Explaining History

In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we step away from the battlefields and examine how the February Revolution of 1917 was received and interpreted in two key Western cities: London and New York.

When the Tsar fell in March 1917, governments around the world struggled to make sense of what was happening. Russia under revolutionary conditions was—and remains—notoriously difficult to penetrate. Whose reports could be trusted? Which factions would prevail? And what would it mean for the ongoing war against Germany?
For Britain, the stakes were existential. The government of David Lloyd George hoped desperately that a new Russian administration would fight more effectively than the Tsar's. The Labour left, by contrast, hoped the revolution might end the war altogether. Both would be disappointed.

Drawing on Robert Service's superb Spies and Commissars, we explore this forgotten moment when London briefly became the world's largest hub for Russian political émigrés. Maxim Litvinov, the future Bolshevik commissar, was living in the East End with his English wife Ivy, agitating against the war and meeting with anti-war MPs like Ramsay MacDonald. Across the city, the Russian embassy at Cheshire House—still adorned with portraits of the imperial family—found itself issuing visas to revolutionaries it had spent decades monitoring.

We follow the revolutionaries as they attempt to make their way home, braving U-boat-infested North Sea crossings from Aberdeen to Bergen, and examine the peculiar dilemmas this created for British authorities. Should they expedite the return of anti-war militants? Detain them? Deport them?
Then we cross the Atlantic to New York, where the American press—unconstrained by British wartime censorship—reported the revolution days before London or Paris. Leon Trotsky and Nikolai Bukharin were there, denouncing US entry into the war from East Coast platforms, while Jewish refugees from the Empire celebrated the fall of the Tsar.

From the Albert Hall rally of 10,000 people honouring Russia's "freedom" to Brixton prison cells holding revolutionaries deemed too dangerous, this is a story of hope, naivety, intrigue, and the complex international dimensions of a revolution that would soon take a very different turn.

Topics covered:
The British government's hopes and fears after the February Revolution
Maxim Litvinov and the Russian émigré community in London
Ramsay MacDonald, the Labour Party, and the anti-war movement
The Russian embassy's awkward transition under the Provisional Government
The logistical challenges of returning to Russia via U-boat-infested seas
New York's reaction to the revolution and America's entry into the war
Trotsky and Bukharin's anti-war agitation in the United States
The Albert Hall rally and British left-wing enthusiasm for the revolution
The detention of Chicharin and Petrov in Brixton prison

If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us on Patreon for ad-free listening and exclusive video content. Our next masterclass on Nazi Germany is coming soon, and a new interview with Dennis Broe on Las Vegas and the mob drops this Friday.
Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.
▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content
Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory
▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation
Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast
Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com
▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper
Website: explaininghistory.org

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we turn our attention away from the Western Front and towards a often-neglected combatant of the First World War: the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

When we think of military incompetence in the Great War, our minds typically turn to the Western Front—to Haig, to Passchendaele, to the "lions led by donkeys" thesis. But the Habsburg army, which fought the Russians and the Italians across vast and challenging theaters, offers an even starker case study in structural weakness and strategic fantasy.

Drawing on Alexander Watson's superb *Ring of Steel*, we examine the multiple deficiencies that plagued the Dual Monarchy's forces in July 1914. The problems began with manpower. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was a patchwork of nations and ethnicities, and loyalty to the Habsburg crown varied dramatically. In the German-speaking west, draft evasion stood at just 3%. In the Czech lands, it rose to 6-7.3%. Among Hungarians—still nursing grievances from 1848—over a quarter ignored their summons. And in Galicia and the South Slav lands, where illiteracy was high and irredentist movements simmered, more than one third of men failed to present themselves for service. Many had simply emigrated to America.

But the deficiencies went far deeper than manpower. The army was desperately short of modern artillery. Its divisions had fewer guns than their Russian counterparts, and two-thirds of those were obsolete—bronze-barrelled pieces without recoil mechanisms or protective shields. Ammunition stocks were around half those of other great powers. The logistical infrastructure—barracks, depots, railways—was wholly inadequate for the expansion war would require.

Perhaps most fatally, the army's tactical doctrine was frozen in the nineteenth century. The Chief of Staff, Conrad von Hötzendorf, was regarded as a genius within the officer corps. His 1890 manual on tactics remained gospel a quarter of a century later. He believed that "energy, decisiveness and action" could overcome firepower, that infantry could win "even without support from other weapons" through "unbendable steadfastness of will." Foreign observers watching pre-war manoeuvres were appalled: officers standing upright behind firing lines, troops advancing in close formations, a complete obliviousness to terrain. The German military attaché's verdict was damning: mere cannon fodder.

The Central Powers' war plan demanded the impossible of both Germany and Austria-Hungary. The Germans were asked to defeat France in six weeks. The Austro-Hungarians were asked to hold the Russian army while simultaneously invading Serbia. Neither task was remotely achievable with the forces and doctrine available.

**Topics covered:**
- The multi-ethnic challenge of Habsburg recruitment
- Draft evasion rates across the empire
- Emigration and the loss of potential soldiers
- Material shortages: artillery, ammunition, infrastructure
- Conrad's tactical doctrine and the cult of the offensive
- Comparisons with Russian military incompetence
- The gap between strategic ambition and operational reality

Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.
▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content
Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory
▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation
Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast
Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com
▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper
Website: explaininghistory.org

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this special episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we step back from the hourly news cycle to examine the deeper historical context of the unfolding crisis between the United States and Iran.

As the situation in the Middle East escalates hour by hour, with consequences nobody can yet predict, it's tempting to get drawn into "hyperpunditry"—the kind of instant analysis that offers certainty where none exists. This podcast takes a different approach. Instead, we explore the historical patterns and structural forces that have brought us to this moment.

From Iraq to Iran: A Trajectory of Decline

We begin by looking back at the planning—or lack thereof—that accompanied the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The neoconservative "Project for a New American Century," drafted in the late 1990s, identified Iran, Iraq, Syria, and North Korea as existential threats requiring regime change. But by the time of the Iraq War, the intellectual and strategic capacity that had characterised post-war occupations like Japan and Germany was conspicuously absent.

The contrast is stark. Post-war Japan was rebuilt under MacArthur with a genuine understanding that creating a stable, pluralistic society required workers' rights, a modern constitution, and the removal of warmongers from power. Iraq, by contrast, was handed to Republican Party loyalists in their twenties with no relevant experience. The disbandment of the Iraqi army—against explicit US Army advice—turned hundreds of thousands of trained soldiers into armed and embittered opponents of the occupation.

As Donald Rumsfeld famously said when the Iraqi National Museum was looted and its ancient treasures destroyed: "Freedom is messy."

The Chancer in Chief

What we are witnessing now is of a category order worse—and arguably stupider. But to focus solely on Donald Trump's personal incompetence would be to miss the deeper picture. Trump is best understood as a "chancer," in some ways comparable to Hitler in the 1930s: testing boundaries, seeing what he can get away with, and becoming increasingly convinced that nobody will stop him.

The assassination of Qasem Soleimani appears to have been a spontaneous decision, based on the assumption that killing one man would be enough. This fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the Islamic Republic, Iranian nationalism, and the regional dynamics of the Middle East. It also ignores the inconvenient fact that the Iran nuclear deal—which Iran was broadly complying with—was torn up by Trump himself.

What Comes Next

The consequences are already unfolding. Iran has abundant missiles and cheap drones. It can, if it chooses, shut down the Persian Gulf, triggering an oil crisis worse than 1973. The long-term loser will be international nuclear non-proliferation: the lesson for any "rogue state" watching is that the North Korea model—acquire a nuclear weapon—is the only reliable protection against the United States.

Meanwhile, Britain finds itself dragged into a war launched on a whim, with no independent foreign policy of its own. Since the Suez Crisis in 1956, Britain has not had an independent foreign policy. Keir Starmer's government has already agreed that America can use British air bases. It remains to be seen whether the British public, with little appetite for this conflict, will accept being drawn in.

Topics covered:
- The neoconservative "Project for a New American Century"
- Post-war planning: Japan (1945) vs. Iraq (2003)
- The disastrous disbandment of the Iraqi army
- Trump as "chancer": Hitler comparisons and their limits
- The assassination of Soleimani and Iranian nationalism
- The wreckage of the Iran nuclear deal
- Regional implications: Hezbollah, Netanyahu, and Turkey
- Britain's role and the legacy of Suez
- The nuclear proliferation lesson for rogue states

---

*If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us on Patreon for ad-free listening and exclusive content. Take care, and if you're in that part of the world, stay safe.*
Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.
▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content
Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory
▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation
Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast
Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com
▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper
Website: explaininghistory.org

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we're joined by writer Susan Barrett to discuss her new novel, *All Cats Are Grey*—a dark and compelling work of historical fiction set against the backdrop of the London Blitz.

The book tells the story of four very different people, each of whom has committed what might be called a "necessary murder" in their past. They come together during the chaos of the blackout to use their lethal skills against a serial rapist and murderer who is exploiting the wartime disruption to terrorise the bomb-scarred streets of London. This villain is inspired by a real figure: Gordon Cummings, an infamous but largely forgotten serial killer of the Blitz era.

But our conversation ranges far beyond the plot. Susan, whose background is in film and television research, shares fascinating insights into how historical research has changed—and what we lose in the age of the internet. She discusses the serendipity of physical archives, the power of handwritten ledgers and Victorian photographs, and the surprising voices uncovered by the Mass Observation project that challenge our assumptions about "respectable" wartime behaviour.

We also delve into the mythology of the Blitz itself. How does the reality of crime, class division, and social disruption sit alongside the cherished national story of plucky unity? What did people actually think and do when the bombs were falling? And why does Britain have such a peculiar fascination with poisoners and serial killers?

From the tragic case of Timothy Evans and Reginald Christie to the Jack the Ripper industry, from the origins of the welfare state to the echoes of COVID—this is a wide-ranging conversation about history, memory, and the stories we tell ourselves.

*All Cats Are Grey* is published on 24th April by Bathwick Hill Press, a small independent publisher. Please consider supporting independent bookshops and publishers.

**Topics covered:**
- The changing nature of historical research in the internet age
- The Gordon Cummings case and wartime crime
- Mass Observation and authentic voices from the past
- The mythology of the Blitz versus historical reality
- Britain's fascination with serial killers and poisoners
- How COVID helps us understand wartime disruption
- The importance of independent publishing

---

*If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us on Patreon for ad-free listening and exclusive content.*
Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.
▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content
Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory
▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation
Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast
Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com
▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper
Website: explaininghistory.org

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Episode Summary:
In this episode of Explaining History, Nick explores the agonizing political and strategic choices faced by Great Britain in the 1930s.
Why did the British government delay rearmament for so long? Drawing on Daniel Todman's Britain's War: Into Battle, we examine how the shadow of the First World War and the Great Depression shaped the policy of appeasement. Nick argues that the "caution" of the Baldwin and Chamberlain governments wasn't just cowardice; it was a desperate attempt to avoid the "total war" that would require the complete subordination of freedom and prosperity to the state.
From the technological leap from biplanes to monoplanes to the "imperial overstretch" that left Singapore and Palestine vulnerable, we delve into the global chessboard of the late 30s. How did the need to defend an empire spanning the globe leave Britain dangerously exposed in Europe? And why was the fall of Singapore written into the strategic compromises of the 1920s?
Plus: Details on our upcoming Nazi Germany Masterclass in March!
Key Topics:
The Rearmament Debate: Why a "Churchillian" surge in 1935 might have failed.
Technological Change: The shift from fabric biplanes to the Spitfire and Hurricane.
Imperial Overstretch: The impossible task of defending the UK, the Mediterranean, and the Far East simultaneously.
The Palestine Mandate: How the Arab Revolt of 1936 tied down British troops needed elsewhere.
Books Mentioned:
Britain's War: Into Battle (1937-1941) by Daniel Todman
English History 1914-1945 by A.J.P. Taylor
Forgotten Armies by Christopher Bayly and Tim Harper

Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.
▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content
Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory
▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation
Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast
Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com
▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper
Website: explaininghistory.org

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.