier for them to plunder the we alth of Russia on their own, and they turned out to be (for the time being) not needed all this “officer color”.
When the Reds were finally formed and were able to conduct effective offensive operations, the invaders urgently gathered home, because they didn’t want to fight at all, and the Whites by that time were completely divided, their morale turned out to be low, and their goals were illusory, like mirages in the desert. Remember, by the way, that one of the reasons for the defeat of the white movement was, no matter how strange it may seem, the complete absence of ideology.
There are many problems, but no solutions…
In the rear of the whites there were dozens of insolent limitrophes, problems with which only the reds could solve. Moreover, every more or less capable commander of the whites in the rear could freely host some kind of "ataman", robbing and killing the population, but the fight against this "freemen" did not go beyond "warnings and reprimands". What kind of unity of command can we talk about if the illustrious officers turned out to be completely incapable of basic organizational actions?
In addition, the whites quite deliberately set each other up out of momentary interests, they could never agree on at least the simultaneous start of an offensive, they constantly concluded separate agreements with any local "kings".
While the military side of themwe must pay tribute: in most cases, the former tsarist officers turned out to be more flexible and better savvy in tactics. But over time, many intelligent commanders grew up from among the Reds, and former autocratic specialists left for them. The army of the "monarchists" more and more resembled one big gang with a predictably low efficiency in battles against linear formations. What other reasons are there for the defeat of the white movement in the civil war?
Organizational lawlessness
As for the organization of the rear, everything was even worse with it (although, much worse). Denikin alone received from the Allies in 1919 74 tanks, at least 148 airplanes, several hundred cars, several dozen tractors, about half a thousand artillery pieces, including heavy samples, several thousand rifles and machine guns, millions of cartridges for them …. Yes, even the tsarist army, freezing in the trenches of the First World War, could only dream of such we alth! So what are the reasons for the defeat of the white movement, when the accumulated mass of equipment could break the front anywhere?
Where did it all go?
The lion's share of all good things was either stolen and sold … all the same red, or dead weight, settled somewhere in distant warehouses, and ancient rifles were sometimes found even in the mid-40s by the Soviet military during revisions. So the reasons for the defeat of the white movement are banal theft, sloppiness and selfishness.
The newest howitzers are uneducatedcalculations managed to "kill" in just a couple of weeks. Subsequently, Soviet commanders recalled that the Whites used no more than 20 shells per gun for the whole day due to the complete “laxity” of the materiel.
Mismanagement of resources
But in the rear of the whites there was a continuous “crunch of French rolls”: huge money was squandered on the furs and jewelry of mistresses, balls and banquets were held in the evenings. And this at a time when the troops are suffering desperate defeats from the Reds?
Moreover, today you can often read in novels about a "highly educated white officer" and about "ragged reds". Perhaps, at some point, it was like that… Only Colonel Katomin, who had defected to the Whites, noted with bitterness the abundance of drunken officers and soldiers. “For the Reds, this is impossible … Any drunken officer will be shot immediately, the morale of your opponents is extremely high,” he said to his new colleagues. For which he was almost beaten right during the performance. Here they are, the reasons for the defeat of the white movement. In short, this is confusion and total impunity.
And that's not to mention the parts of the "unidentified affiliation" that felt very at ease in the monarchist rear. Bandits and deserters, "fallen away" from their part of the interventionists and just gangs of greens - there was no one to deal with them, and no one wanted to take on this. As a result, the rear was decomposed, and complete disorder also reigned at the fronts. No one was responsible for anything, so the reasons for the defeat of the whitemovements in the civil war are becoming quite evident…
It should be noted also the conditions for the provision of medical care. There are no exact statistics on the scale of medical losses, but it is known that the whites provided medical care to the wounded … of the worst quality. In memoirs and archival documents, there are repeated references to mass epidemics of typhus, the complete absence of normal doctors in the troops, the inability to organize a more or less normal hospital even in the rear.
Ideology
It is generally accepted that the monarchists "with tears in their eyes" recalled "Russia, which we lost" and tried their best to revive the monarchy. That's just not the case. Yes, there were convinced monarchists among the whites, but history remembers few of them. In many ways, the reasons for the victory of the Reds and the defeat of the White movement lie in confusion and vacillation even in the ideological sphere. The "belyaki" could not even agree with each other on plans for the post-war development of the country, and no one wanted to "humiliate" and explain something to their "electorate". And at this time, when the Reds created a whole institution of commissars, effectively implanting their ideology.
You said it - do it
And you should not consider the Reds simple talkers: if they set a goal, then they achieved their goal. They did this by showing the practical effectiveness of their policies. Monarchists, on the other hand, repeated the mistake of Kerensky's “balabol” with his Provisional Government: unfulfilled promises, blurring of ideology, lack of guarantees for the “electorate” - emphasize the reasons for the defeat of the white movement that you are more interested intaste, themselves.
While Lenin came out with his brilliantly simple decree, in which he promised bread to the workers and land to the peasants, former tsarist officers and officials competed in wit, discussing the next draft of future legislation. These are the reasons for the defeat of the white movement.
