Paul
Goble
Staunton, June 21 – Vladimir Putin says
when the USSR was founded, non-Russian republics “received an enormous amount
of Russian lands” and “traditionally Russian historical territories” and that
when they left in 1991, they should not have “carried away these gifts from the
Russian people” (youtube.com/watch?v=etszjYX6pZU).
This represents an even more
egregious misreading of the historical record than even the Kremlin leader is
usually guilty of as there was no Russia that was giving land but father a situation
in which a new and revolutionary government divided up the country in an effort
to save as much as it could.
Putin didn’t specify which republics
and territories he was referring to, but he did say “at the time of the founding
of the Soviet Union, the right to leave was written but no procedures were
specified” and argued that the Crimean Anschluss was entirely legitimate
because there was a referendum and because “Crimea always was ours even from
the juridical point of view.”
On the one hand, this is no more
than the latest bombastic comment by someone increasingly unmoored from
reality; but on the other, as Russian sociologist Igor Eidman says, by implying
that Russia would have the right to take back such “gifts,” it is “in fact a
direct threat of war to the former Soviet republics.”
The Kremlin leader has already
seized part of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, Eidman says; and he is willing to
threaten the independent countries around Russia’ periphery (gordonua.com/blogs/eydman/putin-prigrozil-zabrat-u-sosednih-gosudarstv-podarki-ot-russkogo-naroda-eto-fakticheski-pryamaya-ugroza-voynoy-byvshim-sovetskim-respublikam-1505586.html).
If others start invoking that principle,
the commentator continues, there could be problems. Imagine if the many nations
which still remain in “’the prison house of peoples’” known as Russia and whoa
re not “state-forming” but rather “in essence “colonized” should begin to
demand back the lands they were forced by Moscow to give away!”
“The more rapidly the rating of Putin
is falling, the more aggressive his rhetoric is becoming. The bunker-tunnel
(p)resident is trying to regain popularity, making his bed on aggressive
nationalism directed against his country’s neighbors. This threatens new
military adventures,” Eidman concludes.
No comments:
Post a Comment