For that to be the case, you'd probably need the 1917 French mutinies to become much more widespread.then CPs might win the war when Americans aren't yet arrived to Europe.
This is just not politically possible. Sukhanov, a left-wing "Zimmerwaldist" Menshevik wrote with regret that "During the first weeks the soldiers of Petrograd not only would not listen, but would not permit any talk of peace. They were ready to lift up on their bayonets any uncautious 'traitor' or exponent of 'opening the front to the enemy.'" (Quoted in Adam Ulam, *The Bolsheviks* [New York: Macmillan 1965], p. 325. https://books.google.com/books?id=TdCK1WkconkC&pg=PA325 (See https://books.google.com/books?id=6-D_AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA202 for a slightly different translation.)
The February revolution actually in many way restored Russian morale for a little while. The Kornilov offensive of course crushed it completely. But after the February Revolution the cries for peace went silent for some time (except from the Bolsheviks).After the February revolution,the preovisional government ends the Russia's patricipation in World War?How will World War I end and what will happen to Russia?
The February revolution actually in many way restored Russian morale for a little while. The Kornilov offensive of course crushed it completely. But after the February Revolution the cries for peace went silent for some time (except from the Bolsheviks).
I think he actually meant the Kerensky Offensive. There was also the Kornilov Affair, where Alexander Kerensky (who ordered the aforemented offensive) had to arm the bolsheviks to prevent Lavr Kornilov from taking over the russian government, so maybe it still counts.Kornilov offensive? Don't you mean the Brusilov offensive, which went very well at first, before the Germans once again came to A-H's aid (honestly, the Russians did quite well during the war against any CP that wasn't Germany). Kornilov tried to overthrow the Provisional Government in a coup, which I'm sure didn't do any wonders for morale either, admittedly.
I think he actually meant the Kerensky Offensive. There was also the Kornilov Affair, where Alexander Kerensky (who ordered the aforemented offensive) had to arm the bolsheviks to prevent Lavr Kornilov from taking over the russian government, so maybe it still counts.
Yes I meant the Kerensky offensive.That's right, it was the Kerensky Offensive, though Brusilov commanded it. I confused it with the Brusilov Offensive of 1916, in which Russia actually won, but at a tremendous loss of life.
Though as Ulam notes a bit further on, a demand for all land to be distributed among the peasants would have achieved a similar result, as the peasant soldiers would have rushed back to their villages so as not to miss out.
The problem there, of course, is that this would have left the government with no bargaining power at the peace table, and allowed Germany to dictate terms. Essentially it was an "all or nothing" situation. The Russian government (whoever they were) had a choice between continuing the war or else disbanding the army and signing whatever treaty the Germans chose to offer them - there was no middle way.
For an earlier Brest-Litovsk, you need an earlier revolution. If the Tsar falls around October 1916, and the rot sets in a bit faster than OTL, the Bolsheviks could perhaps gain power by March, and sign a peace similar to OTLs. This could have the ironic result of seeing the Tsar overthrown in the "October Revolution", and Lenin seizing power in the February one, rather than vice versa.
After the February revolution,the preovisional government ends the Russia's patricipation in World War?How will World War I end and what will happen to Russia?
Well, the terms might not be QUITE as harsh as OTL's if you don't see any silly period of "neither war nor peace" on the part of the Russian government that Lenin adopted IOTL. A Kerensky surrender, at the very least, would mean the lines would be those of a Pre-Faustschlag Eastern Front rather than a Post-Faustschlag one. Now, there's no way the Russians would know that in advance, but its still possible. Lenin himself might even be willing to take the peace terms right away in the event of this earlier Revolution, if it takes place while the "Reactionary" forces still control a more or less intact army and the Center-Right wasn't entirely discredited by another long stint of intense warfare (They'd be ruling over the winter; when the activity on the front slowed down, rather than during the main campaigning season)
But would there still be an intact army once the peasants had been promised the land? Won't they be off to their villages to make sure of getting their cut?
Either way, the fact that when they sit down at the negotiating table the German army is sitting 150 miles further east than it was IOTL is going to have an impact on the exact terms of B-L. That treaty's sheer scope was only really possible because the Germans had demonstrated that they could march virtually unopposed into the Russian heartland, making the new government's vulnerability obvious. Some troops will probably still be on the line for one reason or another; particularly those in combat contact with the Germans, who can't exactly just pack up and walk away without running the risk of getting overrun and captured, so while still negotiating from weakness Russia won't be getting quite as much ripped off.