106 years ago, on November 27, 1917, the elections to the Russian Constituent Assembly ended. The results of those elections offered a historical chance of changing the course of development and radical democratization of life not only for that Russia called “prison of nations”, but also for Bessarabia, Ukraine and other nations that formed part of the empire not out of their own free will. Regrettably, that historical chance was destroyed by the Bolshevik regime that took over in Russia by an armed putsch only 20 days before the given elections. Why and how that Constituent Assembly and, respectively the chance to democratize Soviet Russia collapsed, what the consequences were for that country and the world around it and what should be done to learn such dramatic lessons of our history were among the issues discussed by experts invited to IPN’s public debate “Collapse of the Constituent Assembly and of chance to democratize Soviet Russia. Effects on the country and the world”.
The permanent expert of IPN’s project Igor Boțan said that a Constituent Assembly is an elected representative body that is usually convened ad-hoc to agree the state structure after a profound crisis in particular societies. Respectively, the Russian Constituent Assembly was the representative institution of Russia elected on November 25-27, 1917, which came together for its first meeting on January 6, 1918 to decide the state structure of Russia. “The Constituent Assembly proclaimed the Russian Democratic Federal Republic, abandoning this way the monarchic form of government after the Provisional Government in 1917 declared the Russian Republic, annulled land ownership and sought to sign a peace treaty,” stated the expert.
According to him, in the first meeting the Constituent Assembly refused to take into account the Bolsheviks’ draft Declaration of Rights of Working and Exploited People, which was to invest the Soviets of Workers’ and Peasants’ Deputies with state power so as to legitimize the past and future actions of the Bolsheviks. This was one of the main reasons why the Bolshevik regime dissolved by force the Constituent Assembly elected according to the most democratic rules of Russia. This way, an autocratic regime replaced the democratic regime that could have been established in Russia.
“The difference between autocratic and democratic regimes is that the autocratic leaders use the power without taking into account the political opinions that differ from those of the authorities and the opposition and it is almost impossible to replace the power by electoral democracy. The authoritarian regimes can be dictatorships and “competitive” regimes that practice “electoral authoritarianism”. The competitive authoritarian regimes can accept democracies in terms of pluralism and, respectively, for civil rights. These are usually political systems with a dominant party in which that party uses different means to dramatically reduce the role of the opposition. However, in such regimes, the opposition sometimes, if it unites, can win the elections and can change the government,” stated Igor Boțan.
Doctor habilitate of history Anatol Petrencu, president of the Association of Historians of the Republic of Moldova, said the failure of the Constituent Assembly was a failure for Russian democracy, for Russia first of all. The reasons derive from the context in which those elections were held as Russia became involved in World War I from the very first days. In four years, towards 1917, things were rather bad for Russia, which experienced failures on the front, suffered huge losses – 2 million soldiers and 1 million civilians died and other millions were hurt, were hungry, etc.
“The blame was placed on Nicholas II, the last or last-but-one emperor of Russia. Do you know why? Because Nichols II was the supreme commander of the armed forces. He had the rank of colonel, but in Russia there were many soldiers who were more skilled in the military art than he was. For example, an uncle of his, the brother of his father, was an army general with rich experience. Those failures on the front and also in large cities, such as Petrograd and Moscow, weren’t covered as the wheat didn’t reach the front because the railways were blocked,” explained the historian.
Anatol Petrencu noted that in such conditions when the people were dissatisfied and there were plotters who no longer supported Nicholas, that ousting scheme was applied. The throne was to be conceded to his son, but was actually conceded to his brother. As a result, the revolution of February 1917 was victorious. The power was taken over by the State Duma and the Provisional Government led by Alexander Kerensky was formed.
According to the doctor habilitate of history, those who came to power after the February revolution, the SRs, of the Socialite Revolutionary Party, represented the interests of the peasantry. Over 80% of the people in Russia lived in villages. The SRs represented the largest party in Russia and this came to power not accidentally. “They often say that the Bolsheviks removed tsarism, but this is not true. The Bolsheviks actually removed the Socialists, but those were “revolutionary Socialists”, while these were “international Socialists”. Russia suffered defeats on the front, while the Bolshevik Party promoted successful propaganda and agitation as the Bolsheviks said that the soldiers should not fight between them, but against the own governments, should aim the arms against the own governments. In those conditions, on July 3-5, 1917, the Bolsheviks tried to take over, but failed,” said Anatol Petrencu.
He noted that immediately after the removal of tsarism and the coming to power of democratic parties, the task of the Provisional Government was to convoke the Constituent Assembly to design a democratic constitution for Russia. Regulations for those elections were worked out in August 1917, while the elections were held in November. That coming to power of the Bolsheviks on November 7, 1917 was ultimately assisted by the Germans.
Doctor habilitate of history Nicolae Enciu, senior scientific researcher at the Institute of History of the Moldova State University, said the Constituent Assembly represented the missed chance to democratize Russia. But that event should be regarded through a wider historical angle. “Russia, unlike any other state of the contemporary world, has a series of particularities. Russia has never been a European state in the modern meaning of the word as, for example, the UK is. The UK experienced the revolution of the middle of the 17th century and limited then the prerogatives of the king. The UK became a limited, constitutional monarchy – a model of functioning of a society with monarchal form of government. Russia also didn’t have the experience of France, namely of the Great French Revolution that had declarations of human rights and freedoms, a constitution, etc. Russia didn’t have a constitution in the real meaning of the world. The problem of a constitution appeared only during the years of the first democratic-bourgeois revolution of 1905-1907,” explained the historian.
According to him, Russia since its origins has evolved as an empire, as a conquering empire. At the end of the 19th century, after endeavoring to free peoples curing four-five centuries, Russia achieved a unique result in the contemporary world. According to the census of 1897, at the end of the 19th century, Russia had a population of 126 million and an enormous area. But the reforms needed for development were late in that period and the country was economically, socially weak. At the beginning of the 20th century, it had a density of not even 7 inhabitants per square mile. It was populated mainly in the European part, while in Siberia the density was of 0.53 people per square mile. The population of towns was of only 17 million and 12 million of those people were concentrated in the European part. Russia resorted to particular reforms only when it was defeated militarily. The fact that it was beaten by Japan in the war of 1904-1905 perfectly showed Russia’s underdevelopment. Since that period, the political parties that appeared after the first revolution of 1905-1907 had focused on the limitation of the tsar’s prerogatives. With the largest territory in the contemporary world, Russia was in front of a chose – to concede partial prerogatives to the Duma or to continue governing in an autocratic way.
“Until the February 1917 revolution, the tsar oscillated between those two options and wasn’t eager to concede a part of his prerogatives. As a result of such an oscillation, Russia experienced cataclysms that do not have an equivalent in the contemporary world and the Bolshevik regime was consequently established,” stated Nicolae Enciu.
He noted that the character and behavior of Tsar Nicholas II were an important factor that led to that social, political turmoil of 1917. There were chances to keep Russia on the democratic path established after the February revolution, but that chance before the Bolsheviks took over in the autumn of 1917 was missed.
The public debate entitled “Collapse of the Constituent Assembly and of chance to democratize Soviet Russia. Effects on the country and the world” was the 23rd installment of the project “Impact of the Past on Confidence and Peace Building Processes” which is implemented by IPN News Agency with the support of the Hanns Seidel Foundation of Germany.
Impactul trecutului
See related articles:
- 100 years under sign of MASSR. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Oppressive regime in Transnistrian region speculates on historical factors
- Alexandru Postica: Language problems and economic interests are persistent challenges in Transnistrian region
- Anatol Țăranu: Vulgar Moldovenism born in MASSR continues to live in Moldova’s realities
- Anneli Ute Gabanyi: Moldova has always been of great geostrategic importance for Russia
- Igor Boțan: Moldova’s biggest threat comes from disinformation campaigns
- Ion Valer Xenofontov: Ideas from secret protocol to Soviet-Nazi pact still used today
- Moldova from Ribbentrop-Molotov to Independence. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Soviet’s actions in relation to the Bessarabians in 1940 are ‘occupation” not “liberation”
- Historian Dumitru Lisnic: Soviets brought their own people to Bessarabia for administrative positions
- Anatol Petrencu: Soviets imposed their way of thinking and way of life in MSSR
- Ex-history teacher from Șerpeni: Village in 1944 was completely destroyed
- Effects of Iasi-Chisinau Operation 80 years later. IPN Debate
- Igor Boțan: Soviets’ 1940 actions in relation to Bessarabians were not “liberation”
- Anatol Țăranu: Annexation of Bessarabia on June 28, 1940 was an agreement between two dictators
- Day of June 28, 1940 between celebration and catastrophe. IPN Debate
- Andrei Curăraru: Deportations were aimed at creating society without values
- Lidia Pădureac: Soviet state committed crimes against humanity
- Alecu Reniță: Deportations must keep us vigilant and as far away as possible from Russia - a struggling monster
- Decapitation and uprooting of nation through deportations. IPN Debate
- Igor Boțan: Propaganda must be combated by imbedding critical thinking
- Nicolae Mihai: In totalitarian regimes, citizens no longer enjoy rights and freedoms
- Festive practices and identity engineering in (post)totalitarian regimes. IPN debate
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: In Russia there is an authoritarian regime with totalitarian tendencies
- Igor Boțan: All legislatures in Moldova were pro-European or had periods when they promoted accession
- EU enlargement after collapse of USSR: causes and effects. Moldova’s lesson. IPN debate
- Andrei Curăraru: EU’s ambition is to become an important political center
- Anatol Petrencu: Collapse of Soviet Union was a triumph for countries annexed by force
- Cristian Manolachi: We must discern in avalanche of political messages. 2024 is a complicated election year
- Political mythologies in history and in actuality. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Political mythology in Ukraine war has been exploited to the maximum
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: Authoritarian regimes are effective in disseminating propaganda
- Valentin Constantinov: Today we speak Romanian due to verticality of population of Bessarabia in 1812
- Igor Boțan: Literary language and official language are brought to highest level that unites us all
- Vasile Șoimaru: We are Romanians on both banks of the Prut
- Long path home of the Romanian language. IPN debate
- Statements about Russia terrorist attack: Terror breeds only terror
- Igor Boțan: Moldovan authorities must ensure communication with citizens from left bank of the Nistru
- Alexandru Cerbu about war of 1992: Bodies were lying on the streets in Tighina as in Bucha
- Victor Juc: The Nistru armed conflict was caused deliberately
- 32 years of an unfinished war. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Danger of repeat of horrors that society experienced under communist regime still exists
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: We must detach ourselves from Soviet past and build a European society
- History, an international antidote to political repression. IPN debate
- Flori Bălănescu: In the absence of a Nuremberg-type trial, we cannot talk about condemnation of communism
- Alexandru Postica: Victims of political repression receive far too small recompence against terror they went through
- Role of history in forming person and modernizing society. IPN debate
- Igor Botan: You cannot build a future if you don’t know your past
- Ana Bîtcă: By informing students about political repression, we want to avoid repeat of past mistakes
- Igor Boțan: The Gulag was Bolsheviks’ solution for controlling population’s protest movement
- Ludmila Cojocaru: Soviet system meant repression, extermination, enslavement of population
- Lidia Pădureac: The Gulag was used to destroy people’s uprightness
- GULAG phenomenon: genesis, manifestation, lessons. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Budapest Memorandum would have been very important if those who signed it had considered it binding
- Radu Burduja: Ukraine must draw conclusions after signing Budapest Memorandum
- Ion Negrei: Russia no longer enjoys credibility internationally
- Failure of Budapest Memorandum. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Ukraine is key to final Transnistrian conflict settlement
- Natalia Albu: Frozen conflicts mean also a low level of quality of human life
- Octavian Țîcu: Moscow wants Moldova to be Transnistrized
- Frozen conflicts: genesis, dangers, settlement. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Phenomena that occurred in USSR before World War II were typical also for MASSR
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: Thousands of people were executed only because they were regarded as a possible source of opposition
- Stalinist repression in MASSR and memory of victims of totalitarian communist regime. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: To better understand how Union of 1918 occurred, we should analyze circumstances in which this occurred
- Alexandru Arseni: Governments in Chisinau and in Bucharest should recognize Union of 1918
- Ion Varta: After Russian Empire collapsed, Romanian national movement evolved into national liberation movement
- Great Union of 1918: lessons for past, present and future. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: When we speak about collapse of Constituent Assembly, we should consider consequences of this for Bessarabia
- Nicolae Enciu: Soviet society was constituted as an antipode of Western society
- Anatol Petrencu: In current Russia, there is no democracy
- Igor Boțan: Romania is also obliged to make effort for Moldova to manage to integrate into EU
- Alecu Reniță: Russia is a threat not only to ex-Soviet states, but also to whole Europe
- Igor Șarov: A continuous struggle is led to secure European integration desideratum
- European genealogy tree of Moldova. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Cold War ended because everyone realized what Soviet power actually was
- Ion Valer Xenofontov: Cold War lesson - to win with modesty and to lose with grace
- Anneli Ute Gabanyi: USSR wanted to impose same thinking system on people
- Lessons of Cold War. IPN debate
- Vitalie Stoian: Warsaw Part always intervened inside its borders, not outside them
- Anatol Țăranu: Warsaw Treaty was nothing else but “collective policeman”
- Igor Boțan: Warsaw Pact was a reply to reply
- Warsaw Pact: History without propaganda. IPN debate
- Radu Burduja: NATO was and will remain a successful alliance
- Igor Boțan: Soviet Union became totalitarian and wanted to conquer whole world
- Victor Juc: NATO enlargement occurs at request of states that consider themselves vulnerable
- NATO: History without propaganda. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Russians’ rhetoric on use of nuclear weapons shows that things go bad
- Pavel Moraru: Signing of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact led to start of World War II
- Mihai Țurcanu: Russia wants to change international order by force
- Truth and lie about beginning of World War II. IPN debate
- Virgiliu Pâslariuc: European development model is a security and prosperity guarantee
- Price and effects of Independence. Comparative study (1877 vs. 1991. IPN debate
- Ion Varta: Russian factor was every time fateful for our national interest
- Igor Boțan: Role of intellectuality in obtaining Independence was prolific
- Ion Negrei: Putsch of October 1917 didn’t enjoy support among population of Bessarabia
- Igor Boțan: We are witnessing third stage of dismemberment of Soviet Union
- Marin Gherman: Communism was a catastrophe for previous century
- USSR: Born and Destroyed by Putsches. IPN debate
- Stalinization and de-Stalinization of Moldovan society. IPN debate
- Ludmila Cojocaru: Keeping memory of Stalinist crimes necessitates effort from state and society
- Igor Boțan: After Stalin’s death, Stalinization is only a kind of phantom
- Florin Abraham: Historical memory cannot be built without state support
- Igor Boțan: Stalinist elites devour each other, this being an essential quality of Stalinism
- Octavian Țîcu: Stalinization – imbedding of a series of features typical of Soviet Union
- Stalinization and de-Stalinization in European context. IPN debate
- Florin-Răzvan Mihai: Putinism poses a big threat
- Ion Manole: Passivity of international community to crimes of communism generated Ukraine war
- Kakhovka Dam: Why are laws and customs of war powerless? IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Possession of nuclear weapon makes Russia ignore international law norms
- Anatol Petrencu: Some nations fight without scruple
- Igor Boțan: Those who took part in deportation of people from Bessarabia were ideologically indoctrinated
- Viorica Olaru: The Kremlin administration is similar to the KGB
- “Stalinist deportations: echo of the past, for present and future”. IPN debate
- Alexandru Postica: Deportations should be treated in a broader context
- Mihail Druță: It is justified to celebrate Europe Day on May 9
- Anatol Țăranu: Moldova cannot become European state by keeping Soviet symbols
- Igor Boțan: It is a big mistake to reveal World War II events that suit only a particular side
- Victory Day: between reconciliation, antagonization and destabilization? IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Acknowledging organized famine is important for learning lessons
- Museographer of Avdarma: 800 people died from hunger in this village in 1946-1947
- Famine of 1946-1947. Vasile Șoimaru: People were dispossessed of everything and were murdered
- Lidia Pădureac: While Moldovan SSR was dying from starvation, Soviet Union was exporting grain
- Organized famine of 1946-1947: victims, murderers, memory. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Fascism, in its milder version, and Bolshevism were heresies of socialism
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: Society should be attentive so as not to allow authoritarian-totalitarian deviations
- Alexandru Cosmescu: Fascism, Stalinism and Nazism created external enemies in order to achieve their goals
- What do Fascism, Nazism and Stalinism have in common? IPN debate
- Alecu Reniță on 1903 pogrom: Authorities failed to stop bloodshed
- Pogrom of 1903: executioners, victims and lessons. IPN debate
- Andrei Kushko: Not Moldovans, but imperial functionaries triggered Chisinau program
- Igor Boțan: Chisinau program was an outburst of anti-Semitism in Russian Empire
- Igor Boțan: Accession to EU is alternative to Russian world for Moldova
- Ion Negrei: Moldova should connect to European space for good
- Anatol Țăranu: There are affinities between aggressive policy of Russian empire and current regime of Putin
- Fate of peripheries of empires. Quo vadis, Moldova? IPN debate
- Mihai Țurcanu: “Stockholm syndrome” replaced feeling of national identity in many compatriots
- Igor Boțan: Putin’s drama is that he does not have ideology or economic force or army
- Maria Pilchin: Putin teaches his people to die because he was unable to teach them to live
- What did we celebrate and why did we celebrate on February 23? IPN debate