I think that OP means making Russia much better by 2023. There is some ideas.
“Better” is a vague term which may mean a lot of different and even contradictory things but let it be.
Mongols never invade Russian principalities (perhaps Temujin dies as child). Then Russian nations can turn more towards western and industrialise and develope on same speed as the West. Russian nations would unite later.
Why would they? In XIII - XVII territory of the European Russia was pretty much geographically isolated from Western Europe and close contacts with the Northern Europe existed mostly within context of the Byzantine trade which pretty much ceased to exist after the 4th Crusade and even before this, by the end of the XII century was dying out due to the nomads of the Black Sea coast: the most senior throne moved to Vladimir in the mid-XII.
Lithuania and Poland still would be on the way to the west and neither of them was the most advanced state in Europe.
As for the “industrialization” in its early form it was pretty much enforced in Russia by the mid-XVIII well ahead of many European states (being one of the major exporters of cast iron probably implies certain degree of “industrialization”).
Ivan the Terrible is not that terrible and he developes the country with better rule.
How exactly he is “developing” it in the terms of specific items?
He doesn't kill his son and heir Ivan Ivanovich and he begin long and prosperous reign instead Russia falling to chaos for several years.
He was succeeded by his son Feodor with a capable administrator as a power behind the throne. Chaos started later after few years of a terrible weather and resulting famine. Nothing good is known about Ivan Jr.
Russia sees down- and uphills but manages to develope as modern nation during 19th century.
Well, it was reasonably “modern” in the XIX century all the way to a serious pretense to the dominance in continental Europe.
Nicholas I makes some meaningful reforms and abolish serfdom.
Which “reforms” exactly?
As for the serfdom he was seriously planning its abolishment: his heir to the throne was a chairman of commission working on the plan. The problem was so complicated that when the former chairman and now the emperor decided to go ahead with it, the result was a fundamental screwup in pretty much each and every aspect.
This had nothing to do with the serfdom and everything with the Russian imperial ambitions.
Alexander II's oldest son Nicholas Alexandrovich survives and becomes tsar.
And the miracle happens overnight …. The only things known about NA are: (a) very good memory, (b) excessive eagerness to please everybody, (c) complete absence of his own opinions and (c) weak health.
Even better if AII is not assassinated.
Is “Even better” an irony? Something along the lines of a couch of a losing team saying “next time we will play even better”?
Let’s see. By the time of AII’s assassination:
- Peasantry was crushed by the taxes and emancipation payments.
- Landowning nobility was mostly financially destroyed by the way the process was handled.
- Manufacturing/industrialization was not going anywhere because free trade policy made the fledgling Russian companies uncompetitive.
- Adopted system of the railroad development was plagued with corruption, most of the equipment was bought abroad and the the government had been under obligation to pay the railroad companies for exploitation of their railroads (only under AIII Witte was able to get rid of this practice).
- Due to the combination of the lousy situation in agricultural sector and an absence of manufacturing, there was a high level of poverty: the pauperized peasants simply could not get a descent work anywhere.
- Final “pacification” of the Caucasus resulted in genocide of the Circassians.
- War with the Ottomans was screwed up, made Russia first a laughingstock of Europe and then pariah of Europe.
- Paper ruble was in almost free fall (to be fair, normalization started by the end of AII reign but it took the whole reign of AIII to finish the process).
- Military reform was in general good thing but it involved numerous bad decisions and resulted in a terrible practice which spanned all the way to WWI saddling Russian army with the generals incapable of taking decisions.
- Opening more universities was a good idea but these universities were producing mostly lawyers and “philosophers” and all the way to the end had been centers of anti-government activities.
- Judicial reform was, in theory, a good idea but in practice the jurors and judges had been acquitting the terrorists and the district attorneys tended to consider themselves a part of the defense team in the political cases. The result was almost unrestricted “reign of a terror” (and those responsible for emperor’s security were clearly and obviously incompetent).
- Presumably most benefitting class, intelligencia, was anti-government as a matter of principle.
- Cherry on the top of the cake, he managed to turn a routine case of having a mistress (his father, uncle and grandfather had them without causing any family problems) into a major scandal which broke family apart.
Sorry, RE simply could not afford more of AII and Perovskaya, Zelyabov & Co had to get the state awards … before being hanged.
Tsarevich Nicholas Alexandrovich is killed in Japan during his visit in Otsu on early 1890's and eventually his youngest brother Michael becomes tsar. He was conservative but not such believer to absolutism so he might allow some actual constitution.
His murder would require war with Japan which Russia at that time could not win: Far East was absolutely undeveloped. As for Michael, he simply did not want to rule. As for the constitution, NII granted it in 1905 and the following decade demonstrated that the clowns in Duma were not better than those in bureaucracy (which at least produced Witte and Stolypin). And when in February 1917 Russia became democratic, incompetence of the leading democrats had been proved beyond any reasonable doubt.
That’s for sure.
Russia probably falls to revolution at some point but it should has mostly positive effects.
Revolutions tend to produce the bloody effects before they start producing something else. But without a war revolution in RE seems unlikely. Unlike
evolution.
Entente wins WW1 in 1916. During 1920's tsar is enforced to commit meaningful reforms.
Again “meaningful reforms”. What does this mean? Russia Empire already had a comprehensive set of the labor laws and modern judicial system. It needed not the reforms but a prolonged period of a peaceful development with a minimal disturbances coming from a government (generally known as the “reforms’).
Later Russia evolves as developed somehow democratic nation.
Just as a pure curiosity, why “somehow democratic” is by default considered an universal benefit uniformly benefitting all cultures regardless their specifics? This is pretty much like the Marxist theory that
all societies have to pass through prescribed set of the forms to end up with a communism. The Marxist theory was created in a blissful ignorance regarding non-european history and did not work out as expected. So perhaps the same applies to other similar one size fits all theories? It is not about “good vs. bad” but about possibility of more than one path of a social development.
Instead deciding continue war Provisional Government decides sue peace (perhaps war goes even worsely for Russia). Windows for Bolshevik revolt is pretty tight and it fails.
PG has just bit luck and manages crush Bolsheviks completely either during July revolution attempt or on October Rebvolution.
PG was a bunch of the well-educated idiots who could not find their own posteriors with both hands in a broad daylight. The only thing they demonstrated convincingly is that in Russia intelligencia should not be allowed anywhere close to the government. 😂
Someone else becomes first post-Soviet Russian president instead Yeltsin. Perhaps Yavlinsky.
Yeah, sure. See above about the PG. 😜