Excerpts from the article ""Nikolashka" or the Emperor Nicholas II" by Irina Smirnova (site of "Free Press"):
http://svpressa.ru/issue/news.php?id=11459 (Translated from Russian into English)
The official point of view on the fate and the role of Nicholas II in the history of the country, was worked by soviet historians and filmmakers: «a good family man, but a weak emperor, who led Russia to catastrophe, he misunderstood the situations in Russia and in the world», etc. Such version has long been a familiar stamp and it does not bother many people, but no one of them asks the question: how could "a weak ruler" to lead Russia to impressive achievements in all fields and force, which the country had before the First World War? Really, was the Russian economic miracle that has reached its peak in 1913, and with whom it was customary to equate all the subsequent achievements of the USSR, it happened against his will? The authors of a new 50-minute documentary film - writer Boris Romanov and director Roman Yershov - turned the topic itself the sharp side and tried to debunk the myth of the weakness of the last Russian tsar. ... According to the authors of the film, being a man of strong will, Nicholas accepts the challenge of Fate and joined with her in «a duel». Thus, this documentary is devoted to the Nicholas's efforts to overcome a destined course of events . – "Now we know that the unprecedented decision taken in 1899 in the Hague by the leading delegations of powers, laid the foundation for limiting the arms race and to establish international rules of war - told the "Free Press" writer Boris Romanov. – That was then set up an international arbitration court, now known as the Hague Tribunal, and laid the foundation for future international organizations - the League of Nations and the UN later. This whole structure of international relations was laid the foundation by Nicholas II in order to avoid the impending catastrophe. What else could make a man trying to save the world from war?" ... In autumn 1904 Nicholas II began a strong liberal and social reforms that were derailed grandiose provocation of Socialist Revolutionary Party on 9 January 1905 ("Bloody Sunday"). When later Gapon was asked what would happen if Nicholas II came to the demonstrators, Gapon said at once without reserve: "He would be killed at once." Authors of the film believe that the Emperor repeatedly faced with the fact that all his efforts to overcome the Fate were of no avail. But he never gave up. For the first time a documentary film tells the story of an attempt to Nicholas (in March 1905 )to abdicate in order to restore the patriarchate. For the first time a documentary film tells the story of proposal of Nicholas II (shortly before the First World War) to refer the dispute between Serbia and Austria-Hungary in the Hague international tribunal. But the German Emperor Wilhelm did not even replied to this Nicholas's II telegram. ...
"'It is the shallow fashion of these times to dismiss the Tsarist regime as a purblind, corrupt, incompetent tyranny. But a survey of its thirty months' war with Germany and Austria should correct these loose impressions and expose the dominant facts. We may measure the strength of the Russian Empire by the battering it had endured, by the disasters it had survived, by the inexhaustible forces it had developed, and by the recovery it had made. In the governments of states, when great events are afoot, the leader of the nation, whoever he be, is held accountable for failure and vindicated by success. ...
Why should this stern test be denied to Nicholas II? He had made many mistakes, what ruler has not? ... But the brunt of supreme decisions centered upon him. At the summit where all problems are reduced to Yea or Nay, where events transcend the faculties of man and where all is inscrutable, he had to give the answers. His was the function of the compass needle. War or no war? Advance or retreat? Right or left? Democratise or hold firm? Quit or persevere? These were the battlefields of Nicholas II.
Why should he reap no honour from them? The devoted onset of the Russian armies which saved Paris in 1914; the mastered agony of the munitionless and retreat; the slowly regathered forces; the victories of Brusilov; the Russian entry upon the campaign of 1917, unconquered, stronger than ever; has he no share in these? In spite of errors vast and terrible, the regime he personified, over which he presided, to which his personal character gave the vital spark, had at this moment won the war for Russia. He is about to be struck down. A dark hand, gloved at first in folly, now intervenes. Exit Tsar. Deliver him and all he loved to wounds and death. Belittle his efforts, asperse his conduct, insult his memory; but pause then to tell us who else was found capable. Who or what could guide the Russian State? Men gifted and daring; men ambitious and fierce, spirits audacious and commanding - of these there were no lack. But none could answer the few plain questions on which the life and fame of Russia turned'."
This is written not by Russian monarchists, but by Winston Churchill, who during the First World War was a military minister. These words of the famous English politician quoted in the film, and against the backdrop of pre-revolutionary newsreels, photographs and documents of the time, it make a strong impression
(Translated from Russian into English by Boris Romanov. I'm sorry for my imperfect English)
1 out of 1 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
