Romanov Rescue 1917-1919: Action and Inaction

[COUNTESS]

I, belive, you are correct. It is always easier to make a government , rather than a person the scapegoat.

 

[HaroldRoberts]

I'm surprised to read some misinformation here, but the facts are well known. Lloyd George's government offered the Tsar and his family asylum in the UK, but this was overruled by Buckingham Palace. George V opposed the idea of a rescue mission because it was not militarily feasible.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Please cite the misinformation and let us know where you got your information. Thank you.

 

[HaroldRoberts]

The only misinformation was that some people seemed to believe it was the government rather than the King who did not want the Romaovs in the UK.

Quite a lot of this was covered in Kenneth Rose's biography of George V which was published in 1983. George was not upset to learn of the death of Alexandra because he had never liked her, but he did write in his daiary, "But those poor innocent children!". George realised that Nicholas and his wife were bound to be executed when the Bolsheviks moved the family into exile, he just didn't realise the five children would be killed as well.

It does seem entirely out of character but you have to see things from the King's position in 1917. There had been a rebellion in Ireland and looked to be another if conscription was introduced there. Aside from Russia, Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire were also on the brink of collapse. Ideally Britain could have fought to reinstate a constitutional monarchy with Nicholas' brother Michael as the Tsar, but he was killed before the family.

 

[Zonk]

I just read that in the Kenneth Rose book as well.

I wouldn't say that George V didn't like Alexandra but he definitely thought she was teh cause for a lot of her problems in Russia.

Didn't the British government also try to find a place for them to go (i.e. another country). They did look at other options. The books also mentions the anti monarchy feelings that were going on (i.e. the anti German feelings and the communist party). So there was a legitimate fear. Plus the King hated Lloyd George (and the feeling was mutual) so I think they didn't mind placing the blame on him.

 

[HaroldRoberts]

Yes that is correct, Lord Stamfordham suggested somewhere in mainland Europe would be more suitable. France declined to accept the Romanovs since the war was still raging there.

Since George V was still alive, Lloyd George had to amend his 1934 memoirs to suggest it was Kerensky's provisional government that had made it impossible for the Romanovs to go into exile in Britain.

 

[Vasillisos Markos]

If George V was the impediment to the Romanovs entering England, did this cause him to send British warships to rescue his Aunt Minnie from the Crimea? As a way to atone or to insure that others would get out safely?

 

[AristoCat]

I am not all to sure where the Imperial Family would have gone if they did escape. Initially they were given asylum in England, but that was later denied. I'd have to do some research to put the particulars together on that.
There have been things written, which make for fun discussion, but have mostly been discredited.

The Imperial Family was offered asylum, but George V interfered and prevented the offer from being carried through. It was for the sake of PR, to avoid associating with anything/anyone German and the Empress was a Princess of Hesse, a German principality. At the time it was WWI and the British were up in arms over anything or anyone German.

 

[Grandduchess24]

But did king George v die resenting not saving cousin Nicky and his family I mean they were family and because of him they were kept prisoners and executed

 

[Daria_S]

But did king George v die resenting not saving cousin Nicky and his family I mean they were family and because of him they were kept prisoners and executed

I've read about this scenario in Lacey's bio of Elizabeth II, and I think that George V was stuck in between a rock and a hard place. On one hand, Nikolai II and his wife and children were family, and family should stick together, but we have to remember that at the time there were a great deal of upheavals and the Hapsburg and Hohenzolern Houses were losing power. Though looking out for family may have been noble, George had to look out for himself and his throne. He didn't want to deal with being overthrown in the midst of all the commotion and anti-German sentiments, so he did what was best for himself and his wife and children (and the throne of course). Did he regret it? I can't say, because I haven't read anything that talks about his feelings on the matter, but I'd imagine that he may have felt some sadness over the fate of cousin Nicky and his own part in it.

 

[Russophile]

Copy that. And the communist/fascist party in England was really starting to get going about that time culimnating with Sir Oswald Mosley in WWII so unfortunately, IMO, Geoge did the correct thing for England, also IMO, I thought there would be another way out for the Imperial family. However, they would never go. Alexandra herself said that.

 

[AristoCat]

Something could have been done. There could have been a discreet rescue using special forces or MI6. Family is family and the Imperial Family was left to be butchered, throwing the whole succession and Imperial Family into chaos and setting a horrific precedent. Mind you, Nicholas and Alexandra ended up dying without even a trial and then their own daughters and son being shot to death point blank in some cases.

There's no excuse for vetoing and interfering in the original offer of asylum. If they ahd been rescued they could have been stashed in some quiet cottage on one of the royal estates in the middle of nowhere until a new place was found for them. At that point, yes, things were getting unstable, but it could have all been done discreetly. And then it could have been very different. The House of Windsor has blood on their hands over that.

 

[Vasillisos Markos]

But did the King's government offer asylum? Or was it merely discussing the matter when it was decided not to accept the Tsar and his family? I can't say I really blame George V for not extending a welcome, if the decision was his to make, because I don't think he ever thought the whole family would be massacred and he also believed his people would be upset at taking in a despot. Even though Russia was fighting on the side of the British, the King's subjects still remembered the Crimean War and probably were not crazy about the Russians.

 

[AristoCat]

They did actually offer it, but after George V intervened, it was withdrawn.

he also believed his people would be upset at taking in a despot

Exactly. It was all about PR.

 

[AristoCat]

I find it disgusting that the BRF refused to help the Imperial Family and how the English refused to lift a single finger, all in the name of being anti-German, as if Alexandra could help that, or her children. There was no way that anyone could help the children? So many Romanov butchered that to this day there is no one that could end up figuring out who is the legitimate head of the family. Not one person could be bothered to help and the White suffered so horribly. When people complain that Russia created Communism, quite frankly it would be refreshing for people to be reminded that no one worked to help the Whites regain control of Russia and at least get the Imperial Family out. I am so optimistic that one day the BRF will get their karma for letting Nicholas and Alexandra and the children face the firing squad.

 

[Daria_S]

I agree with a lot of what you say, especially the fact that someone could have at least helped Nikolai and Aleksandra's children, and that no one helped the White Army really have a chance at some sort of restoration. However, I think that we need to look at George V's decision to not help his cousins from another angle. Could he have helped? Absolutely. But, what would have happened to him and his wife and children? Britain wasn't exactly feeling warm towards the house of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Wettin, I believe being the name that the family used), so if George brought in his Russian cousins, with Alix, who was German by birth, he would have sealed his own family's fate. I'm not saying he did the right thing, but I'm saying that he did what he had to do to save his throne and wife and children. Also, we cannot forget that the Romanovs would have parted from each other. The Nikolai, Aleksandra and their children were a very close-knit unit, and I cannot see anyone going willingly if someone couldn't come.

I think it's a little harsh to want the current British Royal Family to suffer for George V's choices. The present monarch, her children, grandchildren and cousins are not responsible, so they should not be made to suffer. The ones who should are the ones who were in Russia at the time, and stood by and watched the family get slaughtered.

 

[AristoCat]

Have done something secretly; the BRF was flush with cash and could have heavily paid mercenaries to get them somewhere, like South America or deposit them somewhere secretly in some far corner of the Empire. Or keep them secreted in Scotland or somewhere. If the BRF was committed to skullduggery to kepe their throne, they could have done a little skullduggery to end up rescuing the family. This isn't the YouTube generation where you cna't hide anything. I am more than sure that something could have bene done if the BRF had been willing to get their hands a little dirty and been willing to be underhanded. Family is family and I am more than a little sure that they could have saved them somehow.

The BRF cared more about their PR and such than their own flesh and blood.

 

[Russophile]

It wasn't only the PR they cared about, remember Diana Mosely (at the time Diana Guinness) and her husband Oswald Mosely were quite active in Fascism/Socialism when the 1st war ended and up until the second world war. The BRF had enough problems to deal with in keeping their country in tact.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

I am of the opinion that even if George V had agreed, I don't believe the Romanovs would have ever been allowed to leave Russia overtly. I often wondered why the Tsar's Danish cousins didn't send for them covertly, smuggling them to Finland.

Seems to me that all his relatives forsook the Imperial Family.

 

[Russophile]

Ducky and Kyril went to Finland and it was fine until the Bolshiviks there started agitating. Everybody thought it was only temporary. Minnie was the worst of the lot refusing help from numerous relatives. Queen Marie (Missy) sent a ship and was refused.
The Romanovs were NOT living in reality.

 

[NGalitzine]

No one could know that the Bolsheviks would actually kill the entire family. Their relatives in Europe probably thought they would eventually be sent into exile.

 

[branchg]

Actually, history has shown that many of their royal relatives in Europe were extremely worried that the hatred towards Alexandra would result in their murder. Which is exactly what happened.

I don't think anyone was under the illusion the Bolsheviks would spare the life of the imperial family. Right from the start, they were using brutal violence and murder to consolidate their power under Lenin.

 

[branchg]

...The BRF cared more about their PR and such than their own flesh and blood.

George V and the Government were genuinely concerned the revolutions sweeping through Europe at the end of the war would engulf Britain and result in the end of the monarchy, especially since both George and his consort, Mary, were thoroughly German in descent.

As a constitutional monarch, the King was limited as to what help he could extend to his many relatives who lost their thrones, fortunes and countries in the aftermath of the War. He could only act on advice of his ministers and they were adamantly opposed to allowing Nicholas II and his family to settle in Britain.

War is never pretty.

 

[AristoCat]

No one had ot send Nicholas to Britain. What could have happened is that he could have been sent somewhere. If he had wanted, a way could have been found.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The British and their allies had troops in Russia aiding the Whites. The problem with the Whites was that they weren't even unified in what they wanted - some wanted a restoration of the monarchy while others wanted to simply get rid of the Bolsheviks but not restore the Romanovs. Another aim of some of the anti-Bolshevik forces was to force Russia back into the war.

The main reason why the family was executed when they were was that the Whites were so close.

George V was adivsed not to allow the autocratic Nicholas into the country - yes to George he was a beloved cousin but to the ordinary man in the street he was an evil butcher who had been responsible for the deaths of many of his own people.

Getting the children out was not going to happen as the family wouldn't have been separated anyway and there was no way that the Russians were going to allow Nicholas to leave Russia. He was going to have to die for his mistreatment of the people - and rightly so. Like Louis XVI and Marie Antionette there really wasn't an option - but they should have stood trial and been found guilty and then publicly executed. Not tried in absentia as happened.

Some people here have some fanciful idea that Nicholas was a nice man. He wasn't. He didn't care about the people - only his own family.

George V cared about his family - yes but he also realised that by getting the Russians to Britain could see similar actions within his own country and thus see his country torn apart like Russia had been - and as a good monarch he couldn't let that happen - so he stood by and allowed his cousins (remember that both Nicholas and Alexandra were his first cousins in their own right) to die to save his own people.

A couple of years later he did act - when another cousin was faced with death by a corrupt government and sent in the British navy to rescue Andrew, Alice and their children (including a baby named Philipos) from Athens - but Andrew wasn't a cruel tyrant who had repressed his own people like Nicholas was.

 

[Vasillisos Markos]

My dear Iluvbertie,

Well said! George was genuinely fond of Nicky but as a constitutional monarch George could not do as he pleased. And we should not forget that Nicky brought this mess upon his own head. As much we deplore the tragedy of what occurred, we cannot forget that many others died horrible deaths as well as that hindsight is always 20/20. Uneasy lies the head which wears the crown, say what?

 

[Tsaritsa]

Over the last couple of nights I have watched programes about how George and Mary modernised the monarchy. It was said that George and his government agreed on giving asylum to the IP, but after 48hrs, having consulted with his private secretary, Lord Stanfordham, a man in whom George had every confidence, he did an about turn. He was indeed concerned that the epidemic of communism would spread and that a guillotine would be erected in Trafalgar Square.
George had gone to some lengths to deGermanize his family, even changing their name. He was more than aware of his country's intolerance of all things German and at the time Empress Alexandra may have headed the list. He could not, however, rid himself of hearing the accent and a wonderful story has Queen Mary singing the wartime song "Yes, we have no bananas" as "Yah, ve hef no bananas"!!!

 

[Warren]

Not one person could be bothered to help and the White suffered so horribly. When people complain that Russia created Communism, quite frankly it would be refreshing for people to be reminded that no one worked to help the Whites regain control of Russia...

No one? There were 40,000 British troops (plus tanks), 13,000 Americans, 12,000 French, 5000 Canadians and 150 Australians, plus another 130,000 soldiers from Czechoslovakia, Japan, Greece, Poland, Serbia, Romania, Italy and China fighting with the White Russian forces.

Quote: "The Allied intervention was a multi-national military expedition launched in 1918 during World War I which continued into the Russian Civil War. Its operations included forces from 14 nations and were conducted over a vast territory. Allied efforts were hampered by divided objectives, lack of an overarching strategy, and a lack of home front public support. These factors and the deteriorating situation compelled the Allies to withdraw from North Russia and Siberia in 1920."

source: Allied Intervention in the Russian Civil War

 

[Russophile]

Too bad they couldn't help the Whites after WW2 when Stalin got his hooks (literally) into many of them.

 

[Benedict XVI]

If the whites took over Russia would they have restored the monarch under absolutism or constitutional? Or would they have re-establish a provisional government? If I'm right the white army was made up of more then just monarchists but anyone who was against marxist and bolshevism teachings.