OCR Specification focus:
‘Methods of repression and the reach of reform defined authority.’
The Provisional Government of 1917 struggled to maintain authority amid war, revolution, and societal upheaval. Its use of repression and attempts at reform reveal its aims, limitations, and ultimate failure.
The Context of the Provisional Government
The Provisional Government was established in March 1917 following the abdication of Tsar Nicholas II, intended as a temporary authority until a Constituent Assembly could establish a permanent system. It inherited a deeply unstable Russia facing war exhaustion, economic collapse, social unrest, and radical political movements. Its authority was immediately challenged by the existence of dual power — shared governance between the Provisional Government and the Petrograd Soviet — which constrained its ability to act decisively.
Assembly of the Petrograd Soviet, 1917. The image illustrates the Soviet’s representative mass politics that undercut the Provisional Government’s capacity to coerce and to reform decisively, contextualising the ‘dual power’ dynamic. Source
Dual Power: The situation in 1917 Russia where authority was shared and contested between the Provisional Government and the Petrograd Soviet, limiting effective governance.
This dual power dynamic shaped both repression and reform policies, as the government sought to balance liberal ideals with the need for order.
Repression under the Provisional Government
Early Commitment to Liberalism
Initially, the Provisional Government pursued a liberal course, abolishing many repressive tsarist institutions:
The Okhrana (secret police) was disbanded.
Censorship was lifted, allowing free press and speech.
Political prisoners were released, and exiles invited to return.
Freedom of assembly and association was guaranteed.
May Day (1 May) celebration, Dvortsovyi Square, Petrograd, 1917. The image shows soldiers and civilians assembling openly, illustrating the Provisional Government’s early liberal guarantees and their effect on public life. Source
These steps aimed to legitimise the new regime and distance it from the autocracy’s repressive image. However, they also emboldened opposition groups and undermined state authority.
Shifts towards Repression
As opposition mounted and order deteriorated, the government reverted to coercive methods to maintain control:
Suppression of Unrest
April Crisis (1917): Demonstrations against continued participation in the First World War were suppressed, though the government stopped short of mass arrests.
July Days (3–7 July 1917): Armed protests by workers and soldiers in Petrograd, encouraged by Bolsheviks, were violently dispersed.
Shooting by cadets and Cossacks of a peaceful working demonstration on Nevsky Prospekt, Petrograd, 4 July 1917. The photo shows the violent suppression of the July Days uprising, illustrating the Provisional Government’s turn to coercion. Source
Troops loyal to the government restored order, Bolshevik leaders were arrested or went into hiding, and press offices were raided.
Re-establishing Authority
The government created the Counter-Espionage Bureau to monitor revolutionary groups.
The Kerensky government authorised troops to restore order in rebellious regions, notably during strikes and peasant land seizures.
Efforts were made to reform the police, replacing the Okhrana with the Militsiya and later the State Guard, though these new bodies lacked authority and efficiency.
Militsiya: A civilian police force established by the Provisional Government to replace the tsarist police, intended to operate on democratic principles but often ineffective.
Despite these measures, the government’s repression remained limited and inconsistent, undermined by soldiers’ and police officers’ reluctance to act against revolutionary crowds.
The Kornilov Affair and Repression’s Limits
The Kornilov Affair (August 1917) exposed the fragility of state repression. General Lavr Kornilov attempted a right-wing coup to restore order, but Prime Minister Alexander Kerensky denounced him and called on the Petrograd Soviet and Red Guards to defend the revolution. The failure of Kornilov’s coup discredited conservative forces and further delegitimised the Provisional Government, showing its dependence on revolutionary groups it sought to contain.
Reform under the Provisional Government
Political and Civil Reforms
The government aimed to transform Russia into a liberal democracy, enacting significant reforms:
Abolition of class, religious, and national restrictions.
Establishment of freedom of speech, press, and religion.
Plans for universal suffrage and elections to a Constituent Assembly.
These measures reflected liberal ideals but were often too slow or abstract to address pressing realities. The postponement of the Constituent Assembly until November 1917 eroded public patience and revolutionary momentum grew.
Economic and Social Reform Attempts
The government attempted to address economic dislocation and social unrest, but with limited success:
Land Reform
Pressure from peasants seizing land increased, but the government postponed land redistribution until the Constituent Assembly.
This refusal alienated peasant support and led to widespread illegal land seizures and violence in the countryside.
Labour Reform
The government legalised trade unions and recognised factory committees, empowering workers to negotiate conditions.
Efforts to control strikes were inconsistent, and industrial output continued to decline amid chaos and worker radicalisation.
Urban Policies
Attempts to stabilise food supplies and prices failed due to logistical breakdowns and continued war demands.
Shortages, inflation, and unemployment intensified urban discontent.
War Policy and Reform Failure
A decisive obstacle to reform was the government’s commitment to continuing the First World War. Many believed that victory was essential for Russia’s stability and future democracy. However:
The disastrous June Offensive (1917) deepened disillusionment among soldiers and civilians.
Desertions soared, discipline collapsed, and the army’s loyalty became uncertain.
Resources diverted to the war effort limited the government’s capacity to implement domestic reforms.
The persistence of the war linked reform failures to broader dissatisfaction with the government’s direction.
Interaction of Repression and Reform
The Provisional Government’s approach to repression and reform was marked by contradiction and hesitation:
Early liberal reforms undermined the state’s coercive power, emboldening revolutionary opposition.
Later repressive actions lacked consistency, organisation, or public support, appearing reactive rather than strategic.
Reform efforts, while ideologically ambitious, failed to deliver immediate solutions to urgent social and economic crises.
Continued participation in the war neutralised the potential benefits of reforms and heightened the need for coercive control.
This unstable combination meant that neither repression nor reform effectively secured the regime’s authority. The Bolsheviks, promising “Peace, Land, and Bread,” capitalised on the government’s failures and overthrew it in October 1917.
Legacy of the Provisional Government’s Policies
The Provisional Government’s experience highlighted enduring themes in Russian governance:
The challenge of balancing liberal reform with the need for state authority.
The difficulty of implementing reform during war and revolutionary crisis.
The risks of hesitation and inconsistency in repression, which can undermine rather than strengthen authority.
The collapse of the Provisional Government underscored that neither repression nor reform alone could sustain power without legitimacy, stability, and decisive leadership.
FAQ
The Petrograd Soviet held significant influence over the army and workers, issuing Order No. 1, which required soldiers to obey the government only if orders did not contradict the Soviet.
This undermined the Provisional Government’s control over the military and police, limiting its capacity to use force effectively. It also acted as a counter-authority, often opposing government decisions and discouraging violent suppression of unrest, which made coordinated repression difficult.
Land reform was postponed until a Constituent Assembly could address it, as ministers feared radical changes might destabilise Russia further.
The government also worried that redistributing land without legal frameworks would alienate landowners and moderate supporters. This cautious approach backfired, as peasants increasingly seized land illegally, weakening state authority and fuelling revolutionary sentiment in the countryside.
As Minister of Justice and later Prime Minister, Kerensky promoted liberal reforms, including freedom of speech and the abolition of capital punishment in civilian cases.
However, he also authorised force when necessary, notably during the July Days and against peasant uprisings. His leadership reflected the government’s broader tension: attempting to balance democratic ideals with the practical need to restore order and assert authority.
The Kornilov Affair deepened public mistrust in the government. By calling on the Petrograd Soviet and Red Guards to suppress Kornilov’s attempted coup, Kerensky inadvertently strengthened revolutionary forces.
The incident split the government from conservative military supporters and made it appear weak and indecisive. It also allowed the Bolsheviks to present themselves as defenders of the revolution, increasing their support ahead of the October uprising.
Widespread war fatigue limited the effectiveness of both repression and reform.
Soldiers often refused orders to suppress uprisings, undermining repressive measures.
Economic pressures from the war reduced the government’s capacity to fund reforms and address shortages.
Continued fighting discredited the government’s legitimacy, as promises of reform rang hollow without peace.
This climate of exhaustion made the government’s policies appear ineffective and contributed directly to its collapse.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
What was the Militsiya, and why was it created by the Provisional Government in 1917?
Mark Scheme:
1 mark for identifying what the Militsiya was.
1 mark for explaining why it was created.
Indicative content:
The Militsiya was a civilian police force established by the Provisional Government to replace the Okhrana, the tsarist secret police. (1 mark)
It was created to operate on democratic principles and symbolise a break from the repressive policies of the old regime. (1 mark)
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain how both repression and reform were used by the Provisional Government to maintain authority in 1917.
Mark Scheme:
Up to 2 marks for describing methods of repression.
Up to 2 marks for describing key reforms.
Up to 2 marks for explaining how these measures were intended to maintain authority.
Indicative content:
Repression: Use of force to suppress unrest such as the July Days, arrests of Bolshevik leaders, press raids, and creation of new policing bodies like the Militsiya and State Guard. (1–2 marks)
Reform: Legalisation of trade unions, guarantees of freedom of speech, press, and assembly, abolition of class and religious restrictions, and plans for a Constituent Assembly. (1–2 marks)
Explanation: Both repression and reform aimed to stabilise society and assert control. Reforms sought legitimacy and public support, while repression targeted revolutionary threats and maintained order. (1–2 marks)
