Russian entry into World War I

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  Russia's entry into World War I came down to a single room in St. Petersburg at 7 p.m. on the 1st of August, 1914. The German ambassador met with Foreign Minister Sergei Sazonov and asked three times whether Russia would reconsider its mobilization order. Each time, Sazonov refused. The ambassador delivered a formal note accepting Russia's challenge to war; Germany declared war that same evening. Historian Christopher Clark has called Russia's mobilization order "one of the most critical decisions of the July Crisis." Tsar Nicholas II had written privately to Kaiser Wilhelm in the hope of preserving peace. The two were cousins, and their letters make plain how much both men wanted to avoid catastrophe. But the alliances they had inherited would not wait for cousins to agree. What drove the Russian Empire into a conflict that so many of its own leaders openly called madness? And was Russia simply reacting to events, or was it pursuing goals of its own?

• 2. Rivals and Realignments

  ›

  In 1800, more than 3,000 kilometers of territory separated Russia from British India. By 1902, Russian advances into Central Asia had compressed that buffer to just 30 kilometers. The proximity hardened British suspicion of Russian ambitions into something close to alarm. Russia's longstanding goal was to control the Bosporus Straits and through them reach the Mediterranean Sea. That ambition put it on a collision course with British naval dominance there.

  Between 1873 and 1887, Russia had stood alongside Germany and Austria-Hungary in the League of Three Emperors. A later Reinsurance Treaty with Germany alone ran from 1887 to 1890. Both arrangements collapsed over the same fault line: Russia and Austria-Hungary could not reconcile their competing ambitions in the Balkans. France moved quickly to capitalize on the rupture. The Franco-Russian Alliance of 1894 drew Russia into an entirely different orbit.

  Britain's isolation during the Second Boer War of 1899 to 1902 exposed the danger of having no continental allies. Russia's defeat in the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 was equally sobering for St. Petersburg. The Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907 resolved their disputes in Asia and paved the way for the Triple Entente with France. That alliance, however, remained largely informal. In 1908, Austria-Hungary annexed the former Ottoman province of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Russia responded by backing the formation of the Balkan League to check further Austrian expansion. The First Balkan War of 1912 to 1913 saw Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece seize most of the Ottoman Empire's remaining European territories. A Second Balkan War followed; Bulgaria was decisively defeated by its former allies and emerged as a resentful and unstable regional power. Serbia, by contrast, emerged as Russia's primary ally in the region. In 1913, Nicholas II expanded the Russian army to over 500,000 men. Austria-Hungary and Germany watched Serbia's growing strength with mounting alarm, interpreting it as a direct threat to their own influence. Germany had also developed significant interests in the Ottoman Empire by this time. Those interests overlapped with Russia's own ambitions in ways that would prove consequential.

• 3. Nicholas and the Crisis

  ›

  On the 28th of June, 1914, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo placed Tsar Nicholas II in an almost impossible position. Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, had been killed by Bosnian Serbs in response to Austria-Hungary's annexation of their predominantly Slavic province. Austria-Hungary could not prove that the Serbian government had ordered the killing. Even so, one month later it issued Serbia a formal ultimatum during the July Crisis. Austria-Hungary designed the ultimatum to be rejected, giving it a pretext for war. Russia had no formal treaty obligating it to defend Serbia. But Russian leaders had long viewed control of the Balkans as a strategic necessity. They had also secured French support for the unfolding crisis. Pan-Slavism was reshaping the political climate, emphasizing Russia's responsibility to all Slavic peoples threatened by Austria-Hungary. Serbia had positioned itself as the champion of that ideal. Austria-Hungary aimed to crush Serbia for exactly that reason.

  Nicholas's personal instinct was to support Serbia while somehow avoiding direct conflict with Germany. On the 25th of July, he placed the Russian army on alert, a formal step short of full mobilization. The Russian army, it turned out, had virtually no workable contingency plans for anything short of a general mobilization. Every intermediate step would appear to Berlin as preparation for total war. Nicholas was also warned personally by his Foreign Minister that failing to support Serbia risked revolution and the loss of his throne. On the 30th of July, 1914, Nicholas confirmed the order for a full general mobilization. That order was the first general mobilization by any European power and arrived before Germany had declared a state of imminent war. Germany then issued an ultimatum demanding that Russia demobilize within twelve hours.

  Count Witte, one of Russia's senior statesmen, had already offered the starkest private assessment of the situation. He told French Ambassador Maurice Paléologue that the war was madness, that Slavic solidarity was nonsense, and that Russia would gain nothing from it.

• 4. The French Pledge

  ›

  French Ambassador Maurice Paléologue had built his position in St. Petersburg on a deep personal antipathy toward Germany. He believed that when war came, France and Russia had to stand together as allies. His views aligned exactly with those of French President Raymond Poincaré. Paléologue repeatedly pledged to Russian officials that France would enter any war alongside them. France offered unconditional support through the crisis with Germany and Austria-Hungary. Historians have debated whether Paléologue exceeded his instructions from Paris. What is beyond dispute is that he failed to keep his government precisely informed. He never warned Paris that Russian mobilization could trigger a world war.

  Germany would face far greater difficulty fighting on two fronts than it would fighting Russia alone. Russia leaned heavily on the French commitment for exactly that reason. By the time each power had formally entered the war, a propaganda battle was already under way. Germany released the first of the great wartime documentary pamphlets, the German White Book, on the 4th of August, 1914. Britain followed with the Blue Book two days later. Russia issued its own account, the Orange Book, in mid-August. Each publication was curated to justify its own country's entry into the war while attributing blame elsewhere.

• 5. Logistical Ruin

  ›

  Russia's pre-war army numbered 1,400,000 regular soldiers, with 3,100,000 additional reserves available through mobilization. Those numbers masked a logistical picture that was, by any standard, catastrophic. Germany had ten times as much railway track per square kilometer as Russia did. A Russian soldier deploying to the front traveled an average of 1,290 kilometers. A German soldier covered less than a quarter of that distance. Russia's heavy industry could not equip the armies the Tsar could mobilize; artillery pieces, shells, motorized transport, and even boots were all in short supply.

  The Baltic Sea was closed by German submarines and surface ships, cutting off one potential supply route. The Dardanelles Straits were controlled by the Ottoman Empire, Germany's ally, making that route equally impassable. Russia could only receive outside assistance through Arkhangelsk, which froze solid in winter, or through Vladivostok, over 6,400 kilometers from the front. Construction of a new rail line began in 1915, eventually opening the ice-free port of Murmansk by 1917.

  War Minister Vladimir Sukhomlinov and Grand Duke Nicholas, who commanded the armies in the field, openly despised each other, fracturing the command structure from within. The broader culture of the high command compounded this, placing connections to royalty above military expertise. The elite Imperial Guards, a stronghold of the aristocracy, prioritized ceremonial parades over strategic planning. Grand dukes inevitably rose to senior command positions regardless of their qualifications. British historian David Stevenson highlighted the "disastrous consequences of deficient civil-military liaison," noting that civilians and generals were barely communicating. Russia launched an immediate offensive almost before its mobilization was complete. Its armies crossed into German territory without adequate artillery, without reliable supply lines, and without unified command.

• 6. Tannenberg and After

  ›

  The Battle of Tannenberg revealed the cost of all those deficiencies at once. German forces rapidly crushed both invading Russian armies, and the Russian Second Army was annihilated in its entirety. The officers who fell there were precisely those whose loyalty the dynasty would need most in the difficult years ahead.

  In September 1914, Russia was compelled to halt a successful offensive against Austria-Hungary in Galicia. Allied pressure required it to redirect its forces against German-held Silesia instead, sacrificing its own forward momentum. On the 29th of October, 1914, Ottoman warships attacked Russia's Black Sea coast. Russia and its Entente partners formally declared war on the Ottoman Empire in November 1914. On the 3rd of November, British warships bombarded the outer forts of the Dardanelles Straits, beginning the ill-fated Gallipoli campaign.

  General Anton Denikin, retreating from Galicia, described the experience in terms that left no room for doubt. He wrote that German heavy artillery "swept away whole lines of trenches and their defenders with them." "We hardly replied," he continued. "There was nothing with which we could reply." His regiments were, in his words, "beating off one attack after another by bayonet." "Blood flowed unendingly," he wrote, "the ranks became thinner and thinner and thinner. The number of graves multiplied."

  By early 1917, the conditions forged on the Eastern Front had done their work. The groundwork for the imperial regime's collapse had been laid in the opening months of the war.

• 7. Whose War Was It

  ›

  Historians examining the origins of World War I have long focused their scrutiny on Germany and Austria-Hungary. The prevailing scholarly consensus assigns Russia a comparatively secondary role. Standard accounts mention its defense of Serbia, its treaty obligations to France, and its desire to maintain its standing as a great power. Little else receives sustained attention.

  Historian Sean McMeekin has challenged that consensus sharply. He contends that Russia's war was primarily about the Ottoman Empire, not about Serbia. McMeekin argues that Russia's Foreign Ministry and Army had been planning a war of aggression since at least 1908, and possibly since 1895. The immediate objective, in his account, was to seize Constantinople and control the Dardanelles and Bosporus straits. That would give Russia direct access to the Mediterranean Sea. Reviewers have generally been critical of that revisionist interpretation.

  British historian David Stevenson, meanwhile, characterized Russian decision-making in July 1914 as "more truly a tragedy of miscalculation." It was, in his view, a policy of deterrence that failed to deter. Stevenson also observed that Russia was more vulnerable to social upheaval than any other power in the war. A general strike in St. Petersburg had reached its peak in July 1914, even as the mobilization orders were being signed. Russia marched to war while its own cities were already in the streets.