Podcasts about European Russia

Hey guys, what you are about to listen to is basically a “what if” Japan performed Hokushin-ron instead of Nanshin-ron, ie: What if Japan invaded the USSR during WW2? Before I jump into it I just want to thank all of you that signed up for the patreon, you guys are awesome. Please leave a comment on this episode to let me know what more you want to hear about in the future. With all of that said and done lets jump right into it.   Part 1 The Geopolitical context   Ok so, one of the questions I get the most is, what if Japan invaded the USSR. I've actually already tackled this subject, albeit lightly with Cody from AlternatehistoryHub and once with my friend Eric. Its too complicated to give a real answer, a lot of this is guess work, though I really will try to provide hard numbers. I think off the bat something needs to be made clear since we are dealing with alternate history. I am not doing a “what if Japan developed completely different, or what if the IJA got their way in the early 1930's” no no, this is going to be as realistic as possible…even though this is batshit crazy.    Japan faced the decision of whether to go to war with the USSR in 1941 during Operation Barbarossa. They held meetings, made plans, and ultimately it was decided they would not engage the Soviets. Our scenario will follow exactly what they did to a T, but when the made the decision not to go to war, we will see them go to war.    Now before I jump into our this timeline, I think its very important to explain the actual situation Japan faced in 1941. There were two major strategies that emerged during the 1930's within the Japanese military. Many junior officers in the IJA favored the Hokushin-ron “northern strike” strategy against the USSR. Many officers in the IJN with some in the IJA favored the Nanshin-ron “southern strike” strategy, to seize the resource rich dutch east indies by invading Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The idea of Hokushin-ron was to perform an invasion into Southern Siberia and outer mongolia ending around Lake Baikal where they would set up defenses. They had already tried to establish this during the Russian civil war as part of the Siberian Intervention, but failed to create a buffer state. From 1935-1939 there were 108 border clashes between the USSR and Japan. In 1938 one of these border clashes turned into quite a catastrophe, it was called the battle of Lake Khasan.  The Soviets suffered nearly 800 deaths, more than 3000 wounded, perhaps nearly 50 tanks were destroyed with another 100 damaged. The Japanese suffered about 600 deaths with 2500 wounded. The result ultimately was a ceasefire, but for the Kwantung army it seemed to them like a victory. In May of 1939 they had a much larger and more famous battle known as the battle of Khalkhin Gol.  During the early part of the battle the IJA sent 80 tanks crossing over Khalkhin Gol, driving the Soviets back towards Baintsagan Hill. Zhukov was waiting for the attack and sent 450 tanks and armored cars unsupported by infantry to attack the IJA from three sides. The IJA were practically encircled and lost half their armored units as they struggled to fight back as it withdrew. The two armies spared for the next 2 weeks along the east bank of the Khalkhin Gol. Problem was the Japanese were having issues getting their supplies to the area as they lacked motor transport while Zhukov whose army was over 460 miles away from its base of supply had 2600 trucks supplying them. On july 23rd the Japanese launched attacks supported by artillery and within two days they had consumed half their ammunition stores. The situation was terrible, they suffered 5000 casualties and made little progress breaking the Soviet lines. Zhukov then unleashed an offensive on august 20th using over 4000 trucks to transport supplies from Chita base. He assembled around 500 tanks, 550 fighters and bombers and his 50,000 infantry supported by armored cars. This mechanized force attacked the Japanese first using artillery and the aircraft as his armor and infantry crossed the river. The IJA were quickly flanked by the fast moving Soviet armor and encircled by August 25th. The IJA made attempts to break out of the encirclement but failed. They refused to surrender despite overwhelming artillery and aerial bombardment; by the 31st the Japanese forces on the Mongolian side of the border were destroyed. The Japanese suffered nearly 20,000 casualties, the lost 162 aircraft, 29 tanks, 7 tankettes, 72 artillery pieces a large number of vehicles. The Soviets took a heavy hit also suffering almost 25,000 casualties, 250 aircraft, 250 tanks, 133 armored cars, almost 100 artillery pieces, hundreds of vehicles. While these numbers make it seem the Japanese did a great job, you need to consider what each party was bringing to this fight. The Japanese brought roughly 30,000 men, 80 tanks and tankettes, 400 aircraft, 300 artillery pieces, 1000 trucks. The Soviets brought nearly 75,000 men, 550 tanks, 900 aircraft, 634 artillery pieces, 4000 trucks. There are some sources that indicate the IJA brought as many artillery rounds as they could muster from Japan, Manchuria and Korea, roughly 100,000 rounds for the operation. The Soviets fired 100,000 rounds per day. A quick look at wikipedia numbers, yes I know its a no no, but sometimes its good for quick perspectives show: USSR: Bomber sorties 2,015, fighter sorties 18,509; 7.62 mm machine gun rounds fired 1,065,323; 20 mm (0.80 in) cannon rounds expended 57,979; bombs dropped 78,360 (1,200 tons). Japan: Fighter/bomber sorties 10,000 (estimated); 7.7 mm (0.30 in) machine gun rounds fired 1.6 million; bombs dropped 970 tons. What I am trying to say is there was an enormous disparity in military production. And this is not just limited to numbers but quality. After the battle the Japanese made significant reforms. They increased tank production from 500 annually to 1200. The Japanese funded research into new anti-tank guns, such as the Type 1 47 mm. They mounted this gun to their Type 97 Chi-Ha tanks, the new standard medium tank of the IJA. Because of the tremendous defeat to Soviet armor they send General Yamashita to Germany to learn everything he could about tank tactics. But they simply could not produce enough tanks to ever hope to match 10% of the USSR. The Soviets had mostly been using T-26's, BT-5's and BT-7's who were crudely made, but made en masse. The Japanese would find most of their tank models with less effective range, less armor and some with less penetration power. It took the Japanese a hell of a lot more time to produce tanks, they were simply not on par with the Soviets in quantity or quality. Their tank tactics, albeit improved via Yamashita after 1939, were still nothing compared to the Soviets.  The major outcome of the battle of Lake Khasan and Khalkhin Gol was the abandonment of the hokushin-ron strategy and adoption of the nanshin-ron strategy. But, that didnt mean Japan did not have a plan in case they had to go to war with the USSR. Part 2 Kantōgun Tokushu Enshū Kantōgun Tokushu Enshū or the Kwantung Army Special Maneuvers was an operational plan created by the General Staff of the IJA for an invasion of the Russian Far East to capitalize on Operation Barbarossa. Here our story truly begin. Between 1938-1939 the IJA General Staff and Kwantung Army formed two “Hachi-Go” plans. Variants A and B examined the possibility of an all out war with the USSR beginning in 1943. In both plans they expected to be facing 60 Soviet divisions, while they could deliver 50 divisions, delivered incrementally from China and Japan. Plan A called for attacks across the eastern and northern borders of Manchuria while maintaining a defensive stance in the west. Plan B, much more ambitious, called for striking into the vast steppe between the Great Khingan Mountains and Lake Baikal, hoping to cut off the trans-siberian railway. If this was done successfully it was believed the whole of European Russia would be doomed to be defeated in detail. Defeated in detail means to divide and conquer. This battle would take place over 5000 kilometers with Japan's final objective being to advance 1200 km into the USSR. That dwarves Operation Barbarossa in distance, let that sink in. Both plans faced impossible odds. First of all the railway networks in Manchuria were not sufficiently expanded for such far reaching offensives, especially for plan B. Furthermore the 50 divisions required for them would be impossible to come by, since 1937 Japan was bogged down in a war with China. When Japan went to war with the west in 1941 she had 51 divisions. She left the base minimum in China, 35 divisions and tossed nearly 20 into southeast asia and the pacific. On top of not having the men, the IJA estimated a fleet of 200,000 vehicles would be necessary to sustain an offensive to Lake Baikal. That was twice the number of military vehicles Japan had at any given time. After the battle of Khalkhin Gol, plan B was completely abandoned. Planning henceforth focused solely on the northern and eastern fronts with any western advance being limited in scope. Now Japan formed a neutrality pact with the USSR because of her defeat at Khalkhin Gol and Molotov Ribbentrop pact between Germany and the USSR. The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact came as a bitter and complete surprise to Japan. It pushed Japan to fully adopt the Nanshin-ron strategy and this began with her invasion of French IndoChina, which led the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and United States to embargo her. The Netherlands Dutch East Indies refused to sell oil to Japan, the UK refused to sell oil from Burma and the US gradually cut off selling oil to Japan, with her oil exports alone being 80% of Japans supply, the rest from the Dutch east indies. The United States also placed an embargo on scrap-metal shipments to Japan and closed the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping. 74.1% of Japan's scrap iron came from the United States in 1938, and 93% of Japan's copper in 1939. Other things like Rubber and tin were also off the table, as this was mostly acquired from British held Malaya and the Dutch East Indies.    Now the crux of everything is the China War. Japan was stuck, she needed to win, in order to win she needed the resources she was being denied. The only logical decision was to attack the places with these resources. Thus until 1941, Japan prepared to do just that, investing in the Navy primarily. Then in June of 1941, Hitler suddenly informs the Japanese that he is going to invade the USSR. The Japanese were shocked and extremely angry, they nearly left the Tripartite Pact over the issue. This unprecedented situation that ushered in the question, what should Japan do? There were those like Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka who argued they must abandon the neutrality pact and launch a simultaneous offensive with the Germans against the USSR. The IJA favored this idea….because obviously it would see them receiving more funding as the IJN was currently taking more and more of it for the Nanshin-ron plans. But this is not a game of hearts of Iron IV, the Japanese government had to discuss and plan if they would invade the USSR….and boy it took awhile. I think a lot of you will be very disappointed going forward, but there is no grand unleashing of a million Japanese across the borders into the Soviet Far East, in the real world there is something called logistics and politics.    The Japanese military abided by a flexible response policy, like many nations do today. Theres was specifically called the Junbi Jin Taisei or “preparatory formation setup”. Japan would only go to war with the USSR if favorable conditions were met. So in our timeline the Junbi Jin encountered its first test on June 24th when the IJA/IJN helped a conference in the wake of operation barbarossa. A compromise was made allowing the IJA to prepare an invasion plan if it did not impede on the nanshin-ron plans. There was those in the IJA who argued they should invade the USSR whether conditions were favorable or not, there were those who only wanted to invade if it looked like the USSR was on the verge of collapse. One thing agreed upon was if Japan unleashed a war with the USSR, the hostilities needed to be over by mid-October because the Siberian climate would hit winter and it would simply be impossible to continue. The IJA needed 60-7 days to complete operational preparations and 6-8 weeks to defeat the Soviets within the first phase of the offensive. Here is a breakdown of what they were thinking: 28 June: Decide on mobilization 5 July: Issue mobilization orders 20 July: Begin troop concentration 10 August: Decide on hostilities 24 August: Complete readiness stance 29 August: Concentrate two divisions from North China in Manchuria, bringing the total to 16 5 September: Concentrate four further divisions from the homeland, bringing the total to 22; complete combat stance 10 September (at latest): Commence combat operations 15 October: Complete first phase of war   The plan called for 22 divisions (might I add my own calculations of 20 divisions were pretty spot on), with roughly 850,000 men, including Manchukuo allies, supported by 800,000 tons of shipping. The Japanese hoped the Soviets would toss at least half their forces in the Far East, perhaps 2/3rd of their armor and aircraft against the Germans giving them a 2-1 superiority. Even the 22 divisions was questionable, many in the war ministry thought only 16 divisions could be spared for such a venture, something only suitable for mop up operations in the aftermath of a German victory along the eastern front. It was clear to all, Japan needed perfect conditions to even think about performing such a thing.    The War hawks who still sought to perform Hokushin-ron tried to persaude Hideki Tojo on july 5th to go through with a new plan using a total of 25 divisions. This plan designated “Kantogun Tokushu Enshu or Kantokuen” would involve 2 phases, a buildup and readiness phase and an offensive phase. On July 7th they went to Hirohito for his official sanction for the build up. Hirohito questioned everything, but gradually relented to it. The plan was nearly identical to the former plans, banking on the Soviets being unable to reinforce the Far East because of Germany's progress. The level of commitment was scaled down somewhat, but still enormous. Again a major looming issue was the Manchurian railways that would need to be expanded to accomodate the movement of men and supplies. This meant the construction of port facilities, military barracks, hospitals and such. Kantokuen would begin with a initial blow against the Ussuri front, targeting Primorye and would be followed up by a northern attack against Blagoveshchensk and Kuibyshevka. The 1st area army, 3rd and 20 armies with the 19th division of the Korean army would penetrade the border south of Lake Khanka to breach the main soviet defensive lines, thus threatening Vladivostok. The 5th army would strike south of Dalnerechensk to complete the isolation of the maritime province, sever the trans-sierian railway and block Soviet reinforcements. The 4th army would attack along the Amur river before helping out against Blagoveshchensk. Two reinofrced divisions would invade Sakhalin from land and sea. The second phase would see the capture of Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, and Nikolayevsk. Additionally, amphibious operations against Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula were contemplated.   It was agreed the operation could only afford 24 divisions, with 1,200,000 men, 35,000 vehicles, 500 tanks, 400,000 horses and 300,000 coolies. The deployment of thse forces would mean the western front facing Mongolia and the Trans-baikal region would be pretty much open, so delaying actions would have to be fought if the soviets performed a counter offensive there. Air forces were critical to the plan. They sought to dispatch up to roughly 2000 aircraft cooperating with 350 naval aircraft to launch a sudden strike against the Soviet Far East Air Force to knock them out early.    The Soviet Far East had two prominent weaknesses to be exploited. Number 1 was Mongolia's 4500 km long horeshoe shaped border. Number 2 was its 100% dependency on European Russia to deliver men, food and war materials via the trans-siberian railway. Any disruption of the trans-siberian railway would prove fatal to the Soviet Far East.    Now as for the Soviets. The 1930's and early 1940's saw the USSR take up a defensive policy, but retained offensive elecments as well. Even with the German invasion and well into 1942, the Soviets held a strategy of tossing back the IJA into Manchuria if attacked. The primary forces defending the Far east in 1941 were the Far Eastern and Trans-Baikal Fronts, under the command of Generals Iosif Apanasenko and Mikhail Kovalyov. The Trans-Baikal front held 9 divisions, including 2 armored, a mechanized brigade and a heavily fortified region west of the Oldoy River near Skovorodino had a garrison. The Far Eastern Front had 23 divisions including 3 armored, 4 brigades and 11 heavily fortified regions with garrisons including Vladivostok. Altogether they had 650,000 men, 5400 tanks, 3000 aircraft, 57,000 vehicles, 15,000 artillery pieces and nearly 100,000 horses. By 1942 the Vladivostok sector had 150 artillery pieces with 75 -356 mm calibers organized into 50 batteries. As you can imagine after Operation Barbarrosa was unleashed, things changed. From June to December, roughly 160,000 men, 3000 tanks, 2670 artillery pieces, 12,000 vehicles and perhaps 1800 aircraft were sent to deal with the Germans. Despite this, the Soviets also greatly expanded a buildup to match the apparent Japanese buildup in Manchuria. By July 22nd 1941 the Far Eastern and Trans-Baikal Fronts were to be raised by 1 million men for august. By December it was nearly 1.2 million. Even the Soviet Far East Navy saw an increase from 100,000 men to 170,000 led by Admiral Yumashev. The Soviet Mongolian allies were capable of manning about 80,000, though they lacked heavy equipment.    Thus if this war broke out in September the Soviets and Mongolians would have just over a million men, with 2/3rds of them manning the Amur-Ussuri-Sakhalin front, the rest would defend Mongolia and the Trans-Baikal region. Even though the war against the Germans was dire, the Soviets never really gave up their prewar planning for how to deal with the Japanese. There would be an all-out defense over the border to prevent any breach of Soviet territory. The main effort would see the 1st and 25th armies holding a north-south axis between the Pacific ocean and Lake Khanka; the 35th army would defend Iman; the 15th and 2nd Red Banner armies would repel the Japanese over the Amur River; and other forces would try to hold out on Sakhalin, Kamchatka and the Pacific coast. The Soviets had constructed hundreds of fortified positions known as Tochkas along the border. Most of these were hexagonal concrete bunkers contained machine gun nests and 76 mm guns. The fortified regions I mentioned were strategically placed forcing the Japanese to overcome them via frontal attacks. This would require heavy artillery to overcome. Despite the great defensive lines, the Soviets did not intend to be passive and would launch counteroffensives. The Soviet air force and Navy would play an active role in defeating a Japanese invasion as well. The air force's objetice would be to destroy the Japanese air force in the air and on the ground, requiring tactical ground attack mission. They would also destroy key railways, bridges and airfields within Manchuria and Korea alongside intercepting IJN shipping. Strategic bombing against the home islands would be limited to under 30 DB-3's who could attack Tokyo, Yokosuka, Maizuru and Ominato. The Soviet Navy would help around the mouth of the Amur River, mine the Tatar Strait and try to hit any IJN ships landing men or materials across the Pacific Coasts.    Japan would not be able to continue a land war with the USSR for very long. According to Japanese military records, in 1942 while at war they were required to produce 50 Kaisenbun. A Kaisenbun is a unit of measurement for ammunition needed for a single division to operate for 4 months. Annual production never surpassed 25 kaisenbun with 100 in reserve. General Shinichi Tanaka estimated for an operation against the USSR 3 Kaisenbun would be needed per divisions, thus a total of 72 would be assigned to 24 divisions. This effectively meant 2/3rds of Japans ammunition stockpile would be used on the initial strike against the USSR. Japan would have been extremely hard pressed to survive such a war cost for 2 years.    Now in terms of equipment Japan had a lot of problems. During the border battles, Japanese artillery often found itself outranged and grossly under supplied compared to the Soviet heavier guns. Despite moving a lot of men and equipment to face the Germans, the Red Army maintained a gross superiority in armor. The best tank the Kwantung Army had in late 1941 was the Type 97 Chi-Ha, holding 33mm armor with a low velocity 57 mm gun. There was also Ha-Go and Te-Ke's with 37 mm guns but they had an effective range less than 1 km.   The Soviet T-26, BT-5 and BT-7's had 45 mm guns more than capable of taking out the Japanese armor and the insult to injury was they were crudely made and very expendable. Every Japanese tank knocked out was far greater a loss, as Japan's production simply could not remotely match the USSR. For aircraft the Japanese were a lot better off. The Polikarpov I-16 was the best Soviet fighter in the Far East and performed alright against the Nakajima Ki-27 at Khalkhin Gol. The rest of the Soviet air arsenal were much older and would struggle. The Soviets would have no answer to the IJN's Zero fighter or the IJA's high speed KI-21 bomber that outraced the Soviet SB-2. Japanese pilots were battle hardened by China and vastly experienced.   Another thing the Japanese would have going for them was quality of troops. The Soviets drained their best men to fight the Germans, so the combat effectiveness in the far east would be less. Without the Pacific War breaking out, some of Japan's best Generals would be brought into this war, of course the first one that comes to mind for me is General Yamashita, probably the most armor competent Japanese general of ww2.    Come August of 1941 those who still sought the invasion of the USSR were facing major crunch time. The IJA planners had assumed the Soviets would transfer 50% or more of their power west to face the Germans, but this was not the case. By August 9th of 1941, facing impossible odds and with the western embargos in full motion, in our timeline the Japanese Hokushin-Ron backers gave up. But for the sake of our story, for some batshit insane reason, the Japanese military leadership and Hirohito give the greenlight for an invasion on August 10th.   Part 3 the catastrophe   So to reiterate the actual world plan had    10 August: Decide on hostilities 24 August: Complete readiness stance 29 August: Concentrate two divisions from North China in Manchuria, bringing the total to 16 5 September: Concentrate four further divisions from the homeland, bringing the total to 22; complete combat stance 10 September (at latest): Commence combat operations 15 October: Complete first phase of war   So what is key to think about here is the events of September. The Battle for Moscow is at the forefront, how does a Japanese invasion in the first week or two of September change things? This is going to probably piss off some of you, but Operation Typhoon would still fail for Germany.  In our time line the legendary spy Richard Sorge sent back information on Japan's decision to invade the USSR between August 25th to September 14th. On the 25th he informed Stalin the Japanese high command were still discussing whether to go to war or not with the USSR. On September 6th Stalin was informed the Japanese were beginning preparations for a war against the west. Then on September 14th, the most important message was relayed to Stalin "In the careful judgment of all of us here... the possibility of [Japan] launching an attack, which existed until recently, has disappeared...."[15]    With this information on hand from 23 June to 31 December 1941, Stalin transferred a total of 28 divisions west. This included 18 rifle divisions, 1 mountain rifle division, 3 tank divisions, 3 mechanized divisions and 3 mountain cavalry divisions. The transfers occurred mainly in June (11 divisions) and October (9 divisions).    Here we come to a crossroads and I am going to have to do some blunt predictions. Let's go from the most optimistic to the most pessimistic. Scenario 1) for some insane reason, Stalin abandons Moscow and moves his industry further east, something the Soviets were actively preparing during Operation Typhoon. This is not a defeat of the USSR, it certainly would prolong the war, but not a defeat. Now that seems rather silly. Scenario 2) Stalin attempts transferring half of what he did in our time line back to Moscow and the Germans fail to take it. The repercussions of course is a limited counteroffensive, it wont be as grand as in our timeline, but Moscow is saved. Scenario 3) and the most likely in my opinion, why would Stalin risk moscow for the Far East? Stalin might not transfer as many troops, but certainly he would have rather placed his chips in Moscow rather than an enemy literally 6000 km's away who have to cross a frozen desert to get to anything he cares about.  Even stating these scenarios, the idea the German army would have taken Moscow if some of the very first units from the far east arrived, because remember a lot of these units did not make it in time to defend moscow, rather they contributed to the grand counteroffensive after the Germans stalled. The German armies in front of Moscow were depleted, exhausted, unsupplied and freezing. Yes many of the Soviet armies at Moscow were hastily thrown together, inexperienced, poorly led and still struggling to regain their balance from the German onslaught. Yet from most sources, and by sources I mean armchair historian types argue, the Germans taking Moscow is pretty unlikely. And moscow was not even that important. What a real impact might have been was the loss of the Caucasus oil fields in early 1942, now that could have brought the USSR down, Moscow, not so much, again the Soviets had already pulled their industry further east, they could do it again.   So within the context of this Second Russo-Japanese War, figure the German's still grind to a halt, they don't take Moscow, perhaps Soviets dont push them back as hard, but the USSR is not collapsing by any means. Ok now before we talk about Japans invasion we actually need to look at some external players. The UK/US/Netherlands already began massive embargoes against Japan for oil, iron, rubber, tin, everything she needed to continue her war, not just against the USSR, but with over 35 divisions fighting in China. President Roosevelt was looking for any excuse to enter WW2 and was gradually increasing ways to aid Britain and the Soviets.  Now American's lend-lease program seriously aided the USSR during WW2, particularly the initial stages of the war. The delivery of lend-lease to the USSR came through three major routes: the Arctic Convoys, the Persian Corridor, and the Pacific Route. The Arctic route was the shortest and most direct route for lend-lease aid to the USSR, though it was also the most dangerous as it involved sailing past German-occupied Norway. Some 3,964,000 tons of goods were shipped by the Arctic route; 7% was lost, while 93% arrived safely. The Persian Corridor was the longest route, and was not fully operational until mid-1942. Thereafter it saw the passage of 4,160,000 tons of goods, 27% of the total. The most important was the Pacific Route which opened up in August of 1941, but became affected when Japan went to war with America. The major port was Vladivostok, where only Soviet ships could transport non-military goods some 8,244,000 tons of goods went by this route, 50% of the total. Vladivostok would almost certainly be captured by the Japanese in our scenario so it won't be viable after its capture. Here is the sticky part, Japan is not at war with the US, so the US is pretty much free to find different Pacific paths to get lend-lease to the Soviets, and to be honest there's always the Arctic or Persian corridors. Hell in this scenario America will be able to get supplies easily into China as there will be no war in Burma, hong kong, Malaya and such. America alone is going to really ruin Japans day by increasing lend-lease to the UK, China and the USSR. America wont be joining the war in 1941, but I would strongly wager by hook or by crook, FDR would pull them into a war against Germany, probably using the same tactic Woodrow Wilson did with WW1. This would only worsen things for Japan. Another player of course is China. Late 1941, China was absolutely battered by Japan. With Japan pulling perhaps even more troops than she did for the Pacific war to fight the USSR, Chiang Kai-Shek would do everything possible to aid his new found close ally Stalin. How this would work out is anyone's guess, but it would be significant as I believe America would be providing a lot more goodies.    Ok you've all been patient, what happens with the war? Japan has to deliver a decisive knock out blow in under 4-6 months, anything after this is simply comical as Japan's production has no resources. The oil in siberia is not even remotely on the table. The Japanese can't find it, would not be able to exploit it, let alone quick enough to use it for the war. Hell the Italians were sitting on oil in Libya and they never figured that out during WW2.   So Kantokuen is unleashed with an initial blow against the Primorye in the Ussuri Front followed by an assault against Blagoveshchensk and Kiubyshevka. The main soviet lines south of Lake Khanka are attacked by the Japanese 1st area army, 3rd and 20th armies and the 19th Korean division. This inturn threatens Vladivostok who is also being bombarded by IJA/IJN aircraft. The 5th Ija army attacks south of Dalnerechensk in an attempt to sever the trans-siberian railway, to block Soviet reinforcements and supplies. The 4th IJA army fords the Amur river to help with the assault of Blagoveshchensk. Meanwhile Sakhalin is being attacked from land and sea by two IJA divisions.  Despite the Soviets being undermanned the western front facing Mongolia and the Trans-Baikal region is wide up to an attack as its only defended by the 23rd IJA division, so a limited counteroffensive begins there. The Japanese quickly win air superiority, however the heavily fortified Tochkas are not being swept aside as the Japanese might have hoped. A major problem the Japanese are facing is Soviet artillery. The Japanese artillery already placed along the borders, initially performed well, crushing Tochkas in range, but when the Japanese begin advancing and deploying their artillery units they are outgunned perhaps 3-1, much of the Soviet artillery outranges them and the Soviets have a much larger stockpile of shells. Airpower is failing to knock out soviet artillery which is placed within Tochkas and other fortified positions with anti-aircraft guns. Without achieving proper neutralization or counter battery fire, the Japanese advance against the fortified Soviet positions. The Soviets respond shockingly with counterattacks. The 15th and 35th Soviet armies with the Amur Red Banner Military Flotilla toss limited counterattacks against both sides of the Sungari River, harassing the Japanese. While much of the soviet armor had been sent west, their light tanks which would be useless against the Germans have been retained in the far east and prove capable of countering the IJA tanks. The Soviets inflict tremendous casualties, however General Yamashita, obsessed with blitzkrieg style warfare he saw first hand in the west, eventually exploits a weak area in the line.Gradually a blitzkrieg punches through and begins to circle around hitting Soviet fortified positions from the rear. The Soviets knew this would be the outcome and had prepared to fight a defense in depth, somewhat managing the onslaught.  The trans-siberian railway has been severed in multiple locations close to the border area, however this is not as effective as it could be, the Japanese need to hook deeper to cut the line further away. In the course of weeks the Soviets are gradually dislodged from their fortified positions, fighting a defense in depth over great stretches of land. Vladivostok holds out surprisingly long until the IJN/IJA seize the city. Alongside this Sakhalin is taken with relative ease. The Soviet surface fleet is annihilated, but their large submarine force takes a heavy toll of the IJN who are attempting Pacific landings. Kantokuen phase 1 is meeting its objectives, but far later than expected with much more casualties than expected. The Japanese are shocked by the fuel consumption as they advance further inland. Each truck bearing fuel is using 50% of said fuel to get to the troops, something reminiscent of the north african campaign situation for Rommel. The terrain is terrible for their vehicles full of valleys, hills, forests and mountains. Infrastructure in the region is extremely underdeveloped and the Soviets are burning and destroying everything before the Japanese arrive. All key roads and cities are defended until the Japanese can encircle the Soviets, upon which they depart, similar to situations the Japanese face in China. It is tremendously slow progress. The IJA are finding it difficult to encircle and capture Soviet forces who have prepared a series of rear lines to keep falling back to while performing counterattacks against Japanese columns. As the Japanese advance further into the interior, the IJN are unable to continue supporting them with aircraft and much of the IJA aircraft are limited in operations because of the range. The second phase of Kantokuen calls for the capture of Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, and Nikolayevsk. Additionally, amphibious operations against Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula are on standby as the IJN fears risking shipping as a result of Soviet submarine operations. The sheer scope of the operation was seeing the tide sides stretching their forces over a front nearly 5000 km in length. At some points the Japanese were attempting to advance more than 1000 km's inland, wasting ungodly amounts of fuel and losing vehicles from wear and tear.  So what does Japan gain? Within the span of 4 months, max 6 months Japan could perhaps seized: Sakhalin, the Primorsye krai including Vladivostok, segments of the trans siberian railway, Blagoveshchensk, Kuibyshevka. If they are really lucky Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, Nikolayevsk. Additionally, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula. What does this mean? Really nothing. Pull out a map of manchuria during WW2, take a pencil and expand the manchurian border perhaps 1000 km if you really want to be generous, that's the new extent of the empire of the rising sun. The real purpose of attacking the USSR is not to perform some ludicrous dash across 6000 km's of frozen wasteland to whittle down and defeat the Soviets alongside the rest of the Axis. It was only to break them, in late 1941 at Moscow there was perhaps a fools chance, but it was a fool's chance for Japan.  Japan has run out of its stockpiles of Kaisenbun, oil, iron, rubber, tin, all types of resources necessary for making war. Unlike in our timeline where Japan began exporting resources from its conquests in southeast asia and the pacific, here Japan spent everything and now is relying on the trickles it has within its empire. The China war will be much more difficult to manage. The lend-lease will increase every day to China. The US/UK/Netherlands will only increase pressure upon Japan to stop being a nuisance, Japan can't do anything about this as the US Pacific Fleet is operating around the Philippines always a looming threat. The Japanese are holding for a lack of better words, useless ground in the far east. They will build a buffer area to defend against what can only be described as a Soviet Invasion of Manchuria x1000. The Allies will be directing all of their effort against Germany and Italy, providing a interesting alternate history concept in its own right. After Germany has been dealt with, Japan would face a existential threat against a very angry Stalin. Cody from Alternate History Hub actually made an episode on this scenario, he believed the Soviets would conquer most of Japan occupied Asia and even invade the home islands. It would certainly be something on the table, taking many years, but the US/UK would most likely interfere in some way. The outcome would be so much worse for Japan. Perhaps she is occupied and a communist government is installed. Perhaps like in our timeline the Americans come in to bolster Japan up for the looming coldwar.  But the question I sought to answer here was, Japan invading the USSR was a dumb idea. The few Japanese commanders who pushed it all the way until August 9th of 1941 simply had to give up because of how illogical it was. I honestly should not have even talked about military matters, this all came down to logistics and resources. You want to know how Japan could have secured itself a better deal in WW2? 1941, the China War is the number one problem Japan can't solve so they look north or south to acquire the means to solve the China problem? Negotiate a peace with China. That is the lackluster best deal right there.    Sorry if this episode did not match your wildest dreams. But if you want me to do some batshit crazy alternate history stuff, I am more than happy to jump into it and have fun. Again thank all of you guys who joined the patreon, you guys are awesome. Until next time this is the Pacific War channel over and out. 

The Daily Quiz - Geography Today's Questions: Question 1: The country of Vanuatu is on which continent? Question 2: What is the capital city of Oman? Question 3: What is the capital city of Lithuania? Question 4: Rome is the capital city of which country? Question 5: What is the capital city of Italy? Question 6: Which of these Russian cities is not located in European Russia? Question 7: What is the capital of Ireland? Question 8: In which country would you find the UNESCO World Heritage site of Mont Saint Michel? This podcast is produced by Klassic Studios Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Daily Quiz - Geography Today's Questions: Question 1: What is the smallest independent state in the world? Question 2: Which of these Russian cities is not located in European Russia? Question 3: What U.S city is known as Insurance City? Question 4: Baghdad is the capital city of which country? Question 5: Which famous landmark has a full scale replica in Nashville, Tennessee? Question 6: What Is The Most Westerly Capital City In Mainland Europe? Question 7: Which of these countries borders Brazil? Question 8: Lomé is the capital city of which country? This podcast is produced by Klassic Studios Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last time we spoke about the Red Bearded Honghuzi Bandits. Yes Manchuria and many parts of China proper have had a bandit problem going back to ancient times. The borderlands between the Russian Empire and Qing Dynasty proved to be the perfect grounds for bandits to evolve. The Honghuzi were getting larger, more organized and certain leaders amongst them would have long lasting impacts on the history of China. Such names that come to mind are Zhang Zuolin and the Dogmeat General Zhang Zongchang. Such forces were incorporated officially into the Qing military to thwart other bandit groups and eventually to harass the Russians or Japanese in conflict looming on the horizon. Everything seems to be hot in Manchuria, Russian has full on invaded her and is reluctant to drag her troops out. There are those unhappy with this circumstance and they will soon make themselves heard loud and clear.    #73 The Yellow Peril and a War in the East   Welcome to the Fall and Rise of China Podcast, I am your dutiful host Craig Watson. But, before we start I want to also remind you this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Perhaps you want to learn more about the history of Asia? Kings and Generals have an assortment of episodes on history of asia and much more  so go give them a look over on Youtube. So please subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry for some more history related content, over on my channel, the Pacific War Channel where I cover the history of China and Japan from the 19th century until the end of the Pacific War. The Boxer Rebellion is over. The Russo-Chinese War in Manchuria is over. Order had been restored to Beijing and in Manchuria things were significantly quieted down. Now the other nations of the 8 nation alliance had their hands full dealing with the expedition against Beijing and they sort of turned a blind eye to what was a side conflict in Manchuria. But when things were settling down and 177,000 Russian forces had more or less invaded and were occupying Manchuria, well a lot of eyeballs bulged. Britain and Japan sought common cause, both had significant investments in the Asia-Pacific. For example Britain had Weihaiwei and was literally staring down at the Russians over in Port Arthur and Dalien. Japan had been slighted by the triple intervention by Russia, Germany and France, losing her acquisitions of Port Arthur and Dalien to the Russians. Manchuria was always seen as a buffer zone to the Japanese, she now hand a toehold in Korea and such large Russian activity in Manchuria was very threatening. Let us not forget the entire war between the Qing dynasty and Japan over Korea, to a lesser extent also had Russian as a 4th party. Russia did meddle in Korea and continuously antagonized Japan. Thus with common cause Japan and Britain formed an alliance on January 30th of 1902. In response Russia and France formed their own on March 16th of 1902. The alliances basically worked to thwart any other great powers from getting involved in a potential war between Japan and Russia.  Now Russia also agreed to the rest of the great powers that she would gradually withdraw her forces from Manchuria. It was to be rolled out in 3 periods of 6 months. The first phase saw southwest Manchuria evacuated and returned to China, but when it came to the second phase, suddenly Russia was making demands for concessions to the Qing dynasty.  Britain, Japan and the US protested the demands and this bolstered China to reject them. Now turned back the clock a bit there was another sticky situation. When chaos was erupting in Korea, King Gojong ran to the Russians for protection for over two years. This turned the nations favor towards the Russians over the Chinese and Japanese. Russia seized this opportunity to strengthen her forces in defense of her legation in Korea, and this action was met with actions taken up by Japan. Japanese and Russian officials met and this was the result verbatim: A further agreement between Russia and Japan had been signed in Tokyo on 25 April 1898. The agreement contained three understandings: The independence of Korea was assured; neither country would interfere in Korea's domestic affairs. There would be no appointment of military or civil advisers without discussion with the interested parties. Russia agreed not to hinder Japan's development of trade with Korea.  Aside from this the Russians of course wanted to seize as much as they could. A Russian-Korean bank was formed in 1897, and a timber cutting contract was given to Russian industrialists in the Yalu river area. In 1901, Tsar Nicholas II told Prince Henry of Prussia, "I do not want to seize Korea but under no circumstances can I allow Japan to become firmly established there. That will be a “casus belli." The contract only came into effect when the Manchurian railway projects were kicking off and when able bodies were around, which came about during the occupation of Manchuria. In april of 1903 Russians acquired some land and established a fort at Yongampo near the mouth of the Yalu river. America and Japan received similar concessions in the region. The Japanese began receiving reports, indicating Port Arthur was being heavily stocked with supplies and a large body of Russian troops were advancing across the Liaodong Peninsula towards Korea. Thus from the Japanese point of view it looked clear Russia was not honoring her agreements. On July 28th of 1903, the Japanese ambassador at St Petersburg was instructed to make it known to the Russians, the 7 demands they made to China was not seen as a “relaxation of her hold on Manchuria but rather a consolidation” Two days later, Russian Admiral Alexeiev was appointed Viceroy of the Far East. Alexeiev would hold supreme power to exercises diplomacy between Russian East Asia and her neighbors as well as command the Russian military and naval forces in the east. From the Japanese point of view, a permanent Russian occupation of Manchuria would be prejudicial over her own security and interests. It would also threaten Korea, which was her sphere of interest, one she was not looking to share. Russia agreed to consider drawing up a new treaty. On August 12th of 1903 a draft was presented at St Petersburg, but in the meantime Russia was strengthening her position in the far east. This tense situation kept going, until January 13th of 1904 when Japan offered to recognize Manchuria as being outside her sphere of interest, if Russia would agree Korea was Japan's sphere of interest. It was to be blunt a very fair deal. Japan requested an early reply to the proposal, but by February 4th of 1904 no reply was forthcoming. Two days later the Japanese ambassador, Mr. Kurino called upon the Russian foreign minister, Count Lamsdorf to take his leave. Kurino explained to Lamsdorf that the Japanese government had decided to adopt some “independent action” deeming it necessary to defend its established rights and legitimate interests. Basically Japan's patience had come to an end. The Russian ambassador to Tokyo, Baron Rosen, had continuously sent warnings to his superiors in St Petersburg that if they continued to corner Japan, she would most certainly fight them. Such sentiment was shared by War Minister General Kuroptkin who resigned in a state of exasperation some months earlier. Tsar Nicholas II did not want a war, but he was continuously assured by his advisers, Japan was not strong enough to fight them. When Mr. Kurino took his leave, the immediate signal was made to Admiral Alexeiev, who was in Tokyo at the time. The new viceroy saw with his own eyes evidence of Japanese mobilization and he advised St Petersburg accordingly. The Japanese foreign ministry confirmed their government had run out of patience. However all of this was taken to be a bluff. It has been theorized Alexeiev was simply not averse to a war with a country he certainly deemed inferior to his own. It is also theorized Tsar Nicholas II probably believed if a war would to break out it would be a short and victorious one, and perhaps such an event could distract the tide of revolution hitting his nation, the people of Russia were not happy anymore about the Romanov rule. Funny enough, all of these talks, deceptions and plans were to take shape in China. The Chinese were literally never even thought of or spoken to, and soon a war would literally occur within their borders against their will. How did this all come about? It might sound a bit funny, but a large reason the Russo-Japanese War would occur would simply be a result of, pardon my french, shit talking by one Kaiser Wilhelm II. When Kaiser Wilhelm I died on March 9th of 1888, Germany fell to Frederick III who died of throat cancer only 99 days after taking the reins. On June 15th, a 29 year old Kaiser Wilhelm II took the throne. Now for those of you who don't know, Otto von Bismarck, the man who unified Germany was during the late 19th century one of the greatest political players in the world. Bismarck had an incredible understanding of the balance of power theory and studied all the most powerful nations national interests. He brokered international deals using his knowledge to increase Germany's standing in global politics and he also in many ways designed a system of international alliances to thwart a global war….which ironically would in many ways cause ww1. If you want to know more specifically about this by the way, check out Kings and Generals alliances that caused WW1, I wrote that script and its a fascinating story. Dan Carlin famously referred to Bismarcks work as creating a giant hand grenade, that if the pin got pulled out, only Bismarck understood how to put it back in. While Bismarck was in power things were pretty good, but he was such a colossal figure, that when the young Kaiser came into power, many of his advisers suggested he was being overshadowed by Bismarck. Kaiser Wilhelm II listening to his advisers, sought to stop Bismarck from taking the quote en quote “day to day” administration. Conflicts began to arise between the two men. Wilhelm did not understand the complexities of Bismarcks international relations and saw him as far too peaceful. Wilhelm gradually fell under the influence of his military leaders to the dismay of Bismarck who thought the Kaiser would lead them swiftly into a war with a nation like Russia. In 1890 Bismarck resigned under pressure from Wilhelm II and other German leaders, and as Dan Carlin would say, now the grenade he created was set to go off. Now when the new Kaiser venturing into international relations, he was deeply influenced by a ideological concept that he would use as a tool to coerce international players to act out. The concept is known as the “yellow peril” “le Peril Jaune” as coined by Russian sociologist Jacques Novikow in the late 19th century. In essence the yellow peril was a racist ideology that held asians to be subhuman, like apes and monkeys, but also that as a racial group should they unite, they would threaten what was thought to be the superior race of the day, whites. Basically the idea was that if all the nations of asia were to unite, they could retaliate against the White nations who were at the time colonizing or forcing unequal treaties upon them. There was also a religious element to it, that Christianity was under threat from the hoards of the east.  Now back to Wilhelm II, one of his advisers was the diplomat Max von Brandt who advised him that Imperial Germany had major colonial interests in China. The Triple Intervention that Germany endorsed was justified by the Kaiser under the guise it was to thwart what he began calling “die Gelbe Gefahr / the yellow peril”. The Kaiser began a propaganda campaign using the famous allegorical lithograph “Peoples of Europe, Guard your Most Sacred Possessions” created in 1895 by Hermann Knackfuss. You can google the image. The lithograph portrays the European monarchs with Germany as the leader of Europe personified by a “prehistoric warrior-goddesses being led by the Archangel Michael against the yellow peril from the east. The east is seen as a dark cloud of smoke which rests eerily upon a calm Buddha, wreathed in flame”. The imagery is very apparent, white and christianity is under threat from asian and their eastern religions. This type of ideology goes all the way back to Ancient Greece and Persia, its the age old west vs east stuff. Today you would call this sort of talk, a race war. Now you are probably asking, ok this leader of Germany is just a racist dude, how does this cause a war between Russia and Japan? This story is rather hilarious and hard to believe, but in summary, the Kaiser used the ideology to trick his cousin into war.  For those unaware, Kaiser Wilhelm II was first cousins with King Geoerge V of Britain,  to Tsar Nicholas II of Russia, to Queens Marie of Romania, Maud of Norway, Victoria Eugene of Spain, and even the woman he would eventually marry, the Empress of Russia. Now the Germany presented to Wilhelm was involved in some alliances. I mentioned Britain and Japan had an alliance and France and Russian had an alliance. Wilhelm and his advisers sought to increase Germany's stature. Wilhelm believed that if Russia went to war with Japan, it would break up the Franco-Russian alliance and with no one else to turn to, Russia would seek an alliance with Germany. Wilhelms reasoning was that France was not supporting of Russians expansion into asia and such aggressive actions like going to war with Japan would be highly disapproved by France. The French Premier Maurice Rouvier publicly declared that the Franco-Russian alliance applied only in Europe and not Asia and that if Japan and Russia went to war, France would remain neutral. Such rhetoric seemed to prove Wilhelms beliefs. Germany meanwhile felt threatened by Britain and had embarked on what was known as the Tirpitz Plan in the late 1890s. The Tirpitz plan was Germany's plan to achieve world power status through naval power, but the world's greatest navy of course was Britain at the time. What essentially happened was Germany challenging Britain to an arms race in the form of naval warship building programs. Everything the Kaiser pursued during the late 19th century was what was called “Weltpolitik / world politics” which essentially was just Germany's imperialistic foreign policy to become a global power. Wilhelm and his advisers were playing world politics to weaken rivals and strengthen Germany plain and simple.  So Wilhelm believes he can break the French-Russian alliance and squeeze himself in Frances place if he can get the Russians to go to war with Japan who just happened to be allied to Germany's main rival, Britain. Some real game of thrones stuff here. Wilhelm also believed if Germany could pull this off, France would be compelled to join them, forming a triple alliance against Britain and Japan so they could all pursue their expansionist policies in places like Asia. There was also the belief pulling this off would pull Russia away from the Balkans which was a huge source of tension with Germany's main ally Austro-Hungary. Thats all fine and dandy, but how does Wilhelm get his cousin Tsar Nicholas to go to war with the Japanese, here comes the yellow peril.  Starting in 1895, Kaiser Wilhelm began using the Yellow Peril ideology to portray Germany as the great defender of the west against the barbarism of the east. But then all of a sudden Wilhelm began sending personal letters to his cousin Nicholas praising him as the quote “savior of the white races” and began urging him to take a more hardened approach to Asia. The letters between the two have been referred to as the “willy-nicky” letters, consisting of 75 messages sent back and forth between 1895-1914. I wont list them all of course but lets take a peak at how Wilhelm wrote to his cousin. In 1895 Wilhelm wrote this from Kaltenbronn Schwarzwald. I will paraphrase of course there's a ton of fluff. Dearest Nicky, I thank you sincerely for the excellent way in which you initiated the combined action of Europe[27] for the sake of its interests against Japan. It was high time that energetic steps were taken, and will make an excellent impression in Japan as elsewhere. It shows to evidence how necessary it is that we should hold together, and also that there is existent a base of common interests upon which all European nations may work in joint action for the welfare of all as is shown by the adherence of France to us two. May the conviction that this can be done without touching a nations honour, take root more and more firmly, then no doubt the fear of war in Europe will dissipate more and more. The kind and most valuable messages which you sent me through Osten Sacken[28] by Count Eulenburgs transmission in Vienna have given me a signal proof of your loyalty and openness towards me. I shall certainly do all in my power to keep Europe quiet and also guard the rear or Russia so that nobody shall hamper your action towards the Far East! For that is clearly the great task of the future for Russia to cultivate the Asian Continent and to defend Europe from the inroads of the Great Yellow race. In this you will always find me on your side ready to help you as best I can. You have well understood that call of Providence and have quickly grasped the moment; it is of immense political and historical value and much good will come of it. I shall with interest await the further development of our action and hope that, just as I will gladly help you to settle the question of eventual annexations[29] of portions of territory for Russia, you will kindly see that Germany may also be able to acquire a Port somewhere were it does not "gêne" you. You can see how Wilhelm is egging on his cousin about how Germany will have his back if he were to be bolder in Asia. Also the cute end bit about Germany acquiring some ports.  In 1898 for a New Years letter Wilhelm sent this Dearest Niky May this New Year be a happy one for you dear Allx and the whole of your house and country. May the plans, which you mature be fullfilled for the wellfare of your people. Henry's mission^ is one of the steps I have taken for the help and countenance of your lofty Ideals—without which no sovereign can exist—in promoting civilisation I. e. Christianity in [41] the Far East! Will you kindly accept a drawing I have sketched for you, showing the Symbolising figures of Russia and Germany as sentinels at the Yellow Sea for the proclaiming of the Gospel of Truth and Light in the East. I drew the sketch in the Xmas week under the blaze of the lights of theXmas trees!  Here Wilhelm is pressing upon the religious aspect and is basically flattering Nicholas. Again in 1898 Wilhelm wrote Dearest Nicky I must congratulate you most heartily at the successful issue of your action at Port Arthur ; we two will make a good pair of sentinels at the entrance of the gulf of Petchili, who will be duly respected especially by the Yellow Ones ! I think the way you managed to soothe the feelings of the "fretful Japs"by the masterly arrangement at Korea a remarkably fine piece of diplomacy and a great show of foresight; which Is apt to show what a boon it was that by your great journey,^ you were able to study the Question of the Far East locally and are now morally speaking the Master of Peking! Fretful Japs indeed In 1902 we get probably the most important letter involving the yellow peril Dear Nicky This is the more necessary as/certain symptoms in the East seems to show that Japan is becoming a rather restless customer and that the situation necessitates all coolness and decision of the Peace Powers. The news of the attachment of the Japanese General Yamai^—former leader of the Jap. troops in China—to the Legation at Peking in order to take in hand the reorganisation of the Chinese Army—i.e. for the unavowed object of driving every other foreigner out of China—is very serious. 20 to 30 Million of trained Chinese helped by half a dozen Jap. Divisions and led by fine, undaunted Christian hating Jap. Officers, is a future to be con- templated not without anxiety; and not impossible. In fact it is the coming into reality of the *'Yellow Peril" which I depicted some years ago, and for which engraving I was laughed at by the greater mass of the People for my graphic depiction of it ... Your devoted friend and cousin, Willy, Admiral of the Atlantic".  And there it is, an army of millions of Chinese led by Japanese officers, the yellow peril. So for years Wilhelm egged on his cousin, making him believe he was this savior of the white race, holding the yellow hoard back from sweeping over Europe. Wilhelm also made sure to leave ambiguous ideas that Germany had Russians back, that if war came and let's say a nation like Britain jumped into the mix, Germany would jump in too. Arguable if there was any reality behind these claims. Now back to the situation in the far east, King Gojong found his nation stuck between two tigers again, this time it was Japan and Russia. He believed the key to the issue was Manchuria and sought for Korea to remain as neutral as possible so she could hope to preserve her independence, I would saw independence with finger quotes. Meanwhile the Chinese ambassador to St Petersburg, Hu Weide was receiving reports from Beijing on whether Russia or Japan were likely to win such a war and how it would favor China. It was argued it was in China's interest for Japan to win, because a Japanese victory would likely breakdown Russians stronghold on Manchuria and perhaps China could wrestle it all back in. China decided in December of 1903 to remain neutral if war came, because while she knew Japan was the only one in the far east capable of pushing Russia out, she also did not know what Japan's ambitions might be in Manchuria.  In early 1904 negotiations continued between Russia and Japan, but like I mentioned earlier Japan gradually figured out Russia was not being serious. This was more than likely due to an infamous message sent by Wilhelm to Nicholas in December of 1903.  Since 97—Kiaochow—we have never left Russia in any doubt that we would cover her back in Europe, in case she decided to pursue a bigger policy in the Far East that might lead to military complications (with the aim of relieving our eastern border from the fearful pressure and threat of the massive Russian army!). Whereupon, Russia took Port Arthur and trusting us, took her fleet out of the Baltic, thereby making herself vulnerable to us by sea. In Danzig 01 and Reval 02, the same assurance was given again, with result that entire Russian divisions from Poland and European Russia were and are being sent to the Far East. This would not had happened if our governments had not been in agreement! Nicholas for his part was prepared to compromise with Japan, but the incessant letters from Wilhelm egging him on as a coward for thinking about compromising gradually broke the Tsar. The Kaiser wrote this: undertaking the protection and defence of the White Race, and with it, Christian civilization, against the Yellow Race. And whatever the Japs are determined to ensure the domination of the Yellow Race in East Asia, to put themselves at its head and organise and lead it into battle against the White Race. That is the kernel of the situation, and therefore there can be very little doubt about where the sympathies of all half-way intelligent Europeans should lie. England betrayed Europe's interests to America in a cowardly and shameful way over the Panama Canal question, so as to be left in 'peace' by the Yankees. Will the 'Tsar' likewise betray the interests of the White Race to the Yellow as to be 'left in peace' and not embarrass the Hague tribunal too much?. Nicholas replied he still sought peace, and Wilhelm replied in telegram “oh you innocent angel, this is the language of an innocent angel. But not that of a White Tsar!” Regardless of the Tsar's feelings, Japan was firmly under the belief Russia was not serious about seeking a peaceful solution to their dispute over Manchuria and Korea. When Japan proposed recognizing Manchuria was Russia's sphere of influence if Russia would respect their sphere of influence over Korea, the Russia counter proposal was basically, no, Russia would retain Manchuria and Korea would be open game.  Potential diplomatic resolutions between the two nations had thus failed. Historians generally argue it was the fault of Nicholas II who pushed his administration to give no ground. Why he acted this way though has two major arguments, one I have highlighted, the egging on by the Kaiser, but there was another element at play. The Russian people were frankly fed up with the royal family, the people were looking for change. To start a war and rile up patriotism could have been an attempt to quell the Russian people from revolutionary actions and in retrospect it certainly seems the case. The Tsar's advisers despite being hawkish did not seek a war with Japan, they simply wanted to bully what they thought was a weaker nation into submission. Because the reality was, Manchuria was far, the trans siberian railway was not complete, moving troops and provisions such a distance was a colossal task.  Japan performed a large scale study of the Russian power in Manchuria. The Japanese had been secretly surveying and mapping as far as east of Lake Baikal. In 1904 the Japanese had 380,000 active and reserve army forces, 200,000 in the 2nd reserve, another 50,000 in conscription reserve and 220,000 trained men of the national army, thus they could in theory toss 850,000 men into a conflict and by conscripting perhaps 4,250,000 who would all have to be trained taking time and money. Japan's effective strength was 257,000 infantry, 11,000 cavalry and 894 artillery pieces. They held 12 infantry divisions each containing 11,400 infantry, 430 cavalry and 36 guns a piece. Their troops received 12 months training, once the war started this would be cut to 6 months. Their artillery battalions held 3 batteries with both field and mountain guns ranging in caliber of 2.95 inches to 4.72 inches. Their infantry were equipped with a modern 1900 .256 inch magazine rifle that could fire 2000 yards but was effective at 300. Each soldier carried a knapsack, greatcoat and shelter tent. In their sacks were two days rations and entrenching tools. For machine guns they would receive Hotchkiss guns. The logistical system for the Japanese would be much better than the Russians. They had a series of lines of support. The soldiers carried two days rations, with echelons of transports that carried provisions behind them. Each division had its own transport battalion, including an ambulance train to deal with casualties. Chinese carts, Chinese and Korean coolies would all be paid premium prices for logistical aid. The Japanese would buy local foodstuff from the Koreans and Chinese at premium prices to earn the local populaces support over the Russians. For the Russians their army stood roughly at 4.5 million, but only 6 of the 25 European army corps would play an active role in the far east. By February of 1904 the Russians had roughly 60,000 troops, 3000 cavalry and 164 guns posted at Vladivostok, Harbin and Port Arthur. By Mid february this would be increased to 95,000; with 45,000 at Vladivostok, 8000 at Harbin, 9000 in Haicheng; 11,000 near the Yalu and 22,000 around Port Arthur. The Russian had the European 1st, 4th, 8th, 10th, 16th and 17th army corps each numbering 28,000 rifles and 112 guns. Alongside these were 7 Siberian corps. While the Russians held the advantage in numbers, the trans siberian was not complete and the route going around Lake Baikal formed a massive delay. Lake Baikal is basically the size of Switzerland, around 386 miles long. Thus the forces in Manchuria would be at the mercy of local foodstuffs for provisions, which meant they were competing with the Japanese to purchase them, while the Japanese had their own nations foodstuffs coming via sea transport, from Korea and of course within China. The Russian troops were armed with a .299 caliber rifles, but their training was lackluster and required all men to fire at short range on orders from superior officers. The upcoming war would catch the Russian gunners in the midst of a  re-equipment programme. A third of their guns were a new 3 inch quick firing gun with a range of 6000 yards, capable of battering the Japanese artillery. However the gunners training period was quite literally on the job. Thus many of the gunners were coming into the conflict with a new technology they had not even fired yet. Japan's population was then 46.5 million, Russia's 130 million. The Russian military opinion saw the Japanese “as little people who lived in paper houses…and wasted hours on flower arrangement and tea ceremonies”. However, Minister of War Kuropatkin visited Japan in 1903 and was impressed by their infantry and artillery, stating that they were equal to any European army, and advocated avoiding war with them. Russia's navy was much larger, but divided between the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and the Pacific, whereas Japan's was concentrated in her home waters. By 1902, Russia began strengthening her Pacific squadron and, by the end of 1903, had 7 battleships, 7 cruisers, 25 destroyers and 27 smaller ships. The IJN (the Japanese Navy) consisted of 6 battleships, 10 cruisers, 40 destroyers and 40 smaller vessels. The Russian ships were a hotchpotch of differing types, armaments and speeds, with a varied amount of armor protection. The Japanese ships were nearly all British built, uniform and faster. Alcohol excess amongst Russian crews was a serious problem. Baltic crews spent the 6 months of winter ashore because the gulf of Finland froze and because of bureaucratic demand for uniformity. So did the crews of the Black Sea fleet. Thus, Russian sailors spent less time at sea and less time training. The Japanese navy under British instruction spent more time at sea, and trained intensively. Japanese sailors were literate, while most Russian sailors were not. These variables would come out to play when dealing with steam-driven warships, the most technologically advanced weapons of the day. At the outbreak of the conflict the Russian Far East fleet would have 7 battleships, 6 cruisers and 13 destroyers at Port Arthur. At Vladivostok were 4 first class cruisers, with a number of torpedo boats. At Chemulpo in Korea were the protected cruisers Varya and gunboat Koreyetz. A crucial component of the conflict would be commanding the sea ways. Both nations recognized this fact all too well. The Russian far east fleet was constrained from year the round training by being icebound in Vladivostok for 3 months of the year. Her fleet was also a ragtag bunch with different armaments, speed, armor and flexibility. Russia was dependent on foreign built ships, though she was fully capable of building her own. Russia had ships built from Britain, Germany, France and the US. The Russian navy was based on conscription at 7 years with 3 years of reserve.  The IJN combined fleet was led by Vice-Admiral Heihachiro Togo. The two divided squadrons of the Russian Pacific Fleet were commanded overall by Admiral Oskar Ludvig Stark. The Main Russian squadron was in Port Arthur and the other cruiser squadron was at Vladivostok under the command of Admiral Nikolai Skrydlov. Port Arthur offered some shore artillery battery defense, though it was underfunded due to divestments for the development of Dalny, and its dry dock capabilities were quite limited compared to that of Sasebo. The Russians were bluffing the Japanese while continuing the strengthen their position in the far east. But the Japanese would not wait for them to do so.   I would like to take this time to remind you all that this podcast is only made possible through the efforts of Kings and Generals over at Youtube. Please go subscribe to Kings and Generals over at Youtube and to continue helping us produce this content please check out www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals. If you are still hungry after that, give my personal channel a look over at The Pacific War Channel at Youtube, it would mean a lot to me. Kaiser Wilhelm II had egged his cousin Tsar Nicholas II into facing against the Empire of Japan. Little did the Russian Tsar know, but he was about to send his nation to their doom, for the Japanese had done their homework and were determined to rid Manchuria of the Russian menace

What is Shamanism? Who is the Shaman? Academic definitions and controversies surrounding Shamanism and my proposal to a new definition of Shamanism. CONNECT & SUPPORT

What is Shamanism? Who is the Shaman? Academic definitions and controversies surrounding Shamanism and my proposal to a new definition of Shamanism. CONNECT & SUPPORT

Veterans In Politics- Season 5, Episode 2 with Bob Seely MBE MPBob is MP for the Isle of Wight parliamentary constituency.  He is the sixth generation to be involved in community life on the Isle of Wight, including family members who have served as its MP.  Our host Jonny explores this history, including that of his Uncle Jack and his famous warhorse 'Warrior' who served in WW1.  A fascinating story not to be missed!He first worked as a foreign correspondent in eastern Europe for four years as a stringer for The Times newspaper.  He first visited the USSR in early 1990, witnessing the first celebrations of Easter in western Ukraine since Soviet occupation after World War II, and also the first Chernobyl disaster protests in Kiev that year.  He filed an initial batch of reports and was invited by the newspaper to return permanently to the USSR / former USSR from 1990 to 1994.  During his time, Bob reported from most of the Union republics / new nations of the USSR: Russia (including Moscow, European Russia and Siberia) Ukraine (including Crimea), Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenian (including Nagorny Karabakh), Uzbekistan and Tajikistan.  He also made occasional visits to the Balkans, including Sarajevo and Kosovo.  He also wrote occasional articles for The Spectator and The Sunday Times.In the final year in the former USSR, Bob became a Special Correspondent for The Washington Post.  He then spent a year in the USA writing a book, Deadly Embrace, on Russia's role in the Caucasus.  During this time, Bob was a fellow at Brown University's Watson Institute.  He returned to the UK to work for the Associated Press as a London-based reporter.In 2000 Bob moved temporarily into politics.  He headed up the foreign affairs team for Francis Maude and afterwards worked briefly for Michael Howard and Sir Malcolm Rifkind. In 2005, he stood in the Broxtowe Parliamentary seat in the General Election but lost to the Labour candidate by 2,296 votes.From 2005 to 2008 Bob worked for MTV Networks International.MilitaryFrom 2008 onwards, Bob served in the UK Armed Forces.  He was mobilised or placed on Full Time Reserve Service (FTRS) for nearly a decade until his selection as a parliamentary candidate in the 2017 election, at which time he resigned his full-time service and returned to the Army Reserve.Bob was initially mobilised in 2008, deploying to Iraq.  He served out of the main operating base in at Basra Airport.  Over eight months (parts of Op TELIC 12 and 13), he deployed on over 20 operations during his tour, mainly focused on extended patrolling through the villages around the southern Basra marshes and parts of Basra city, meeting local village elders and providing atmospherics reporting for the UK Command.  After his tour Bob was remobilised and asked to remain in the Armed Forces on full-time service.  He deployed on four occasions to Afghanistan for one to four month tours.  He was based out of Lashkar Gah, and Nad Ali.Bob was awarded a Joint Commanders Commendation in 2009, and was decorated with a Military MBE in the 2016 Operational Awards and Honours List, receiving it from Her Majesty the Queen in early 2017.  Bob has also supported the development of UK military thinking in unconventional warfare.More on Bob here: About Bob Seely | Bob Seely MP

Episode 91:This week we're continuing Russia in Revolution An Empire in Crisis 1890 - 1928 by S. A. Smith[Part 1]Introduction[Part 2]1. Roots of Revolution, 1880s–1905Autocracy and OrthodoxyPopular Religion[Part 3 - This Week]1. Roots of Revolution, 1880s–1905Agriculture and Peasantry - 00:25[Part 4 - 5?]1. Roots of Revolution, 1880s–1905[Part 6 - 8?]2. From Reform to War, 1906–1917[Part 9 - 11?]3. From February to October 1917[Part 12 - 15?]4. Civil War and Bolshevik Power[Part 16 - 18?]5. War Communism[Part 19 - 21?]6. The New Economic Policy: Politics and the Economy[Part 22 - 25?]7. The New Economic Policy: Society and Culture[Part 26?]ConclusionFigures:2) Bringing in the harvest c.1910. - 00:38Footnotes:40) 00:40David Moon, The Russian Peasantry, 1600–1930 (London: Longman, 1999).41) 02:06Richard G. Robbins, Famine in Russia, 1891–1892: The Imperial Government Responds to a Crisis (New York: Columbia University Press, 1975).42) 02:25R. W. Davies, Mark Harrison, and S. G. Wheatcroft (eds), The Economic Transformation of the Soviet Union, 1913–1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 59.43) 02:42Stephan Merl, ‘Socio-economic Differentiation of the Peasantry', in R. W. Davies (ed.), From Tsarism to the New Economic Policy (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1990), 52.44) 03:29A. G. Rashin, Naselenie Rossii za sto let (Moscow: Gos. Statisticheskoe Izd-vo, 1956), 198–9.45) 03:59Davies et al. (eds), Economic Transformation, 59; David L. Ransel, ‘Mothering, Medicine, and Infant Mortality in Russia: Some Comparisons', Kennan Institute Occasional Papers, 1990, .46) 04:31Christine D. Worobec, Family and Community in the Post-Emancipation Period (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), 175.47) 05:57P. N. Zyrianov, ‘Pozemel'nye otnosheniia v russkoi krest'ianskoi obshchine vo vtoroi polovine XIX—nachale XX veka', in D. F. Aiatskov (ed.), Sobstvennost' na zemliu v Rossii: istoriia i sovremennost' (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2002), 154. Some sources put the number of peasant households in European Russia at 9.2 million.48) 06:26Worobec, Family, 25.49) 07:01Moon, Russian Peasantry, 172.50) 07:19Barbara Alpern Engel, Between the Fields and the City: Women, Work and Family in Russia, 1861–1914 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994); E. Kingston-Mann and T. Mixter, ‘Introduction', in Esther Kingston-Mann and Timothy R. Mixter (eds), Peasant Economy, Culture and Politics in European Russia, 1800–1921 (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1991), 14–15.51) 07:51Naselenie Rossii v XX veke: istoricheskie ocherki, vol. 1: 1900–1939gg. (Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2000), 57.52) 08:39Worobec, Family, 64; Barbara A. Engel, Women in Russia, 1700–2000 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 90; B. M. Firsov and I. G. Kiseleva (eds), Byt velikorusskikh krest'ian-zemlepashtsev: opisanie materialov Etnograficheskogo biuro Kniazia V. N. Tenisheva: na primere Vladimirskoi gubernii (St Petersburg: Izd-vo Evropeiskogo doma, 1993), 262.53) 09:04Worobec, Family, 177.54) 09:38Mandakina Arora, ‘Boundaries, Transgressions, Limits: Peasant Women and Gender Roles in Tver' Province, 1861–1914', PhD Duke University, 1995, 44–50.55) 09:55Naselenie Rossii, 48.56) 10:31Stephen G. Wheatcroft, ‘Crises and the Condition of the Peasantry in Late Imperial Russia', in Kingston-Mann and Mixter (eds), Peasant Economy, Culture and Politics of European Russiā.57) 11:14David Moon, ‘Russia's Rural Economy, 1800–1930', Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History, 1:4 (2000), 679–90.58) 12:50Paul R. Gregory, Before Command: An Economic History of Russia from Emancipation to the First Five-Year Plan (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994); Boris Mironov, Blagosostoianie naseleniia i revoliutsii v imperskoi Rossii, XVII—nachalo XX veka (Moscow: Novyi Khronograf, 2010).59) 12:58Boris Mironov and Brian A'Hearn, ‘Russian Living Standards under the Tsars: Anthropometric Evidence from the Volga', Journal of Economic History, 68:3 (2008), 900–29.60) 13:12J. Y. Simms, ‘The Crisis of Russian Agriculture at the End of the Nineteenth Century: A Different View', Slavic Review, 36:3 (1977), 377–98; Eberhard Müller, ‘Der Beitrag der Bauern zur Industrialisierung Russlands, 1885–1930', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 27:2 (1979), 199–204.61) 14:07Wheatcroft, ‘Crises and the Condition of the Peasantry', 138, 141, 151.62) 15:33Judith Pallot, Land Reform in Russia, 1906–1917: Peasant Responses to Stolypin's Project of Rural Transformation (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1999), 95.63) 15:49Pallot, Land Reform, 97.64) 16:39Yanni Kotsonis, Making Peasants Backward: Agricultural Cooperatives and the Agrarian Question in Russia, 1861–1914 (London: Macmillan, 1999), 57.65) 17:52Rogger, Russia in the Age of Modernisation, 81. Zhurov suggests that nationally between one-fifth and one-quarter of households were wealthy at the beginning of the twentieth century. Iu. V. Zhurov, ‘Zazhitovchnoe krest'ianstvo Rossii v gody revoliutsii, grazhdanskoi voiny i interventsii (1917–1920 gody)', in Zazhitochnoe krest'ianstvo Rossii v istoricheskoi retrospektive (zemlevladenie, zemlepol'zovanie, proizvodstvo, mentalitet), XXVII sessiia simpoziuma po agrarnoi istorii Vostochnoi Evropy (Moscow: RAN, 2000), 147–54.66) 18:48Teodor Shanin, The Awkward Class: Political Sociology of Peasantry in a Developing Society, 1910–1925 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972).67) 19:51I. L. Koval'chenko, ‘Stolypinskaia agrarnaia reforma (mify i real'nost)', Istoriia SSR, 2 (1991), 68–9.68) 20:26L. V. Razumov, Rassloenie krest'ianstva Tsentral'no-Promyshlennogo Raiona v kontse XIX–nachale XX veka (Moscow: RAN, 1996).69) 22:31‘Letter from Semyon Martynov, a peasant from Orël, August 1917', in Mark Steinberg, Voices of Revolution (translations by Marian Schwartz) (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2001), 242.70) 22:52John Channon, ‘The Landowners', in Robert Service (ed.), Society and Politics in the Russian Revolution (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1992), 120.71) 23:08Rogger, Russia in the Age of Modernisation, 89 (85).72) 23:49Worobec, Family, 31.73) 24:54Arcadius Kahan, Russian Economic History: The Nineteenth Century (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1989), 190.74) 25:27Gregory Guroff and S. Frederick Starr, ‘A Note on Urban Literacy in Russia, 1890–1914', Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, 19:4 (1971), 520–31 (523–4).75) 25:34V. P. Leikina-Svirskaia, Russkaia intelligentsiia v 1900–1917 godakh (Moscow: Mysl', 1981), 7.76) 25:56Barbara E. Clements, History of Women in Russia: From the Earliest Times to the Present (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2012), 130.77) 26:12Engel, Women in Russiā, 92; A. G. Rashin, Formirovanie rabochego klassa Rossii (Moscow, 1958), 595.78) 26:20Patrick L. Alston, Education and the State in Tsarist Russia (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1969), 248.79) 26:29Ben Eklof, Russian Peasant Schools: Officialdom, Village Culture, and Popular Pedagogy, 1861–1914 (Berkeley: University of California, 1986), 90.80) 26:47James C. McClelland, Autocrats and Academics: Education, Culture and Society in Tsarist Russia (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 44.81) 27:05Eklof, Russian Peasant Schools, 89.82) 27:40E. M. Balashov, Shkola v rossiiskom obshchestve 1917–1927gg. Stanovlenie ‘novogo cheloveka' (St Petersburg: Dmitrii Bulanin, 2003), 42; Scott J. Seregny, ‘Teachers, Politics and the Peasant Community in Russia, 1895–1918', in Stephen White et al. (eds), School and Society in Tsarist and Soviet Russia (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1993), 121–48.83) 28:06Balashov, Shkola, 12.

HE BEING DEAD YET SPEAKETH!Loud and clear, he does, his ministry carried on by his son Franklin Graham. The ministry which bears his name, THE BILLY GRAHAM EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION (BGEA) carries on its spiritual and humanitarian calling at the very highest levels. The BGEA may be even more effective today, especially from a humanitarian standpoint. A madman, a tyrant, dictator and butcher from Russia has killed tens of thousands of people and injured many more. This one man wants Ukraine to be part of Russia and he will do anything, Vladimir Putin will, to make that happen, even at the expense of thousands of innocent human lives. They mean nothing to him, nothing. Some four million people, maybe more, have fled Ukraine. They fear for their lives and rightly so. Putin's Russian butchers kill without warning and indiscriminately. They murder, rape and plunder. Zelensky and his cohorts beg and plead for Western help, especially USA and get little or none. But they fight on, defending their freedom, perhaps choosing to die rather than live under Russian rule. Any organization or individual for that matter which comes to the aid of Ukraine is as brave as can be, all on the altar, willing to risk life and limb for the sake of others, do unto others at the highest level.Such an organization is THE BILLY GRAHAM EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION (BGEA). They go anywhere under any circumstances to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. And more, often much more. They go everywhere with humanitarian aid. They provide medical services. And clothing. And shelter. And food. They know they must provide human aid before that individual is capable of hearing the gospel. BGEA feeds the hungry and perhaps most importantly, provides medical services through trained doctors, the services of men and women highly competent, highly trained who are at the highest levels professionally and spiritually. They do so through their organization's Samaritans Purse. That is one incredible organization. The good it has done, the benefit to mankind is simply outstanding. Those tremendous individuals meet need, whatever it is. Billy Graham would be proud! Another branch of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association ministries is that of the Billy Graham Rapid Response Team (BG–RRT). They have gone to the Ukraine, risking their lives in order to minister to and train church leaders on the methodology of ministering in the times of serious crisis. First, the needs of the body but then the even greater need, the need for salvation through Jesus Christ. Again, the one–of–a–kind Billy Graham would be proud.Franklin Graham, the son and worthy successor of Billy deployed a team of disaster response specialists to Poland, Romania and Moldova to provide aid and meet the needs of the some four million people who have already fled the Ukraine for the safety of those nations. The BGEA affiliated organizations Samaritans Purse deployed these disaster response specialists and in addition, Samaritans Purse sent an Emergency Field Hospital to Ukraine and set up a medical clinic at the train station in Lviv, one of the largest cities in the country. Again, Dr. William Franklin Graham, the Billy of old would be proud. This emergency hospital can do fourteen major surgeries per day or thirty minor surgeries per day, an incredible feat indeed, incredible spiritual and humanitarian–medical accomplishments, driven and motivated by the love and passion for Jesus Christ. Samaritans Purse which provides these services has long partnered with more than 3,200 churches within Ukraine and that partnership will not stop even in the face of this evil, satanic war. “God calls us to go into crisis areas to help those who are most vulnerable”, said Franklin Graham. And BGEA does just that through its excellent ministries Samaritans Purse and the Billy Graham Rapid Response Team. By the way, if you want to be certain that any gift you make for the benefit of the Ukraine is rightly used, give it to BGEA. Ukraine and Russian churches, their leaders and pastors, and so many families who are congregation members who have stayed in the Ukraine, refusing to leave their homeland no matter what Putin does, have joined together in fellowship, worship, prayer and concern for their fellow human beings. They are, these truly called individuals, truly unstoppable in the face of this crisis. Those who truly love and believe in Jesus Christ are better than ever when any crisis is at its worst. Said Franklin Graham, “My father (Billy) preached several times in the Soviet Union. Some criticized him for going there, since the U.S.S.R. was under authoritarian communist rule and the Cold War was raging but my father (what a great man) knew that the message of the gospel was for all people and the people desperately needed to hear the Good News. In 1992, less than a year after the fall of the Soviet Union, my father preached to more than 155,000 people at Moscow's Olympic Stadium, where more than 12,000 people registered decisions for Jesus Christ”. Franklin's father was fearless. Franklin inherited those spiritual genes. So, the bottom line for Franklin Graham, BGEA, Samaritans Purse, and Billy Graham Rapid Response Team:PRAY.Christians, they say must meet the need for prayer around the world. All humankind, right–thinking, loving human beings must solicit the help and intervention of God Almighty to put a stop from this evil from Russia. The Ukraine has some 42 million citizens. It is the second largest country in Europe after European Russia. It is critical territory, geography which shares a long border with Russia, now to its disadvantage, and the Belarus, Poland, Romania and a large area of the Black Sea. It possesses large fertile land making it known as the bread basket of the Soviet Union (once was). Russia wants it back. Putin will do anything to get it back and in the process, so much will be destroyed, so many will be killed, the devastation and evil at its worst. Pray and pray hard. Include in those prayers the divine request that we the Americans, our government, talk no more but DO, act, help, stand up to Russia, and especially Putin and all who would return Russia to its former warlike nature. The Great War, the Third World War looms and the world must be ready. THE GREAT RUSSIAN BEAR IS ON THE PROWL! The civilized world can end in a heart beat if this aggression is not stopped. There is only one way it can be put to a permanent end. That is through the love, forgiveness, salvation and radical change which can only occur through:JESUS CHRIST!

According to Valery Dzutsati, visiting assistant professor of political science at the University of Kansas, the attempted conquest of Ukraine has exposed Vladimir Putin. But he says the Ukraine invasion may have been inevitable, even if Putin weren't in charge. Dzutsati is a native of European Russia and an expert in politics and conflict in Eurasia and Eastern Europe. He's also likely on Putin's hit list.

Rich Jones interviews Jared Halpern on the diplomacy taking place to avert a conflict with Russia.

Vikings[a] is the modern name given to seafaring people primarily[3] from Scandinavia (present-day Denmark, Norway and Sweden),[4][5][6] who from the late 8th to the late 11th centuries raided, pirated, traded and settled throughout parts of Europe.[7][8][9] They also voyaged as far as the Mediterranean, North Africa, the Middle East, and North America. In some of the countries they raided and settled in, this period is popularly known as the Viking Age, and the term "Viking" also commonly includes the inhabitants of the Scandinavian homelands as a collective whole. The Vikings had a profound impact on the early medieval history of Scandinavia, the British Isles, France, Estonia, and Kievan Rus'.[10] Expert sailors and navigators aboard their characteristic longships, Vikings established Norse settlements and governments in the British Isles, Ireland, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, Greenland, Normandy, the Baltic coast, and along the Dnieper and Volga trade routes in what is now European Russia, Belarus[11] and Ukraine,[12] where they were also known as Varangians. The Normans, Norse-Gaels, Rus' people, Faroese and Icelanders emerged from these Norse colonies. The Vikings also voyaged to Constantinople, Iran,[13] and Arabia.[14] They were the first Europeans to reach North America, briefly settling in Newfoundland (Vinland). While spreading Norse culture to foreign lands, they simultaneously brought home slaves, concubines and foreign cultural influences to Scandinavia, profoundly influencing the genetic[15] and historical development of both. During the Viking Age the Norse homelands were gradually consolidated from smaller kingdoms into three larger kingdoms: Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/BreakroomNachos Intro music by Dan Mason: https://danmason.bandcamp.com/

01:02 - Registration for Vaccination of Citizens Living in Temporarily Occupied Territories Begins in Ukraine The Ukrainian authorities have launched a process of vaccination against COVID-19 for those citizens of Ukraine who live in the temporarily occupied territories of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions and in Crimea and who belong to priority groups (people aged 65 and over). At the same time, citizens who have registered and received an ID should not undergo self-isolation or observation upon arrival in government-controlled territory, the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine reports on its Facebook page. 02:21 - Ukraine Ready to Impose Sanctions If Belarusian Planes Fly to Occupied Crimea The Ukrainian authorities will act immediately against any attempts to legitimize the occupation of Crimea by the Russian Federation. If at least one plane of the Belarusian airlines arrives in the territory of the occupied peninsula, sanctions with all the consequences will be inevitable. 04:50 - How Corruption in Russian Medicine Harms Other Countries “Export of Russian Corruption. 1st Report – Medicine” – this is the name of the report that describes the situation in Russia during the COVID-19 pandemic. The paper was presented at the online event of Friends of European Russia, an informal platform of the European Parliament mentored by Lithuanian MEP Andrius Kubilius. The report is the first in a series of analyses of the export of Russian corruption abroad and especially to the EU. 10:50 - Provocations and Attempted Terrorist Attacks on Ukrainian Section of Gas Pipeline Possible due to Launch of Nord Stream 2 Ukrainian law enforcement agencies are considering various scenarios and intensifying their response, in particular at critical and gas infrastructure facilities due to the launch of Nord Stream 2. 13:35 - Russia Bombarding Voronezh On the night of 4 June, powerful explosions rocked the warehouses in the Sloboda plant in the Serbian town of Cacak which specialises in the production of artillery ammunition. Plant workers and the residents of surrounding areas were evacuated. You must admit that the idea of ​​yet another operation by Russian special services suggests itself. Should the Serbian investigators check whether Sloboda supplied its products to Ukraine? There are well-known precedents. And the fact that Serbia is, perhaps, the most pro-Russian country in the European Union is not enough to protect it against Russian sabotage. Brussels Ukraina Review: https://www.promoteukraine.org/journal/

The Volga begins as a small trickle in the Valdai Hills in the north of Russia, and broadens and expands as it heads south, past the storied medieval cities of Tver, Kostroma, and the great trading hub of the nineteenth century, Nizhniy Novgorod, down to Kazan, the capital of Muslim Tatarstan, then Ulyanovsk, the birthplace of Vladimir Lenin, on to Samara, site of the great peasant revolts led by Stenka Razin and Yemelyan Pugachyov. From there, the river flows down to Volgograd, better known as Stalingrad, where the Red Army pushed back the seemingly unstoppable Nazi offensive during World War II, and finally down to Astrakhan, where the Mongol invaders kept their court until Ivan the Terrible conquered the city in 1556. Then, finally, the mighty river empties into the Caspian Sea. So much of Russian history has played out on the banks of this mighty river. The Volga cleaves European Russia from north to south and divides it from east to west, and for centuries, the mighty Volga has challenged and inspired Russians in their quest for expansion, modernization, and self-identification. The river and its role in Russian history is the subject of a new book by Professor Janet Hartley, Emeritus Professor of International History at the London School of Economics: “The Volga: A History of Russia’s Greatest River” (Yale University Press, 2021). The Volga: A History of Russia’s Greatest River (Yale UP, 2021) examines the role of the river in Russia’s development as a political and economic power, but also the river’s enormous impact on Russian culture and national identity. Though the structure of the book is chronological, Hartley brings in the major events of Russian history as convenient mile markers, but it is the compelling narrative of social history which pulls us into the slipstream of the book. Several through lines emerge in Hartley’s account of “Mother Volga.” The river divides Russia from East to West, and often this division plays out in stories of contrasts: Muslim versus Christian, outlaws versus the state, pirates versus traders, and invading armies pitted against each other. But the river also unites Russia along the North/South axis, acting as a conduit for trade, culture, and political ideas. As Russians struggled through the centuries with their national identity, the Volga offered a potent symbol and cultural touchstone, which was amplified in poetry, painting, song, and later famously in sculpture. Though the river is most commonly evoked as a “mother” figure, Hartley points out that throughout Russian history rulers have often sought to “tame” the Volga: Ivan the Terrible famously had the river whipped, and contemporary poets portrayed the river as a supplicant to Catherine II as she expanded the borders of the Russian empire. Hartley also takes us inside twentieth-century attempts to tame the Volga, which have resulted in lasting environmental harm to the life-giving river, and leaves us hopeful that the generation now coming of age will take on the challenge of redressing this damage. Janet Hartley is Professor Emeritus of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science, where she worked for over 30 years.  Jennifer Eremeeva is an American expatriate writer who writes about travel, culture, cuisine and culinary history, Russian history, and Royal History, with bylines in Reuters, Fodor's, USTOA, LitHub, The Moscow Times, and Russian Life. She is the award-winning author of Lenin Lives Next Door: Marriage, Martinis, and Mayhem in Moscow and Have Personality Disorder, Will Rule Russia: A Pocket Guide to Russian History. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Volga begins as a small trickle in the Valdai Hills in the north of Russia, and broadens and expands as it heads south, past the storied medieval cities of Tver, Kostroma, and the great trading hub of the nineteenth century, Nizhniy Novgorod, down to Kazan, the capital of Muslim Tatarstan, then Ulyanovsk, the birthplace of Vladimir Lenin, on to Samara, site of the great peasant revolts led by Stenka Razin and Yemelyan Pugachyov. From there, the river flows down to Volgograd, better known as Stalingrad, where the Red Army pushed back the seemingly unstoppable Nazi offensive during World War II, and finally down to Astrakhan, where the Mongol invaders kept their court until Ivan the Terrible conquered the city in 1556. Then, finally, the mighty river empties into the Caspian Sea. So much of Russian history has played out on the banks of this mighty river. The Volga cleaves European Russia from north to south and divides it from east to west, and for centuries, the mighty Volga has challenged and inspired Russians in their quest for expansion, modernization, and self-identification. The river and its role in Russian history is the subject of a new book by Professor Janet Hartley, Emeritus Professor of International History at the London School of Economics: “The Volga: A History of Russia’s Greatest River” (Yale University Press, 2021). The Volga: A History of Russia’s Greatest River (Yale UP, 2021) examines the role of the river in Russia’s development as a political and economic power, but also the river’s enormous impact on Russian culture and national identity. Though the structure of the book is chronological, Hartley brings in the major events of Russian history as convenient mile markers, but it is the compelling narrative of social history which pulls us into the slipstream of the book. Several through lines emerge in Hartley’s account of “Mother Volga.” The river divides Russia from East to West, and often this division plays out in stories of contrasts: Muslim versus Christian, outlaws versus the state, pirates versus traders, and invading armies pitted against each other. But the river also unites Russia along the North/South axis, acting as a conduit for trade, culture, and political ideas. As Russians struggled through the centuries with their national identity, the Volga offered a potent symbol and cultural touchstone, which was amplified in poetry, painting, song, and later famously in sculpture. Though the river is most commonly evoked as a “mother” figure, Hartley points out that throughout Russian history rulers have often sought to “tame” the Volga: Ivan the Terrible famously had the river whipped, and contemporary poets portrayed the river as a supplicant to Catherine II as she expanded the borders of the Russian empire. Hartley also takes us inside twentieth-century attempts to tame the Volga, which have resulted in lasting environmental harm to the life-giving river, and leaves us hopeful that the generation now coming of age will take on the challenge of redressing this damage. Janet Hartley is Professor Emeritus of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science, where she worked for over 30 years.  Jennifer Eremeeva is an American expatriate writer who writes about travel, culture, cuisine and culinary history, Russian history, and Royal History, with bylines in Reuters, Fodor's, USTOA, LitHub, The Moscow Times, and Russian Life. She is the award-winning author of Lenin Lives Next Door: Marriage, Martinis, and Mayhem in Moscow and Have Personality Disorder, Will Rule Russia: A Pocket Guide to Russian History. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

The Volga begins as a small trickle in the Valdai Hills in the north of Russia, and broadens and expands as it heads south, past the storied medieval cities of Tver, Kostroma, and the great trading hub of the nineteenth century, Nizhniy Novgorod, down to Kazan, the capital of Muslim Tatarstan, then Ulyanovsk, the birthplace of Vladimir Lenin, on to Samara, site of the great peasant revolts led by Stenka Razin and Yemelyan Pugachyov. From there, the river flows down to Volgograd, better known as Stalingrad, where the Red Army pushed back the seemingly unstoppable Nazi offensive during World War II, and finally down to Astrakhan, where the Mongol invaders kept their court until Ivan the Terrible conquered the city in 1556. Then, finally, the mighty river empties into the Caspian Sea. So much of Russian history has played out on the banks of this mighty river. The Volga cleaves European Russia from north to south and divides it from east to west, and for centuries, the mighty Volga has challenged and inspired Russians in their quest for expansion, modernization, and self-identification. The river and its role in Russian history is the subject of a new book by Professor Janet Hartley, Emeritus Professor of International History at the London School of Economics: “The Volga: A History of Russia’s Greatest River” (Yale University Press, 2021). The Volga: A History of Russia’s Greatest River (Yale UP, 2021) examines the role of the river in Russia’s development as a political and economic power, but also the river’s enormous impact on Russian culture and national identity. Though the structure of the book is chronological, Hartley brings in the major events of Russian history as convenient mile markers, but it is the compelling narrative of social history which pulls us into the slipstream of the book. Several through lines emerge in Hartley’s account of “Mother Volga.” The river divides Russia from East to West, and often this division plays out in stories of contrasts: Muslim versus Christian, outlaws versus the state, pirates versus traders, and invading armies pitted against each other. But the river also unites Russia along the North/South axis, acting as a conduit for trade, culture, and political ideas. As Russians struggled through the centuries with their national identity, the Volga offered a potent symbol and cultural touchstone, which was amplified in poetry, painting, song, and later famously in sculpture. Though the river is most commonly evoked as a “mother” figure, Hartley points out that throughout Russian history rulers have often sought to “tame” the Volga: Ivan the Terrible famously had the river whipped, and contemporary poets portrayed the river as a supplicant to Catherine II as she expanded the borders of the Russian empire. Hartley also takes us inside twentieth-century attempts to tame the Volga, which have resulted in lasting environmental harm to the life-giving river, and leaves us hopeful that the generation now coming of age will take on the challenge of redressing this damage. Janet Hartley is Professor Emeritus of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science, where she worked for over 30 years.  Jennifer Eremeeva is an American expatriate writer who writes about travel, culture, cuisine and culinary history, Russian history, and Royal History, with bylines in Reuters, Fodor's, USTOA, LitHub, The Moscow Times, and Russian Life. She is the award-winning author of Lenin Lives Next Door: Marriage, Martinis, and Mayhem in Moscow and Have Personality Disorder, Will Rule Russia: A Pocket Guide to Russian History. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/russian-studies

Next up on the Avenue Red Podcast is a DJ and producer from St. Petersburg, Russia known as Kruglenko. We have seen this guy around on SoundCloud thanks to the various recommendation algorithms, noticing his quality mixes and also his ear for productions are clearly getting to a high level... then he submitted a mix to us. Just shows the algorithms are functioning well over here! What we received is a solid dancefloor-focused, heads-down and elbows-up DJ mix of driving, deep dubby techno and house. Music that is constructed in many implementations from the blueprints of the Basic Channel & Maurizio works. These are the sprawling stylistic tributaries of music that have flowed down-river since those halcyon days and humble beginnings. We hear a lot said these days about the idiosyncratic underground house/techno scenes in France, Germany, Romania ("Rominimal") etc... something equally intriguing and vibrant continues to thrive across the vast swathes of European Russia too and we are proud to champion the players that are busy pushing their visions of underground music and culture over there too! This mix from Kruglenko will hypnotise you to your core, twist you mind and shatter your bones on a good soundsystem. Press play. It's time to breathe in the cold, dark air, close your eyes and let the strobe lights flash through your eyelids. "Hi, Kruglenko from Saint Petersburg, Russia here. I have been a DJ and musician since 2008. I prefer the raw sound of house and techno with notes of dub and minimal. In November 2019 I debuted with a release on MixCult Records, a very good underground deeb/dub techno label from my hometown. I hope you will like this selection!" Artem Kruglenko, November 2020 https://soundcloud.com/kruglenko https://soundcloud.com/mixcult

This week we'll join the citizens of Stalingrad as they feverishly prepare for what look like an inevitable attack as the Sixth Army under General Paulus heads towards the Don River. The obvious approach would see the attack come across the land bridge between the Don and Volga Rivers. And by mid-July 1942 the German intention had become a certainty. The Fourth Panzer Army had crossed the Don and reached the heights of Kotelnikovo and its spearhead, instead of turning south to protect the flank of the First Panzer Army heading towards the caucuses to the south east, was pointing north and obviously coming up towards Stalingrad. That wasn't all. German activity in the great bend of the Don River seemed to indicate the probability of a drive being made across the river and that could only mean one thing – a full attack on Stalingrad instead of a glancing blow. In Moscow, Stalin and the STAVKA had been issuing orders for a few weeks and now their briefings increased when it came to the southern Front. He had fixated on the German's attacking Moscow in force once more and had delayed some decisions in the south. Now that it was clear what was going to happen, the preparations escalated. The tragedy of war had always menaced this region. In 1237 the Golden Horde of the Great Khan had crossed the Volga at this perfect fording point and ravaged the area between the Volga and Don rivers. From there the Khan swept west into European Russia and were stopped just short of Vienna and the Polish border. During the 13th an 14th Centuries Russian armies marched eastward through the same region – it was a border post from which Moscow attacked the Mongols. Then in 1589 a trading centre was established called Tsaritsyn. The legendary Cossack leader Stenka Razin took the city in 1670 and held it during a bloody siege. One hundred years later another Cossack named Yemelyan Pugachev decided to challenge Catherine the Great by storming Tsaritsyn but she defeated him and then cut off his head for good measure. In 1875 a French company built a large steel mill in the city and its population expanded to one hundred thousand. It became a wild west town – or should I say wild east town similar to the growth of American cities. Ramshackle houses followed the river and there were four hundred saloons and brothels which catered for the new settler's needs. It was a tough hard-living town – a bit like the myriad of frontier towns that emerged in the American West. During the Russian Revolution after 1917 the fighting here in the civil war was extremely bitter. As we heard previously, a little-known leader called Joseph Stalin held off three Generals of the White Army for weeks. But he was eventually driven out of the city and Stalin regrouped his forces on the Steppe before falling on the White Army flanks and defeating the White Army forces. To honour their liberator, the residents renamed the city Stalingrad. The city was then completely redesigned as a model Soviet project and it became a manufacturing centre, exporting vehicles, chemicals, tractors, guns, textiles and lumber to all parts of the Soviet Union.

All about the kidney spot ladybird, plus mentions of the pine ladybird, the twice stabbed ladybug, chilocorus kuwanae (probably the same species) and more. There's also a podcast recommendation - Let's Talk About Sects by Sarah Steel. Sources used in this episode: Field guide to the ladybirds of Great Britain & Ireland (Helen Roy and Peter Brown, illustrated by Richard Lewington, 2018)http://www.eje.cz/pdfs/eje/2011/04/14.pdfhttps://www.gbif.org/species/4452277https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327559877_Key_for_identification_of_the_ladybirds_Coleoptera_Coccinellidae_of_European_Russia_and_the_Russian_Caucasus_native_and_alien_speciesColeopterists Day: https://www.coleoptera.org.uk/news/programme-2020-coleopterists-day

GB2RS NEWS Sunday the 9th of February 2020   The news headlines: Build a radio at Bletchley Park Voting for RSGB AGM opens in around 4 weeks GB3GV ATV repeater back to full power   The RSGB invites young people, and an accompanying adult if the child is under 16 years, to join them at the National Radio Centre at Bletchley Park for a fun and hands-on workshop where they can learn more about radio and electronics on the 14th of March. The workshop offers a short introduction to wireless communications, radio propagation and electronic construction, before moving on to the construction of a medium wave radio receiver provided free of charge for each registered student by the Radio Communications Foundation. Attendees will also be able to visit Bletchley Park, including the National Radio Centre. Places are limited to eight young persons, tickets cost £7 and accompanying adults if child is under 16 £8. The ticket includes access to Bletchley Park for the purposes of this workshop on the specified date only. Bookings are available via the Bletchley Park website at www.bletchleypark.org.uk/ under the what’s on tab. Thank you to everyone who has volunteered for the RSGB Board Director and Regional Representative roles as part of the forthcoming elections. The nomination period has now ended. Voting will begin on the 11th of March and will end on the 23rd of April. All the information on candidates and how to vote will appear in the April edition of RadCom. GB3GV, the Leicestershire Repeater Group 23cm ATV repeater, has now been restored to full ERP following a site visit on the 1st of February. Further info from www.leicestershirerepeatergroup.org.uk. Venues and dates for the 2020 series of Train the Trainers courses can be found on the RSGB website at www.rsgb.org/train-the-trainers. In order to ensure that courses are run as cost-effectively as possible between twenty and twenty-five candidates are needed for each course. To reserve a place on any of the courses please email trainthetrainers@rsgb.org.uk with your name and telephone number. The first course to run will be held in Telford on the 21st of March; it currently has eight places available. Following Telford will be Cardiff on the 18th of April. This course currently still has space so please book as soon as possible. Details of other courses available are on the website. The RSGB’s Examinations and Syllabus Review Group is delighted to announce the appointment of Greg Fenton, M0ODZ to the group. Greg has had a life-long interest in amateur radio and in more recent years he also became involved with Makerspace in Newcastle. After gaining his Full licence he started to take part in amateur radio teaching, including to his youngest daughter who is now also a licensed radio amateur. Like Tony, G7ETW who also joined the group recently, Greg has already brought fresh enthusiasm and ideas to the group and the RSGB looks forward to his continued participation. Due to essential maintenance, the Radio Room at the RSGB National Radio Centre at Bletchley Park will be closed to visitors on Tuesday the 11th of February. Whilst the NRC itself will remain open to visitors, it means that the station GB3RS will be ‘off-air’ and hence will be unavailable for any visiting radio amateurs to operate. We apologise for any inconvenience caused. The work should be completed by mid-afternoon and hence GB3RS may be on-air later in the day but, by closing for the day, we are allowing for any over-run needed to complete the work. Provisional results for the last IARU R1 VHF Contest are available on IARU Region 1 website www.iaru-r1.org. Congratulations to GM4ZUK/P who was the highest placed UK station in the single operation 145MHz section and G8P who were the highest placed team in the multi operatior 145MHz section. G3XDY was the highest placed UK station in the 6 hour 145MHz section   And now for the details of rallies and events for the coming week Today, the 9th of February the Harwell Radio and Electronics Rally will be held at Didcot Leisure Centre, Mereland Road, Didcot, Oxon, OX11 8AY, that’s about 3 miles from the A34 Milton Interchange. Doors open 10am to 3pm and admittance is £3 with under 12s free. Talk in will be on 145.550MHz, using G3PIA and there is free car parking. Local and national traders as well as Special Interest Groups and an RSGB Bookstand will be in attendance. Home-made refreshments are available all day. Details from rally@g3pia.net or 01235 816379. Next Saturday, the 15th the Ballymena ARC Rally will be held in Ahoghill Community Centre, 80 Cullybackey Road, Ahoghill BT42 1LA. Doors open at 10.30am and admission is £3. There is free parking on site. There will be traders, a Bring & Buy and a prize draw will operate. Light refreshments will be available. Tables are free but must be pre-booked by email to HKernohan@aol.com. More details from Hugh, GI0JEV on 0282 587 1481. Next Sunday, the 16th, the RadioActive Rally will be held at Nantwich Civic Hall, Cheshire, CW5 5DG. There is free car parking and doors open at 10.30am. There will be a Bring & Buy, as well as traders and an RSGB book stall. A single raffle ticket is included with the entrance programme; additional tickets available. Catering is provided on site. Contact Stuart Jackson on 0788 073 2534. Also, next Sunday, the 16th, the Lomond Radio Club Bring & Buy event takes place at John Connolly Centre, Main Street, Renton G82 4LY. Doors open at 10am. There will be a Bring & Buy, traders and refreshments will be available. Contact Bill at mm0elf@blueyonder.co.uk. Please send details of your rally and event plans as soon as possible to radcom@rsgb.org.uk – we give you valuable publicity online, in RadCom and on GB2RS, all for free.   And now the DX news from 425 DX News and other sources Andre, PP6ZZ will be active as PY0FF from Fernando de Noronha, SA-003, until the 18th of February. He plans to operate all modes, including FT8 and FT4, in his spare time. QSL via Logbook of The World, or via W9VA. RI1ANC, the club station at Vostok Station in Antarctica, is active. Look for activity on the HF bands, mainly FT8 with some CW and SSB. QSL via RN1ON. Ed, K1EP will be active as VP2MEP from Montserrat, NA-103, between the 11th and 17th of February. He will operate CW, SSB and some FT8. QSL via Logbook of The World or direct to K1EP. Rob, G4WXJ will be active as ZC4RH from the UK Sovereign Base Areas on Cyprus until the 13th of February. He expects to operate SSB, CW and FT8 on the 40, 30, 20, 15 and 10m bands. QSL via his home call, direct or via the bureau. He does not use Logbook of The World or Club Log. Dave, VE3VSM will be active as VE3VSM/HR9 from Roatan Island, NA-057, between the 11th and 23rd of February. He will be operating on the 20 and 15m bands using CW in his spare time and during some contests. QSL via Logbook of The World, or direct.   Now the special event news Heiko, DK3DM and others are active as DL2020R until the end of the year to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the German reunification process. QSL via Club Log's OQRS or direct only to M0SDV. DL250BEETH is another special callsign commemorating Ludwig van Beethoven's 250th anniversary. It will be used by the Kerpen local branch of DARC until the end of the year. QSL via DJ6SI. Please send special event details to radcom@rsgb.org.uk as early as possible to get your event publicised here on GB2RS, in RadCom, and online.   Now the contest news The CQ WW WPX Party ends its 48-hour run at 2359UTC today, the 9th. It’s RTTY only on the 3.8 to 28MHz bands. The exchange is signal report and serial number. The PACC Contest ends its 24-hour run at 1200UTC today, the 9th. Using CW and SSB on the 1.8 to 28MHz bands the exchange is signal report serial number with PA stations also sending their Province. On Tuesday the 432MHz FM Activity Contest runs from 1900 to 1955UTC. The 432MHz UK Activity Contest follows at 2000 to 2230UTC using all modes. The exchange is the same for both, signal report serial number and locator. On Wednesday the 80m Club Championships holds a datamodes leg from 2000 to 2130UTC. The exchange is signal report and serial number. On Thursday the 50MHz UK Activity Contest runs from 2000 to 2230UTC. Using all modes the exchange is signal report, serial number and locator. Next weekend the ARRL International DX Contest runs from 0000UTC on the 15th to 2359UTC on the 16th. Using CW only on the 1.8 to 28MHz bands the exchange is signal report and transmit power, with US stations also sending their State and Canadians their Province.   Now the radio propagation report, compiled by G0KYA, G3YLA and G4BAO on Friday the 7th of February. After sunspot group 2757 rotated out of view the Sun remained spotless with a solar flux index around 70. We had periods of geomagnetic disruption thanks to the effects of coronal holes, the worst seeing the Kp index hit four on Thursday morning. These storms resulted in visible aurora being reported at higher latitudes. Monday saw the first of the RSGB’s 80m Club Championship events with an SSB contest. Participants complained about the poor propagation, with continental stations being stronger than locals. This was reflected in the ionosonde data at propquest.co.uk, that showed the f0F2 critical frequency, as measured at RAF Fairford, as 2.875MHz at the start of the contest and only 3.175MHz at the end. Meanwhile, Chilton recorded 3.7MHz at the start of the contest and 3.5MHz at the end. So, you can see that short-range propagation on 80m was marginal and favoured different parts of the country. Next week, there is the possibility that strong jet streams may provide some low-band Sporadic-E enhancement for evening nets when the foF2 has deserted us. Thursday saw an HF enhancement, possibly linked to the raised Kp index, with maximum usable frequencies creeping above 21MHz and 15m FT8 openings into the Canary Islands, the Azores, Greece and European Russia. There were also 15m FT8 openings to South America later in the afternoon. CDXC members have also reported contacts last week with TI9A, Cocos Island, off Costa Rica, and HU1DL in El Salvador. Excitement is also building for the VP8PJ South Orkney DXpedition that should start later this month. Next week, NOAA predicts the solar flux index will remain around 70 with more settled geomagnetic conditions after the effects of the current high-speed solar wind diminish.   And now the VHF and up propagation news.   After a brief period of Tropo in the second half of last week, we are now about to enter a period of very unsettled weather with deep lows passing by the far north of Britain. This means that Tropo will not be a feature this coming week and time may be better spent making sure the antenna ropes are secure and towers lowered if the forecast looks severe. At present, the strongest winds are likely in northern and western areas, but with such a strong Atlantic jet stream there is a huge amount of energy available to spin up very deep lows in less than 24 hours. The message therefore is to keep up to date with the latest forecasts, because the track of such lows can change markedly over a few hours. There is one propagation silver lining to this type of weather, which is possible microwave rain scatter as squally fronts or showers pass by. One of the models does build a high over the continent at the end of next week with a possibility of some Tropo into France, but only from the southeastern corner of the country. Moon declination goes negative on Wednesday, but with perigee on Monday, it's still a good week for EME. Path losses are at their lowest and 144 MHz sky noise is low all week. There are no major meteor showers this week, and we are now well into the Winter minimum for random meteors. The best time for random meteor scatter QSOs is always around dawn when the Earth is rotating towards the main meteor flux. And that’s all from the propagation team this week.  

In his new book, Nomads and Soviet Rule: Central Asia under Lenin and Stalin (I.B. Tauris, 2018), Alun Thomas examines the understudied experiences of Kazakh and Kyrgyz nomads in the NEP period. Thomas begins his book by examining enduring problems nomads faced such as increased European settlement that lead to sharp conflicts over land usage as well as nascent nationalist movements that had their roots in the tsarist period and how these problems were tackled by the Soviet state. The Soviet response, following the revolution, was initially quite weak as the party was small and central Asia even more under governed than in European Russia. But, as the Soviets consolidated power post-Civil War, they sought to Sovietize and modernize the region. Communists and Soviet officials viewed nomads as backwards and poverty stricken and difficult to manage and sought to modernize them and settle them through outreach such as literacy programs, Red Yurts, returning land that had been taken by European settles and tax breaks for nomads who settled, as well as coercion such as higher taxes for nomads who crossed jurisdiction, de-kukalization style campaigns aimed at wealthy nomadic tribal leaders or those with a lot of stock. Thomas addresses the complexities of these campaigns as well as how the Soviet prioritization of nationality over economic modes of production served to further disenfranchise nomads within the central Asian republics. Thomas concludes with a brief look at how all these NEP policies culminated in a disastrous collectivization campaign in the 1930s that effectively ended nomadism in much of central Asia and how accommodations that had been made for nomads in the early 1920s were irrevocably rolled back. Samantha Lomb is an Assistant Professor at Vyatka State University in Kirov, Russia. Her research focuses on daily life, local politics and political participation in the Stalinist 1930s. Her book, Stalin’s Constitution: Soviet Participatory Politics and the Discussion of the Draft 1936 Constitution, is now available online. Her research can be viewed here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In his new book, Nomads and Soviet Rule: Central Asia under Lenin and Stalin (I.B. Tauris, 2018), Alun Thomas examines the understudied experiences of Kazakh and Kyrgyz nomads in the NEP period. Thomas begins his book by examining enduring problems nomads faced such as increased European settlement that lead to sharp conflicts over land usage as well as nascent nationalist movements that had their roots in the tsarist period and how these problems were tackled by the Soviet state. The Soviet response, following the revolution, was initially quite weak as the party was small and central Asia even more under governed than in European Russia. But, as the Soviets consolidated power post-Civil War, they sought to Sovietize and modernize the region. Communists and Soviet officials viewed nomads as backwards and poverty stricken and difficult to manage and sought to modernize them and settle them through outreach such as literacy programs, Red Yurts, returning land that had been taken by European settles and tax breaks for nomads who settled, as well as coercion such as higher taxes for nomads who crossed jurisdiction, de-kukalization style campaigns aimed at wealthy nomadic tribal leaders or those with a lot of stock. Thomas addresses the complexities of these campaigns as well as how the Soviet prioritization of nationality over economic modes of production served to further disenfranchise nomads within the central Asian republics. Thomas concludes with a brief look at how all these NEP policies culminated in a disastrous collectivization campaign in the 1930s that effectively ended nomadism in much of central Asia and how accommodations that had been made for nomads in the early 1920s were irrevocably rolled back. Samantha Lomb is an Assistant Professor at Vyatka State University in Kirov, Russia. Her research focuses on daily life, local politics and political participation in the Stalinist 1930s. Her book, Stalin’s Constitution: Soviet Participatory Politics and the Discussion of the Draft 1936 Constitution, is now available online. Her research can be viewed here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In his new book, Nomads and Soviet Rule: Central Asia under Lenin and Stalin (I.B. Tauris, 2018), Alun Thomas examines the understudied experiences of Kazakh and Kyrgyz nomads in the NEP period. Thomas begins his book by examining enduring problems nomads faced such as increased European settlement that lead to sharp conflicts over land usage as well as nascent nationalist movements that had their roots in the tsarist period and how these problems were tackled by the Soviet state. The Soviet response, following the revolution, was initially quite weak as the party was small and central Asia even more under governed than in European Russia. But, as the Soviets consolidated power post-Civil War, they sought to Sovietize and modernize the region. Communists and Soviet officials viewed nomads as backwards and poverty stricken and difficult to manage and sought to modernize them and settle them through outreach such as literacy programs, Red Yurts, returning land that had been taken by European settles and tax breaks for nomads who settled, as well as coercion such as higher taxes for nomads who crossed jurisdiction, de-kukalization style campaigns aimed at wealthy nomadic tribal leaders or those with a lot of stock. Thomas addresses the complexities of these campaigns as well as how the Soviet prioritization of nationality over economic modes of production served to further disenfranchise nomads within the central Asian republics. Thomas concludes with a brief look at how all these NEP policies culminated in a disastrous collectivization campaign in the 1930s that effectively ended nomadism in much of central Asia and how accommodations that had been made for nomads in the early 1920s were irrevocably rolled back. Samantha Lomb is an Assistant Professor at Vyatka State University in Kirov, Russia. Her research focuses on daily life, local politics and political participation in the Stalinist 1930s. Her book, Stalin’s Constitution: Soviet Participatory Politics and the Discussion of the Draft 1936 Constitution, is now available online. Her research can be viewed here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Imagining Russian Regions: Subnational Identity and Civil Society in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Brill, 2017), Susan Smith Peter discusses the origins of the creation of distinct provincial identities in European Russia and how this process was encouraged and even promoted by the autocracy as a way to gain information about the...

In Imagining Russian Regions: Subnational Identity and Civil Society in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Brill, 2017), Susan Smith Peter discusses the origins of the creation of distinct provincial identities in European Russia and how this process was encouraged and even promoted by the autocracy as a way to gain information about the territories under its control, to better manage resources and collect taxes. The Tsarist administration under Nicholas I encouraged and even mandated the creation of statistical bureaus, provincial newspapers and agricultural societies, which were staffed not just by nobles, but by priests’ sons, merchants and in some cases even peasants as a way to get a more thorough understanding of the territories governed. This allowed people in the provinces to become acquainted with their own particularities, customs and history and to speak directly to the government. However, as Smith-Peter notes, these voices changed from merely providing information to demanding participation in government, which the autocracy rejected. This became increasingly isolating to the nobles in particular as they were cut out of decisions on emancipating serfs and the creation of local government. Smith-Peter argues that the autocracy’s fostering of civil society for economic reasons followed by its rejection of political participation by the civil society it had created caused a rift in Russian society that eventually culminated in the revolutions of 1917. An excellent read for any interested in the development of regional identity and politics in Russia or the USSR. Samantha Lomb is an Assistant Professor at Vyatka State University in Kirov, Russia. Her research focuses on daily life, local politics and political participation in the Stalinist 1930s. Her book, Stalin’s Constitution: Soviet Participatory Politics and the Discussion of the Draft 1936 Constitution, is now available online. Her research can be viewed here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Imagining Russian Regions: Subnational Identity and Civil Society in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Brill, 2017), Susan Smith Peter discusses the origins of the creation of distinct provincial identities in European Russia and how this process was encouraged and even promoted by the autocracy as a way to gain information about the territories under its control, to better manage resources and collect taxes. The Tsarist administration under Nicholas I encouraged and even mandated the creation of statistical bureaus, provincial newspapers and agricultural societies, which were staffed not just by nobles, but by priests’ sons, merchants and in some cases even peasants as a way to get a more thorough understanding of the territories governed. This allowed people in the provinces to become acquainted with their own particularities, customs and history and to speak directly to the government. However, as Smith-Peter notes, these voices changed from merely providing information to demanding participation in government, which the autocracy rejected. This became increasingly isolating to the nobles in particular as they were cut out of decisions on emancipating serfs and the creation of local government. Smith-Peter argues that the autocracy’s fostering of civil society for economic reasons followed by its rejection of political participation by the civil society it had created caused a rift in Russian society that eventually culminated in the revolutions of 1917. An excellent read for any interested in the development of regional identity and politics in Russia or the USSR. Samantha Lomb is an Assistant Professor at Vyatka State University in Kirov, Russia. Her research focuses on daily life, local politics and political participation in the Stalinist 1930s. Her book, Stalin’s Constitution: Soviet Participatory Politics and the Discussion of the Draft 1936 Constitution, is now available online. Her research can be viewed here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Imagining Russian Regions: Subnational Identity and Civil Society in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Brill, 2017), Susan Smith Peter discusses the origins of the creation of distinct provincial identities in European Russia and how this process was encouraged and even promoted by the autocracy as a way to gain information about the... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In Imagining Russian Regions: Subnational Identity and Civil Society in Nineteenth-Century Russia (Brill, 2017), Susan Smith Peter discusses the origins of the creation of distinct provincial identities in European Russia and how this process was encouraged and even promoted by the autocracy as a way to gain information about the territories under its control, to better manage resources and collect taxes. The Tsarist administration under Nicholas I encouraged and even mandated the creation of statistical bureaus, provincial newspapers and agricultural societies, which were staffed not just by nobles, but by priests’ sons, merchants and in some cases even peasants as a way to get a more thorough understanding of the territories governed. This allowed people in the provinces to become acquainted with their own particularities, customs and history and to speak directly to the government. However, as Smith-Peter notes, these voices changed from merely providing information to demanding participation in government, which the autocracy rejected. This became increasingly isolating to the nobles in particular as they were cut out of decisions on emancipating serfs and the creation of local government. Smith-Peter argues that the autocracy’s fostering of civil society for economic reasons followed by its rejection of political participation by the civil society it had created caused a rift in Russian society that eventually culminated in the revolutions of 1917. An excellent read for any interested in the development of regional identity and politics in Russia or the USSR. Samantha Lomb is an Assistant Professor at Vyatka State University in Kirov, Russia. Her research focuses on daily life, local politics and political participation in the Stalinist 1930s. Her book, Stalin’s Constitution: Soviet Participatory Politics and the Discussion of the Draft 1936 Constitution, is now available online. Her research can be viewed here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Most of the specialists in Eastern Europe I know first got truly interested in the region after a trip, which then triggered applications to grad school, years spent reading books, and a year or two in the particular country or region of choice researching a dissertation. Francis Tapon‘s story is different. While he visited Prague in the late 1990s, it did not trigger an academic obsession. Still, he got interested enough in the region and the fact that he knew so little about it that he decided to devote several years traveling to every country to get to know the people. The result is The Hidden Europe: What Eastern Europeans Can Teach Us (WanderLearn, 2012), which is a travelogue tracking his travels starting in Finland and down through the Baltic states and Central Europe, and then the Balkans, and ultimately into the European Russia. He has some great stories, and if what he learns may not surprise specialists, his view is always fresh. Consequently I was happy to talk to him about his journeys and what he learned recently, and I invite you to listen to our conversation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Most of the specialists in Eastern Europe I know first got truly interested in the region after a trip, which then triggered applications to grad school, years spent reading books, and a year or two in the particular country or region of choice researching a dissertation. Francis Tapon‘s story is different. While he visited Prague in the late 1990s, it did not trigger an academic obsession. Still, he got interested enough in the region and the fact that he knew so little about it that he decided to devote several years traveling to every country to get to know the people. The result is The Hidden Europe: What Eastern Europeans Can Teach Us (WanderLearn, 2012), which is a travelogue tracking his travels starting in Finland and down through the Baltic states and Central Europe, and then the Balkans, and ultimately into the European Russia. He has some great stories, and if what he learns may not surprise specialists, his view is always fresh. Consequently I was happy to talk to him about his journeys and what he learned recently, and I invite you to listen to our conversation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Most of the specialists in Eastern Europe I know first got truly interested in the region after a trip, which then triggered applications to grad school, years spent reading books, and a year or two in the particular country or region of choice researching a dissertation. Francis Tapon‘s story is different. While he visited Prague in the late 1990s, it did not trigger an academic obsession. Still, he got interested enough in the region and the fact that he knew so little about it that he decided to devote several years traveling to every country to get to know the people. The result is The Hidden Europe: What Eastern Europeans Can Teach Us (WanderLearn, 2012), which is a travelogue tracking his travels starting in Finland and down through the Baltic states and Central Europe, and then the Balkans, and ultimately into the European Russia. He has some great stories, and if what he learns may not surprise specialists, his view is always fresh. Consequently I was happy to talk to him about his journeys and what he learned recently, and I invite you to listen to our conversation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Amateur Traveler talks to Francis Tapon about European Russia west of the Ural Mountains. Most people only know 2 cities in Russia – Moscow and St Petersburg. In St Petersburg he recommends the Hermitage and the Peterhof. Moscow is so central culturally to Russia that the trains all run on Moscow time across the 9 timezones of Russia. Francis extends the suggested itinerary to include Kazan and Kaliningrad. Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan which is a mostly Muslim area of Russia. Kazan is over 1000 years old. Kazan is right by the Volga river with a large mosque and classic cathedral. Kaliningrad is a Russian exclave in what used to be East Prussia.

The Amateur Traveler talks to Francis Tapon about European Russia west of the Ural Mountains. Most people only know 2 cities in Russia – Moscow and St Petersburg. In St Petersburg he recommends the Hermitage and the Peterhof. Moscow is so central culturally to Russia that the trains all run on Moscow time across the 9 timezones of Russia. Francis extends the suggested itinerary to include Kazan and Kaliningrad. Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan which is a mostly Muslim area of Russia. Kazan is over 1000 years old. Kazan is right by the Volga river with a large mosque and classic cathedral. Kaliningrad is a Russian exclave in what used to be East Prussia.

The Amateur Traveler talks to Francis Tapon about European Russia west of the Ural Mountains. Most people only know 2 cities in Russia – Moscow and St Petersburg. In St Petersburg he recommends the Hermitage and the Peterhof. Moscow is so central culturally to Russia that the trains all run on Moscow time across the 9 timezones of Russia. Francis extends the suggested itinerary to include Kazan and Kaliningrad. Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan which is a mostly Muslim area of Russia. Kazan is over 1000 years old. Kazan is right by the Volga river with a large mosque and classic cathedral. Kaliningrad is a Russian exclave in what used to be East Prussia.

The Amateur Traveler talks to Francis Tapon about European Russia west of the Ural Mountains. Most people only know 2 cities in Russia – Moscow and St Petersburg. In St Petersburg he recommends the Hermitage and the Peterhof. Moscow is so central culturally to Russia that the trains all run on Moscow time across the 9 timezones of Russia. Francis extends the suggested itinerary to include Kazan and Kaliningrad. Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan which is a mostly Muslim area of Russia. Kazan is over 1000 years old. Kazan is right by the Volga river with a large mosque and classic cathedral. Kaliningrad is a Russian exclave in what used to be East Prussia.

Beginners. Two weeks ago we learned about Andorra, one of the smallest countries on the planet. Today, we will get to know a little about the biggest country in the world, mighty Russia. It measures over six and a half million square miles, and takes up an eighth of the Earth's land mass. Because it is so huge, its coastline boarders on fifteen seas, two of which are the Pacific and the Arctic oceans. It shares some of its boarders with thirteen other countries. There are about one hundred and forty two million people living there, mainly in European Russia, which is the part of the country that is closest to Europe. There you can find a concentration of cities such as the capital, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Stalingrad, and also those of southwestern Siberia. The climate in Russia is difficult to summarize. Because there are vast areas of land which are far from the sea, these areas have extremely cold winters and extremely hot summers, with spring and autumn being short. The coastal areas are more regulated by the sea breezes. Siberia, to the north, has an obvious arctic influence, and has only one month of summer in the far north. However, in its sunny southern area, there is a very large population, and successful farming. Advanced. It is difficult to sum up history of such an enormous and ancient country as Russia in a simple paragraph, so I will just hit upon some of the major historical points. Russia, up until the sixth century, was inhabited by nomadic tribes. Peoples from Iran and Turkey settled in the south, but were overrun by Vikings who established power. In the tenth century, the Russian leader Vladimir was converted to christianity. For two hundred years, the Russian Orthodox Church thrived, until the Mongols took over. They were expelled in the fifteenth century and the first Tsar, "Ivan the Terrible" declared himself supreme ruler. The last of the Tsars, Nicholas the second abdicated and was assassinated in 1917, giving way to the Communist Party under Lenin. Russia then endured a civil war, huge losses in the Second World War, and then the Cold War. The Soviet Union was officially dissolved in 1991, and formed a Commonwealth of Independent States. Russia has the largest reserves of natural gas in the world, and is very rich in many minerals. Wealth is bringing transforming power, and infrastructural and social changes are being experienced as a result. This vast and rapidly changing country is closely watched by the rest of the world because of its 'super' status, influence, and modernization.

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the building of St Petersburg, Peter the Great's showcase city for a modern, European Russia. It is a city of ideas. of progress and the Baroque, of Russian identity and Tsarist power. The building of St Petersburg is a testament to Tsarist power but it is also a city of ideas; of progress, of the Baroque and Russian identity. Beset by fire and flood, the city was founded by Peter the Great in 1703 to symbolise a new Russia, one that faced away from the Slavic East and towards the European West. To this end Peter and his heirs imported European architects, craftsmen and merchants to fashion his new capital.The result is a grandiose European city set amidst the freezing swamps of the Baltic coast; a Venice or Rome of the North. Indeed, the Venetian art connoisseur, Francesco Algarotti called St Petersburg ‘a window through which Russia looks on Europe'. It is a city of beauty built upon the cruelty of a tyrant and to this day encapsulates many of the contradictions of Russia.With Simon Dixon, Sir Bernard Pares Professor of Russian History at University College London; Janet Hartley, Professor of International History at the London School of Economics; Anthony Cross, Emeritus Professor of Slavonic Studies at the University of Cambridge

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the building of St Petersburg, Peter the Great's showcase city for a modern, European Russia. It is a city of ideas. of progress and the Baroque, of Russian identity and Tsarist power. The building of St Petersburg is a testament to Tsarist power but it is also a city of ideas; of progress, of the Baroque and Russian identity. Beset by fire and flood, the city was founded by Peter the Great in 1703 to symbolise a new Russia, one that faced away from the Slavic East and towards the European West. To this end Peter and his heirs imported European architects, craftsmen and merchants to fashion his new capital.The result is a grandiose European city set amidst the freezing swamps of the Baltic coast; a Venice or Rome of the North. Indeed, the Venetian art connoisseur, Francesco Algarotti called St Petersburg ‘a window through which Russia looks on Europe’. It is a city of beauty built upon the cruelty of a tyrant and to this day encapsulates many of the contradictions of Russia.With Simon Dixon, Sir Bernard Pares Professor of Russian History at University College London; Janet Hartley, Professor of International History at the London School of Economics; Anthony Cross, Emeritus Professor of Slavonic Studies at the University of Cambridge