Kamil Galeev氏の「5月9日戦勝記念日の「動員」どうなる？」

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Consider the following. If a mass mobilisation is really declared, Russian military bases and existing training facilities would be overflown with a mass of poorly motivated recruits under unmotivated & incompetent leadership (more motivated and competent leaders are in Ukraine)

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

You can't just send a recruit into a frontline assault. You need to at least give him *some* equipment, provide a basic training on how to use it, place him under someone's command and them ship them all to Ukraine. Meanwhile, you need to quarter and feed them somewhere

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Putin absolutely can declare the mass mobilisation. But it will be conducted in a situation of almost no infrastructure and almost no organisational capacities for such a mobilisation and within a military doctrine that effectively excludes a possibility of such a mobilisation

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

In case of total mobilisation, we'll have barracks and training facilities overcrowded by the enormous number of poorly motivated recruits under a weak leadership. And these recruits know they'll be sent to Ukraine where they are likely to be KIA. That's a revolutionary situation

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

As a general rule, we tend to hugely exaggerate the role of unarmed civilians & underrate the role of people with guns in any civil conflict. That's partially wishful thinking and partially an ideology which deliberately focuses on "non-violent protests" and ignores anything else

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Right now I estimate the probability of a *successful* mass revolt in Russia as close to zero. In case of the mass mobilisation however, it gonna skyrocket. You'll have tons of armed people with an immediate self-interest in overthrowing the regime. That's the scenario of 1917

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

The major (and underrated) ofc factor of the 1917 revolution in Russia, or rather a chain of successful coups were the people with guns. More specifically, the garrison of St Petersburg (Petrograd) and the Baltic Navy based in Kronstadt, which is very close to the capital

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

"The people" would have no chance to overthrow the Tsar unless the Tsar: 1. mobilised them 2. brought to the capital 3. trained and gave them guns 4. made sure they have an immediate self-interest in his overthrow, because otherwise they would be sent to WWI and massacred there

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

1917 scenario was predictable. By November 1916 Nicholas II possibly have suspected his minister of interior Protopopov of scheming against him and was already looking for other candidatures. He offered this cabinet position to Kryzhanovsky. Kryzhanovsky sent his conditions pic.twitter.com/3YXFFbrxIz

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

1. Return the Guard Cavalry (= the richest & most privileged nobility regiments) to the capital 2. Transfer a part of gargantuan 460 000 conscripts-composed garrison on the capital to police (= hey, we won't send you to war) 3. Get the rest of the garrison out of the capital

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

That was a very realistic plan that aimed to reduce the revolutionary risks. Tsar rejected it and Kryzhanovsky refused to become a minister of interior. Less than three month later, the Tsar was overthrown, largely by the same garrison of the capital and the empire fell

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

I will argue that as a general rule scholars and analysts exaggerate the importance of ideologies. They're hommes de lettres and largely presume that everyone else is just obsessed with lettres and some high-brow logical constructs as they are. But that's not the case

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

What scholars and analysts tend to underrate is the position of some conscripted uneducated bumpkins from province that just happened to be armed and quartered in capital in numbers of 460 000. But these bumpkins are way more important as a revolutionary factor than intellectuals

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Those conscripted bumpkins may have little interest in complex logical constructs. But they absolutely do have agency and self-interest. Also they have guns. Also there is almost half a million of them. Ergo, their position means everything and that of intellectuals - nothing

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Consider the following. When Lenin returned to Russia in April 1917 he called for stopping the war immediately (Апрельские тезисы). The Bolshevik Party was shocked by such a madness. His own party comrades, other Bolshevik leaders criticised or condemned him, or were in disbelief pic.twitter.com/MCMK8gDGfg

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Why was the Bolshevik leadership shocked by the suggestion to overthrow the Provisional Government and stop the war? Largely because nearly all of the educated classes, of the high-brow people were in favour of continuing the war. What an idiot would stop on the brink of victory?

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Why Lenin's call for stopping the war immediately wasn't supported by other Bolsheviks? Why were they shocked? Since nearly all the high-status people stood for the war till the victory, the idea to stop it would immediately be associated with the low status

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Most Bolshevik leaders were normal people in a sense that their actions and decisions were overwhelmingly motivated by the considerations of status. You do and say what will raise your status in your reference group and avoid whatever you gonna be ostracised for. This is the way

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

That's why (normal) Bolsheviks were shocked by their leader taking such a low status position. They correctly understood that the Lenin's (and the Bolshevik Party) status will drop immediately and irreversibly. They are gonna be mocked and ostracised. Why would Lenin do that? pic.twitter.com/1i7ep6kf1s

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

What they didn't understand however is that Lenin wasn't normal. Status and social acceptance meant everything to them and nothing to him. Now and many more times he would take wildly unpopular (among even the Bolsheviks) decisions and enforce them crushing any protest pic.twitter.com/chcYe2r25y

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Unlike most Bolshevik leaders, Lenin had very accurate understanding of reality. And the reality of 1917 was half a million of *very* simple armed people concentrated in the capital with an immediate self-interest to stop the war (=avoid the trenches) at any cost pic.twitter.com/eicH6uUNUe

Kamil Galeev @kamilkazani

Since these uneducated but armed bumpkins were the main military force in the imperial capital, their position was the only one that mattered. While the position of politicians and intellectuals was merely a white noise which Lenin absolutely could (and should) ignore. End of 🧵 pic.twitter.com/0VPrnPsvR1

仮蔵 @karizo2022

著者紹介：Kamil Galeev氏 チェブニング奨学生としてセント・アンドリュース大学で近世史の文学修士過程で勉強中。2019年7月、北京大学の円清院を卒業し、中国学と経済学の修士号を取得。また、高等経済学校（モスクワ）で歴史学の学士号を取得。 ru.linkedin.com/in/kamil-galee…