Had Siberia become Independent in 1918, No Soviet Union would have Arisen, Mikhaylov Says

Paul Goble

            Staunton, Nov. 17 – Siberia is even more important for Russia’s development than Vladimir Pastukhov suggests (windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2023/11/loss-of-siberia-and-far-east-to-china.html), Dmitry Mikhaylov says. Had it become independent in 1918, there wouldn’t have been a Soviet Union; and if it achieves that now, there won’t be powerful Russian state.

            The Russian journalist, who now lives in the US, says that he would “liken Siberia not to Canada” as Pastukhov does “but to the US in relation to the British Empire at that time.”  In that respect, “Siberia will be an analogue of the United States, the only difference between that between Britain and US is an ocean and between Russia and Siberia only the Urals” (region.expert/creative-process/).

            “It is indeed very interesting that the Declaration of the Independence of Siberia in 1918 was adopted on July 4^th,” the same day of the year that the US did so in 1776. “Unfortunately,” it didn’t succeed, a tragedy because had it done so, there would not have been either the USSR or the emergence of totalitarianism elsewhere as well.

            Now, because Moscow has continued to treat Siberia as a colony, enriching the capital at the expense of impoverishing that land, there is a chance that the decolonization of Russia will finally occur; and in that, Siberia will play a critical role. Indeed, it is very likely to be “the key region” that will determine whether regionalism succeeds this time or not.