1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Nutka1998 [239]
2 years ago
5

What circumstances led to the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk? *

History
1 answer:
Darya [45]2 years ago
3 0

The reason the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk happened was because of 4. a civil war in Russia.

<h3>Why did Russia agree to the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk?</h3>

Russia was an allied power in WWI but when the Communists took over, a civil war broke out as some people resisted.

In order to fight the civil war effectively, the Russian Communist government accepted the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.

Find out more on the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk at brainly.com/question/12778252.

#SPJ1

You might be interested in
Dictatorships are most commonly found in which of the following places? Select all that apply. communist countries representativ
True [87]
I believe it would be Communist Countries and fascist countries
5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Select the country that allowed for peaceful independence of their African colonies after ww2.
nataly862011 [7]
I believe it was (1) Britain. 
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The bill of rights placed into law some of the natural rights that thomas jefferson wrote about in the
sergiy2304 [10]

<span>Declaration of Independence</span>

<span />

8 0
3 years ago
What was Mexican Americans racial status, by law, in the early 20th century?​
ki77a [65]

Explanation:

exican American history, or the history of American residents of Mexican descent, largely begins after the annexation of Northern Mexico in 1848, when the nearly 80,000 Mexican citizens of California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico became U.S. citizens.[1][2] Large-scale migration increased the U.S.’ Mexican population during the 1910s, as refugees fled the economic devastation and violence of Mexico’s high-casualty revolution and civil war.[3][4] Until the mid-20th century, most Mexican Americans lived within a few hundred miles of the border, although some resettled along rail lines from the Southwest into the Midwest.[5]

In the second half of the 20th century, Mexican Americans diffused throughout the U.S., especially into the Midwest and Southeast,[6][7] though the groups’ largest population centers remain in California and Texas.[8] During this period, Mexican-Americans campaigned for voting rights, educational and employment equity, ethnic equality, and economic and social advancement.[9] At the same time, however, many Mexican-Americans struggled with defining and maintaining their community's identity.

In the 1960s and 1970s, Chicano student organizations developed ideologies of Chicano nationalism, highlighting American discrimination against Mexican Americans and emphasizing the overarching failures of a culturally pluralistic society.[10] Calling themselves La Raza, Chicano activists sought to affirm Mexican Americans' racial distinctiveness and working-class status, create a pro-barrio movement, and assert that "brown is beautiful."[10] Urging against both ethnic assimilation and the mistreatment of low-wage workers, the Chicano Movement was the first large-scale mobilization of Mexican American activism in United States history.[11]

5 0
3 years ago
How were the british able to conquer india?
melisa1 [442]
There are a good number of reasons why the British were able to do so, and in fact rule over India effectively for over a century.

Disunity among Indian princely states. India was more a collection of warring princely states, at loggerheads with each other. The British sucessfully used this to play off one state against another. Add to it there was no dearth of people willing to betray the kingdom for a few pieces of silver. Robert Clive succeeded at Plassey, because Mir Jaffar was willing to betray his master Siraj-Ud-Daulah in lie of being the Nawab. Mir Jaffar himself was betrayed by Mir Qasim later on.Tipu Sultan one of the most redoubtable fighters against the British rule, was finally defeated, as the Marathas, King of Mysore, Nizam of Hyderabad all joined hands with the British.
Superiority over other colonial powers. The other colonial powers in India competing for the share of resources were France,Portugal,Denmark, Holland. Of the 4, Denmark and Holland could never really be serious competitors to the British, they had their own trading posts, scattered around, but were never a serious threat. Portugal focussed primarily on the Western coast, Goa, parts of Kerala, Karnataka, and this left the British with vast swathes of unoccupied territory. That left France as the major contender to Britian in the race for colonialism. The British Army was more well equipped, more professional, more disciplined compared to the French army, suffering from indiscipline and corruption. This made the British win key battles all over the East Coast, as they effectively grabbed control.
Doctrine of Lapse. One of the most effective tactics, the British used to take over most of India. Instead of waging an all out war against some of the princely states, they signed a treaty with them, where in if the ruling king died without a heir, the East India company could take over that. And that is how Satara became one of the first states to end up under British rule. And that was also the main reason for the conflict in Jhansi.
Subsidiary alliance was also an effective instrument. According to this alliance, the kingdom which signs the treaty will have to maintain the following rules:

The British agreed to maintain a permanent and fixed subsidiary force within the territory of their ally.
In return, they didn't take money but took over a part of the territory of the ally.
A British officer called "resident" was placed at the court of the ruler.{he could interfere in the internal matters of the kingdom}
The ally could not maintain any relation with any other ruler without the approval of the British.{so,when the rulers wanted to revolt against the British they are alone.}
The Indian rulers felt a false sense of security but in reality they were losing their independence. On the other hand the Britishers maintained large forces at the expenses of the Indian rulers and also increase their area of influence. Some states brought under control through this policy are Hyderabad, Tanjore, Awadh, etc.
At the end of it all, the British had the advantage of better manpower, were militarily more powerful and stronger, and add to it they had some very canny strategists too. And the disunity among Indian princely states, their constant warring with each other, just added to the advantage.
3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which of the following was an Omaha Platform proposal for labor reform?
    9·2 answers
  • What did the Meiji restoration lead to?
    12·1 answer
  • PLEASE HELP 20 POINTS + BRAINLIEST CROWN
    8·2 answers
  • Why would the early Americas be considered diverse or complex
    14·1 answer
  • Was the U.S practicing Isolationism before the attack on Pearl Harbor? Explain.
    6·1 answer
  • Please help
    15·1 answer
  • What are democrats view on the environment?
    14·2 answers
  • Helpppppppppppppppppppppppp
    7·1 answer
  • What should be the relationship between alexander the great and the people?
    7·1 answer
  • What is your reaction to the Song "Bayan Ko"?
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!