Should Russia Break Apart Into Smaller Units.

[DinoDoc]

History doesn't require a working knowlege of the Cyrillic alphabet.

[chequita guevara]

The right to self-determination is one of the most basic of rights. The Russians have no right to keep other people's from being free.

[spartak]

No but holding opinions about a country of 220 million people could perhaps require slightly more knowledge of the country that you can pick up in the op-eds of the NY Times, don't you agree?

[The Vagabond]

Desintegration of Russia would be a major humanitarian and geopolitical catastrophe, much more so than the desintegration of the Soviet Union. Do you know why the USSR desintegrated so smoothly (relatively speaking)? It's because a strong and responsible successor state was in place -- the Russian Federation. You the Westerners don't seem to really appreciate this historic fact and the role of Russia. You think it was all for granted. Just look at Yugoslavia to see otherwise. Now if the Russian Federation desintegrates, what would be in its place? You should pray for the Russian Federation to exist and to keep order in that corner of the globe. Well, you may not pray, but at least please write off the debts of the Soviet era. Fortunately though Russia is more solid than the USSR, and doesn't look like desintegrating.

[The Vagabond]

Taz, I'm afraid you are scaring away potential posters to this thread with your tough criteria.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Azazel
Btw, I guess not everyone knows it but I am a russian citizen, too.

That's great.

[Sonic]

Vagabond, this isn't quite right...
1.Yugoslavia was in fact very different case. Firstly, because these former Yugoslavian countries themselves were full of many different cultures, religions, etc. Take Bosnia and Herzegovina as example. Ones who weren't such, like Slovenia, exited painlessly without conflicts later. Also, in Yugolsavia the change of governments wasn't so noticeble. Yeltsin in Russia immidietly claimed that he doesn't wants former territories and recognised independence, thus making it easier to find a peaceful solution (probably if Putin would have been in power at a time, he wouldn't have done the same - that is why I think Yeltsin was good president). In Yugoslavia everything was different. Yugoslavian government tried to immidietly regain lost lands and that resultd into war, which was quite deadly for all the sides.
2.If Chechenya and Tatarstan would be allowed to go indepenent (and they are the only countries which seeks independence now), Russia still would be strong. And even if all nations would declare independence from Russia, Russia still would be strong enough. Do you think that lose of such countries as Yakutia, Karelia, Kalmukia, etc. would make Russia very weak? Russian strenght is in it's Russian territory, near Moscow and St. Petersburg, not in Caucassus or Siberia. It always been that way. Two thirds of Russian people lives in those territories, most of agriculture and infrastructure is also based there.

[The Vagabond]

Sonic: yes, Yugolavia was very different, and this is what I wanted to tell. On the other hand, if you want to say that those were the merits just of Yeltsin and not of Russia, I disagree. Russia as a country should be given full credit for peaceful dissolution of the USSR.

As for Chechnya, it is not ready for independence yet, as it cannot be trusted to be a responsible peaceful state.

Tatarstan is a more complicated issue. This can be considered in the future, but right now Russia can't afford to destabilize itself by granting independences.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The right to self-determination is one of the most basic of rights. The Russians have no right to keep other people's from being free.

Just a typical irresponsible leftist blah-blah (sorry, Che ).

[spartak]

I should add The Vagabond to the list of those qualified to hold opinions on the subject matter of this thread but can't be bothered.

Sorry for any disruption, but I think I have made my point.

[The Vagabond]

To all independentists out there:
You may worry about the independence of the peoples who don't even know yet that they want to be independent. But what about the enormous sufferings of the Russian people that will ensue should the Russian Federation be destabilized? You don't seem to care about that.

[Sonic]

Yet again, Russian Federation wouldn't be destabilized even if all the nations except Russian gets out of it, since the most of agricultur,e infrastructure and people (and also cities) is exacly in the Russian part of the Federation (at least 2/3 people lives there).
And the Federation would probably even don't fell if just Chechenya and Tatarstan would go. Probably it would be even more peaceful if Chechnya would go.

[The Vagabond]

Sonic: Statehood is one of the important values in Russia. If someone is granted independence, the perception will be that the state crumbles away, and besides this may provoke separatist feelings in the places that now don't even think of independence. All this will destabilize the Federation. Therefore, granting independence is not a joke, it is a very serious step which should be thoroughly thought and prepared. Right now, Russia is too weak and can't afford that.

Probably it would be even more peaceful if Chechnya would go.

Chechnya was already gone once. Do you remember how "peaceful" it was?

[Sonic]

Vagabond, no, Chechnya wasn't ever officially gone. BTW, I meant it would be more peaceful in the federation if Chechnya would go.
Yet again, re-read my posts before please - I said that Russian part of Russia is the major part of Federation, it has more than 2/3 of people, most of agriculture and infrastructure. Thus Russia would still remain a strong country even with all nation gone, although I don't think all of them would want to go even if independence would now be given to Chechnya and Tatarstan.

[Ned]

The federal form of government is ideal for providing for a commonwealth while providing sufficient autonomy at the state or province level. It is only when the federal government goes over the line and begins to impose unwelcome laws on the states that the states rebel. I am thinking of our own civil war.

But even so, I would not let a state secede without the consent of the federal government. This actually may involve two plebiscites: one at the state or province level to determine whether the state wanted to secede; a second at the national level to determine whether to grant the state’s request to secede.

As to Russia: it is their internal business now. Russia is no Milosovician Serbia.