In order to answer the above question we must look at the social and economical problems that the ‘PG’ faced, then look at the other problems the ‘PG’ faced such as the issues with the war, then arising issues with land distribution, the national minorities and the divide between the liberals and socialists and their influences over these issues.
The social issues with the land distribution caused havoc within the countryside. This problem could be seen as a great reason of why the ‘PG’ failed to last, as it failed to deal with the social problem faced. The peasants were outraged as they believed that the land belonged to them, and after the end of Tsarism they saw it as an opportunity to claim back the land although they wanted government approval to do this. However the liberals were not willing to give the land over to the peasants as it would anger the landowners who supported the liberal groups, they wanted land distribution to follow a framework set by the constituent and the landowners to be compensated. However the problem of this also links to the war, as if the government allowed a land free for all, soldiers on the defensive front may ‘hurry back’ to claim the land, which ultimately could lead to the loss of the war which Russia was not prepared to do. Due to the war there were food and good shortages within Russia and the ‘PG’ government did not deal with the situation. The collapsing of the economy continued, angering the peasants, prices of goods and foods arising and many factories forced to close down due to lack of raw materials meaning many jobs were lost further infuriating the workers; the ‘PG’ was unable to solve food shortages. As long as the war continued the situation could not be helped as the goods were given mostly to the army. Strikes were increasing within Petrograd as the workers needs were not being met, the workers longed for better working conditions and shorter working days, which could not be achieved due to the war.
A key reason of why the ‘PG’ lasted such a short time is the divide in the policies of the main groups, the liberals and the socialist. They both had different thoughts thought’s on the war, the social reform of Russia, land distribution and how to deal with the demands of the national minorities. The issues arising of the war could be seen as a crucial reason of why the ‘PG’ failed, Milyukov the leader of the Kadets whom was also the war minister wanted to defend Russia but also make territorial gains if the allies (Britain and France) won, this caused a strain between the liberals and socialists, as the socialists only wanted a defensive war or international peace. Milyukov was forced to resign putting the ‘PG’ in a crisis. In May the ‘PG’ reformed when a new coalition government formed consisting of five social of leaders, one of which were the Mensheviks leader and the leader of the social revolutionaries, whom where to be held responsible if the war went badly. The issues with the war suggests a strong reason of why the ‘PG’ lasted such a short time, as there were a divide in within the people, some people were bound to be disappointed leading to a lack of support.
Furthermore there was a split in the issue of the national minorities, the Poles and Finns wanted independence and the Ukraine’s further wanted their own self government, which the socialists within the government gave in to their