Mikhaylyonok O.M. Issues of Russian statehood and the armed forces in the era of reforms, wars, and revolutions. The end of the XIX – the beginning of the XX century. In: The Victory that changed the world (wars, revolutions, reforms in the fate of Russia): [monograph] ...

Abstract

The chapter notes that the historical and political analysis allows us to rethink and supplement the existing ideas about the last decades of the existence of the Russian Empire and the military problems with which it approached the revolutionary upheavals of 1917. Russia entered the twentieth century with a brilliant facade of imperial power and a huge burden of ever-increasing domestic political and social problems. The political agenda of this historical period is the awareness of the armed forces as a complex social organism, connected by close ties with the state, society, and people. For the first time in the history of the Russian state, the question of the ratio of the army and politics arose. The period between the revolution of 1905-1907 and the revolutions of 1917 can be considered a period of agony of autocratic power in Russia. The upheavals experienced by Russia in 1904-1906 – the defeats in the war, the revolutionary events, the cardinal changes made after the Manifesto of October 17, 1905 in the Basic Laws of the Empire-gave rich food for thought and awareness of the complex mechanisms of interaction between the state, society and the army. The historical stage under consideration is also the time of the development of Russian parliamentarism, which represents a special period of statehood. Of course, the formation of parliamentarism in Russia has become a challenge of the time. This was an opportunity for constitutional reform of the Russian state, which means preventing bloody battles and revolutionary upheavals. However, Russia did not take advantage of the chance provided by history. The political behavior of the armed forces in the transition periods of the development of statehood is determined by a number of factors: their place in state and public life, social composition, the specifics of the political regime, the presence or absence of civil society, the level of political culture, etc. This actualizes a holistic, comprehensive analysis of this system of relationships. It is necessary to further develop an independent direction in Russian political science, the task of which, I think, is to identify trends, reveal patterns, explore universal features and specific features of the relationship between society, the state and the armed forces.