Stalin's second Five-Year Plan (1933-37) shifted emphasis towards new industrial sectors. (a) Describe the main priorities of the second Five-Year Plan. [4]...

The Second Five-Year Plan (1933-37) built on the foundations laid by the chaotic and often brutal First Plan, and is generally considered the most successful of the three pre-war plans.

(a) Main priorities of the Second Five-Year Plan [4 marks]

• Heavy industry continued to expand, but the Second Plan also developed new sectors including transport infrastructure, communications, chemicals and machine-tool manufacturing.
• The Moscow Metro, which opened in 1935, was a flagship project designed to showcase Soviet engineering and modernity. Its stations were decorated with marble, mosaics and chandeliers.
• New canals (notably the White Sea-Baltic Canal and the Moscow-Volga Canal) and railways were constructed, often using forced labour from the Gulag.
• Some limited attention was given to consumer goods production, although heavy industry and, increasingly, arms production remained the dominant priorities as the international situation worsened with the rise of Nazi Germany.

(b) Why the Second Plan was more successful than the First [6 marks]

• Workforce experience: Workers and managers had gained practical experience during the First Plan, reducing the waste, confusion and incompetence that had characterised the earlier period.
• More realistic targets: The Second Plan set more achievable goals, in contrast to the wildly unrealistic targets of the First Plan. This meant more targets were actually met, improving morale and efficiency.
• Existing infrastructure: Roads, railways, power stations and factories built during the First Plan provided a foundation for further growth, rather than starting from nothing.
• Stakhanovite movement: From 1935, the Stakhanovite movement boosted individual and factory productivity through competition and material incentives.
• Better use of foreign expertise: Technical knowledge imported from Western countries (including American engineers like those from Ford Motor Company) was more effectively integrated into Soviet industry.
• More stable workforce: The mass migration of peasants from the countryside to cities, which had disrupted the First Plan, slowed during the Second Plan, creating a more settled and skilled labour force.

(c) How far did the Five-Year Plans transform the USSR into a modern industrial power by 1941? [10 marks]

Evidence of transformation:

• By 1941, the Soviet Union had become the world's second-largest industrial power (after the United States). This was an extraordinary achievement for a country that had been predominantly agricultural in 1928.
• Steel production rose from 4 million tonnes in 1928 to 18 million tonnes by 1940. Coal, oil and electricity generation also increased dramatically.
• The industrial base proved essential during the Second World War (1941-45). Soviet factories produced the T-34 tank, the Katyusha rocket launcher, and thousands of aircraft that proved decisive against Nazi Germany.
• New industrial cities and regions were developed in the Urals and Siberia (such as Magnitogorsk and Novokuznetsk), reducing dependence on the vulnerable western industrial areas that Germany occupied in 1941-42.
• The Dnieprostroi Dam (completed 1932) and other hydroelectric projects provided massive electricity generation capacity.

Limitations of the transformation:

• Growth was concentrated in heavy industry and armaments. Consumer goods remained scarce, and living standards for ordinary citizens were low compared to Western industrial nations.
• Quality of production was often poor. Factories prioritised meeting quantity targets over producing reliable goods, and waste of materials was high.
• Agriculture had not recovered fully from the devastation of forced collectivisation. Food supply remained a persistent problem throughout the 1930s.
• Official Soviet growth statistics were systematically inflated for propaganda purposes, making it difficult to assess real progress accurately.
• The transformation was achieved at enormous human cost: forced labour in the Gulag, the famine of 1932-33, the destruction of the kulaks, and harsh working conditions in factories and mines.

Conclusion: The Five-Year Plans did genuinely transform the Soviet Union from an agricultural economy into a major industrial power, and this transformation proved critical to survival in the Second World War. However, the industrial achievement was heavily skewed towards heavy industry and defence, the human cost was immense, and many of the underlying weaknesses (poor quality, agricultural failure, over-centralised planning) persisted for decades.