Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Should some of Russia's regions in the Far East become their own countries? The people there have their own culture and are extremely distinctive (Asian looking) to the Slavic Russians in West, who are full blown whites.
Thoughts?
I do not see any real benefits for the Russian Far East or Siberia etc. to break away. I mean what is the point? Will it help improve their economy? No. Will it help improve their health care? No.
Don't you know that Russia is the successor state of the Soviet Union?
Successor state by way of economics (by way of taking responsibility for all Soviet debts), in exchange for a seat on the UN Security Council, and the fact as a USSR republic, had 51% of the population of the USSR, which was a major factor in the UN and global community prescribing successor status to Russia.
All the former republics, the the exception of the Baltic states who abstained from voting, agreed with Russia becoming the de facto successor to the USSR, due to the agreements reached, which basically was every other republics way to exit without owing any obligations, what a great deal that was for them.
However, this does not at all mean Russia as it is today, is somehow solely responsible for the conduct of the USSR, given its government and institutions are in no way associated with the USSR (if it retained the Soviet government, I would see/agree with your point). I fail to see how Russia today, is somehow responsible for the USSR past its agreements to take on debts and other obligations. Every republic and many of its people were full participants in the USSR.
It gets even more complicated in who was even controlling the USSR during events; do you want to prescribe responsibility according to which republic was being represented in the Soviet leadership? For example, Georgia could be blamed for all things that happened under Stalin, Ukraine could be blamed for all things that happened under Brezhnev, etc. It is really a ridiculous notion.
No it's not. Serbia had to rejoin the UN after the dissolution of Yugoslavia. It was more identical to how Czechoslovakia split up.
The mentality is kinda like this:
The dissolution of USSR= Russia+others.
The dissolution of Yugoslavia= Several states.
The biggest difference was that the new states from Yugoslavia, and the US, opposed Serbia's successor status, and it did not have the land and population proportion Russia had.
Everyone agreed with Russia being declared the successor state.
This is a stupid thread anyways. Most of the people living in Asian part of Russia are ethnic Russians. They will never support independence.
Exactly. Why would the Russians that live in the Eastern part and who are the majority of population, would want to split from the Russians living in Western part of the country?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Should Russia split already?
I guess Germany was not a country before 1990 then.
