To what extent was the communist victory in the
Civil War dependent on the skilful leadership of
Trotsky? (25 marks)
Introduction: overall judgement
The victory of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Civil War can
be largely attributed to the good leadership of the
Bolshevik Commissar for War, Trotsky. Other factors
certainly came into play, such as the weaknesses of the
opposition and geographic advantages. The opposition,
the Whites, were internally divided, unlike the Bolsheviks,
which undermined their ability to mount effective
counterattacks. They were also lacking in support, as their
identification with the former repressive Tsarist order and
foreign powers meant that the vast majority of the
Russian population perceived them to be unfavourable to
their desires.
Paragraph one: Significance of Trotsky Paragraph two: Geographical advantages
In comparison to the corruption of the Whites, The Bolsheviks held the central area which
the Reds became a well-disciplined and effective included Petrograd and Moscow. They moved
fighting force, overwhelmingly due to Trotsky. their capital to Moscow at the hub of the railway
There was no leader amongst the whites to rival network- this made it easier to transport men
Trotsky- Historian Robert Service “what took and munitions to the battlefronts.
everyone aback” was the transformation of This area also contained the main armament
army from a “flabby panicky mess” into an factories in Russia so the Bolsheviks could carry
“effective fighting force” on producing war materials- The Reds had 2.5
Trotsky proved himself to be a great oralist and million rifles in 1917 in contrast to the 850,000
propagandist and directed the war from a rifles that the whites had, thus the Whites were
special train where he was able to inspire and inadequately supplied dooming their chances to
rally men- as a result Trotsky was able to succeed in war.
achieve an army of over 5 million. The central area was heavily populated (much
Discipline was very tough in the Red Army; more than the white held areas) so the
Trotsky also used fear to conscript men- any sign Bolsheviks were able to conscript large numbers
of disloyalty or desertion was punishable by to fight- the Reds outnumbered the Whites 5
death. million to 656,000. Therefore, red armies often
Despite having no military background Trotsky vastly exceeded their white opponents giving
was personally brave and took his special forces them a battle edge.
to the parts of the front where fighting was Whites were scattered around the edges of this
fiercest- subsequently he was able to inspire and central area, separated by large distances this
motivate men resulting in a Red victory. made communications difficult, especially
Trotsky ensured his army was well fed and moving men weapons and coordinating the
nourished (this was despite the food shortages attacks of different white armies. They had no
throughout Russia so army health was a key telephone links, so they had to use officers on
priority for him). His enthusiasm, command of horseback to convey messages- this shows how
propaganda and ability to boost morale was outdated and ineffective the Whites were in
unparalleled both amongst the Bolshevik and comparison to Red tactics.
the White leadership. To a key extent, the fact the Reds were in a privileged
Trotsky’s imposing of a very tough system of discipline position geographically whilst the Whites occupied the
and control over the Red actually encouraged men to disparate outer areas, naturally hindered the success of
show initiative and courage. He successfully inspired and the whites. However, it was Trotsky’s effective
encouraged troops to greater efforts, and to eventual leadership and organisation to unite the substantial Red
victory. Hence, Trotsky’s leadership was overwhelmingly army is what bolstered to them to victory.
beneficial in achieving a Red win.
Civil War dependent on the skilful leadership of
Trotsky? (25 marks)
Introduction: overall judgement
The victory of the Bolsheviks in the Russian Civil War can
be largely attributed to the good leadership of the
Bolshevik Commissar for War, Trotsky. Other factors
certainly came into play, such as the weaknesses of the
opposition and geographic advantages. The opposition,
the Whites, were internally divided, unlike the Bolsheviks,
which undermined their ability to mount effective
counterattacks. They were also lacking in support, as their
identification with the former repressive Tsarist order and
foreign powers meant that the vast majority of the
Russian population perceived them to be unfavourable to
their desires.
Paragraph one: Significance of Trotsky Paragraph two: Geographical advantages
In comparison to the corruption of the Whites, The Bolsheviks held the central area which
the Reds became a well-disciplined and effective included Petrograd and Moscow. They moved
fighting force, overwhelmingly due to Trotsky. their capital to Moscow at the hub of the railway
There was no leader amongst the whites to rival network- this made it easier to transport men
Trotsky- Historian Robert Service “what took and munitions to the battlefronts.
everyone aback” was the transformation of This area also contained the main armament
army from a “flabby panicky mess” into an factories in Russia so the Bolsheviks could carry
“effective fighting force” on producing war materials- The Reds had 2.5
Trotsky proved himself to be a great oralist and million rifles in 1917 in contrast to the 850,000
propagandist and directed the war from a rifles that the whites had, thus the Whites were
special train where he was able to inspire and inadequately supplied dooming their chances to
rally men- as a result Trotsky was able to succeed in war.
achieve an army of over 5 million. The central area was heavily populated (much
Discipline was very tough in the Red Army; more than the white held areas) so the
Trotsky also used fear to conscript men- any sign Bolsheviks were able to conscript large numbers
of disloyalty or desertion was punishable by to fight- the Reds outnumbered the Whites 5
death. million to 656,000. Therefore, red armies often
Despite having no military background Trotsky vastly exceeded their white opponents giving
was personally brave and took his special forces them a battle edge.
to the parts of the front where fighting was Whites were scattered around the edges of this
fiercest- subsequently he was able to inspire and central area, separated by large distances this
motivate men resulting in a Red victory. made communications difficult, especially
Trotsky ensured his army was well fed and moving men weapons and coordinating the
nourished (this was despite the food shortages attacks of different white armies. They had no
throughout Russia so army health was a key telephone links, so they had to use officers on
priority for him). His enthusiasm, command of horseback to convey messages- this shows how
propaganda and ability to boost morale was outdated and ineffective the Whites were in
unparalleled both amongst the Bolshevik and comparison to Red tactics.
the White leadership. To a key extent, the fact the Reds were in a privileged
Trotsky’s imposing of a very tough system of discipline position geographically whilst the Whites occupied the
and control over the Red actually encouraged men to disparate outer areas, naturally hindered the success of
show initiative and courage. He successfully inspired and the whites. However, it was Trotsky’s effective
encouraged troops to greater efforts, and to eventual leadership and organisation to unite the substantial Red
victory. Hence, Trotsky’s leadership was overwhelmingly army is what bolstered to them to victory.
beneficial in achieving a Red win.
