Ukrajina - naslage istorijskih kontroverzi

[namenski]

Украјина као меки трбух Русије је историјска и геополитичка реалност, само сам написао да нема података о веродостојности ове изјаве и да је, по свој прилици, производ маште или калем на неку реченицу коју је овај некада изговорио.

Искрено бих волео да ме неко демантује.

 

Како си изненада прелетео у Други светски рат, морам да кажем - руку у ватру сам могао да ставим да је Крим био део Рајхскомесаријата Украјина. Којим то подацима располажеш?

Подели их са нама, знам да ти неће тешко пасти  ^_^

Pa zar nije bio deo, Krim/Gotenland mislim, deo RKU?

Zatek'o si me malo, znam da je bilo nekih trvenja izmedju izvodjaca radova na terenu, bilo je i nesto oko posebnog statusa za otprilike bivsu Tavricesku guberniju, Krim sa zaledjem...

 

I kad pomenuh izvodjace radova na terenu, interesantno je da ih je vecina, onako po secanju, umrla u svojim krevetima u dubokoj starosti: Gottlob Berger, onaj Himlerov pomocnik, nacelnik staba SS istatijaznam jos, koji je onako zaduzio Angloamerikance spasavanjem njihovih POW da su mu i 25 godina zatvora smanjili na 10, pa Otto Brautigam koji ni luk jeo ni luk mirisao po Ukrajini, zavrsio u zapadnonemackom ministarstvu inostranih poslova, pa Georg Leibbrandt, 1 expert takoreci, ugledan i kao strucnjak za Istok sa sve americkim univerzitetima, glava jednog i jedinog udruzenja Svaba/folksdojcera kojem nece da na pamet padne da trazi povratak u zemlju svojih predaka i povracaj imovine i sazaljenje nad sudbinom jadnih Nemaca koje ni krive ni duzne proterase sa vekovnih ognjista, Landsmannschaft der Deutschen aus Russland   ...

 

 

Edit: nabrajajuci ove gore, setih se, u vezi sa Ukrajinom, jos jednog zasluznog, Volodymyr Kubiyovych, itekako zasluzan za svinjarije tokom 2. svetskog rata, takodje umro od starosti, u Parizu, ali i Enciklopedije ciji je bio urednik i koja je, ma koliko emigrantska i hladnoratovska jos uvek podobra literatura i izvor glede Ukrajine.

Edited March 12, 2014 by namenski_01

[namenski]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKBEgnIA-hI

[namenski]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dep_rkSmGho

[namenski]

O Srbima (i ostalim Juznim Slovenima) u ukrajinskoj kulturi, medjusobnim uticajima...

 

 

Obaska Myxajlo Maksymovyč kao prvi rektor Univerziteta u Kijevu...

[Radoye]

O Srbima (i ostalim Juznim Slovenima) u ukrajinskoj kulturi, medjusobnim uticajima...

 

 

Obaska Myxajlo Maksymovyč kao prvi rektor Univerziteta u Kijevu...

 

 

[Yoda]

Idemo na temu.

[porucnik vasic]

Нешто Волођа поменуо Никиту и неке злочине по Украјини.

[Prospero]

Crimea: What Could Have Been

 

Vasily Aksenov’s 1979 utopian novel “The Island of Crimea” in today’s context

 

By Alexei Bayer, March 16, 2014.

 

 

 

This is the second time in history that Crimea has seized global attention. Previously, it was in 1853, at the start of the Crimean War. Notably, that was a time when Russia got its clock cleaned on the battlefield by the combined power of the British Empire, Second French Empire and Ottoman Empire. No wonder, then, Crimea holds a special meaning in Russia’s collective psyche.

Beyond the military frame of the Black Sea machinations of Europe’s great powers, there is another episode to be reported. Although it is a literary one, it is no less meaningful in the current political context.

In 1979, Soviet dissident writer Vasily Aksenov wrote a utopian novel The Island of Crimea. It was based on a fantasy that Crimea was an island that had managed to break away from the Soviet Union during the Russian Civil War. Over time, it had become a free-wheeling, multicultural, open and prosperous democracy.

 

Soviet-era Crimea

The real geography and history of Crimea, of course, was quite different. To start with, Crimea is not an island, but a peninsula. It juts out into the Black Sea and is linked to the mainland by the narrow Isthmus of Perekop. The Red Army entered it in 1920.

In 1954, although Crimea was then mostly populated by Russian settlers, then-Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev transferred it from Russia to Ukraine. It was a purely administrative decision, since Khrushchev could never conceive of Russia and Ukraine parting ways.

Nor could Aksenov imagine anything of the kind back in 1979. During the Soviet era, Crimea was an intensely beautiful summer resort. It was freer, more free-wheeling and easy-going than grim and grey Moscow or Leningrad.

But it was still a dingy Soviet place, offering dilapidated sanatoria (resorts) for the proletariat and camp beds for rent in private homes for vacationers.

 

Looking to Taiwan

When looking for a real-world model for his utopian Crimea, Aksenov took the island of Taiwan, which avoided a communist takeover in the Chinese Civil War and became a technologically advanced, prosperous and, eventually, democratic state.

The Kuomintang-led government decamped to Taiwan when it lost control of the mainland in 1949. Thereafter, the island was governed directly through the National Assembly, a legislative body supposedly representing all of China — not just Taiwan. The institution survived under this fiction until 2005.

The KMT army also fled to Taiwan, and it dominated the “national” government in its island exile as a military dictatorship in the early post-Civil War decades.

While China still regards Taiwan as its breakaway province, in Taiwan, there has been a push in recent years to declare outright independence. The idea is supported by a majority of Taiwanese. However, Beijing is adamantly opposed to any such steps.

But what do Aksenov’s utopian novel and the present grim geopolitical reality have in common?

 

 

The last stand of the southern White Army

Crimea did at one brief point look very similar to what Taiwan came to be in the 1950s. By 1920, the Bolsheviks were clearly winning the Civil War in Russia and had asserted control over most of the former empire. Lots of people all over the vast Russian Empire had reason to fear Lenin and his cohorts.

Meanwhile, noblemen, landowners, businessmen, clergy, urban professionals and ordinary middle class people had found refuge in Crimea. That was also the location to which the White Army — the largest resistance faction to the communist Red Army’s takeover — had retreated. It was commanded by Baron Wrangel, who was also the head of the government.

But, unlike the KMT in Taiwan, the Whites were not able to hold Crimea. Some 140,000 anti-Bolshevik White refugees following Wrangel were evacuated by sea and subsequently dispersed throughout Europe. 50,000 White Army officers who stayed behind, trusting in the Bolsheviks’ reassurances, were subsequently massacred on Lenin’s orders.

 

 

The precarious statelet

Taiwan has a varied population, consisting of early Han Chinese migrants, refugees from the mainland and their descendants and about half a million indigenous people. The latter belong to an Austronesian ethnic group related to inhabitants of the Philippines, Malaysia and other Pacific Rim countries.

In Crimea, the original population was Crimean Tatars, who were collectively deported to Central Asia in 1943, allegedly for welcoming German occupiers. They were allowed to return only after communism collapsed and now make up less than 15% of the region’s population.

While China never relinquished its claim on Taiwan, Russia parted with Crimea with relative ease. In 1994, Russia even joined with the United States and Great Britain to guarantee Ukraine’s territorial integrity in exchange for Kiev’s agreement to give up Soviet-era nuclear weapons that remained on its territory.

But in Aksenov’s novel, the independent Crimea finally comes to a bad end when Moscow decides it no longer wants to tolerate a free and prosperous capitalist statelet so close to its borders.

Staging a military operation eerily prescient of Vladimir Putin’s underhanded invasion, the Soviet Army of the story occupies Crimea. Most of the novel’s protagonists get killed.

[Filipenko]

Dobri su. Po ovome bi se trebalo zaključiti da je cela armija Belih, sa sve teretom silnih plemića, zemljoposednika, biznismena, urbanih profesionalaca, sveštenstva dakle imala 200 hiljada (pod Vrangelovom komandom). Pa to bi crvena armija počistila samo da je poslala konje u juriš, bez jahača. I naravno, pošto istorija građanskog rata kreće od 1920. oni su se eto na Krimu zatekli, i samo su mirno želeli da žive svoje živote, a nisu bili u paničnom begu od pravedne osvete crvene armije nakon silnijeh masakara koje su počinili kidišući na središte ruske zemlje iz, gle čuda, današnje Ukrajine. Uvek za takvim pravednicima koje je sustigla zla (s)udba pustim suzu, providnu, kad već ne mogu belu.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Filipenko

[namenski]

Dobri su. Po ovome bi se trebalo zaključiti da je cela armija Belih, sa sve teretom silnih plemića, zemljoposednika, biznismena, urbanih profesionalaca, sveštenstva dakle imala 200 hiljada (pod Vrangelovom komandom). Pa to bi crvena armija počistila samo da je poslala konje u juriš, bez jahača. I naravno, pošto istorija građanskog rata kreće od 1920. oni su se eto na Krimu zatekli, i samo su mirno želeli da žive svoje živote, a nisu bili u paničnom begu od pravedne osvete crvene armije nakon silnijeh masakara koje su počinili kidišući na središte ruske zemlje iz, gle čuda, današnje Ukrajine. Uvek za takvim pravednicima koje je sustigla zla (s)udba pustim suzu, providnu, kad već ne mogu belu.

Super su: tajvanisali i uzivali u blagodetima demokratije, dok je onih cirka 150 miliona izvlacilo noge iz vekovnog blata, opismenjavalo se i skolovalo na kursevima, postajali inzenjeri, stotine hiljada inzenjera i u 15-ak godina nadmasivali zemlje koje su se nesmetano razvijale vekovima, napravilo mlaznjake i kosmicke brodove, ICBM-ove i pruzilo prliku slobodarskim Krimljanima da postanu sila kojom ce da se kite i busaju u grudi ruske junacke.

Edited March 20, 2014 by namenski_01

[Prospero]

nisam znao za sitan™ detalj da prezidijum sssr nije imao kvorum kada je krim dodelio ukrajini 1954.
 
 

Why Khruschev gave Russia’s Crimea to Ukraine
Written By: Andrew Rosthorn
Published: March 18, 2014 Last modified: March 18, 2014


Between 1854 and 1856, The Czar of All The Russias lost a quarter of a million soldiers defending the Crimea against the French, British, Turks and Sardinians.
 
Lenin and Trotsky lost a hundred thousand Red Army soldiers capturing the Crimea from the Whites in 1920. In 1941 and 1942, Stalin lost another hundred thousand men besieged in Sebastopol by von Manstein’s Army Group South.  Another 18,000 Russians died retaking the city from the Germans in 1944.
So why, only ten years later, did the Soviet Premier Nikita Khruschev give the Crimea to Ukraine?
 
Vladimir Putin claimed not to know how it had happened when he signed his defiant treaty to annex Crimea today: ‘No one could imagine that Russia and Ukraine could become different states. But the USSR broke up. I don’t know why Khrushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine. Maybe he wanted to hide his own wrongdoings towards Ukrainians in 1930s.’
 
American chatter about Khruschev’s mother and second wife both being Ukrainian was rejected last week by Khruschev’s son Sergei, now a senior fellow at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island and a naturalised US citizen. In a radio interview Sergei Khruschev said, ‘It was just business.’

His father, the man who shocked the USSR by denouncing Stalin’s crimes and saved us all from nuclear war with personal Telex messages to President Kennedy during the Cuban missile crisis, had been on the way to lunch in Moscow one day in January 1954 when he mentioned to colleagues: ‘Yes, comrades, there is an opinion to deliver Crimea to Ukraine.’
 
Pravda gave it six lines on the front page. Pravda.ru revealed the details in 2009: ’The agenda of the session of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which took place January 25, 1954, contained a question about the delivery of the Crimean region to the structure of the Ukrainian SSR. The discussion of the question took only 15 minutes. The participants of the meeting approved the decree, and the region was given away to Ukraine for free.
 
‘The question should have been submitted to the open discussion of the Supreme Council of the Russian SSR. Moreover, a referendum should have been conducted to find out the opinion of the residents of the two republics. Nothing of that happened. The Presidium of the Supreme Council gathered for a session on February 19, 1954 – only 13 of 27 members were present. There was no quorum, but the decision was adopted unanimously.’
 
The February 19, 1954, decree, published by Pravda on February 27, gave plausible reasons that might have been used as arguments for President Putin’s frightening activity of last week. In 1954 the stated reasons were: ‘the economic commonalities, territorial closeness, and communication and cultural links’ between Crimea and Ukraine. In the 1959 census, the Soviet Union’s Crimean holiday playground and Black Sea naval base was inhabited by 858,000 ethnic Russians and only 268,000 Ukrainians. The survivors of the unfortunate Crimean Tatars who were the original inhabitants of the peninsula had still not been allowed to return from their ghastly 1944 exile in the GULAG in Uzbekistan.
 

Dr Sergei Khrushchev
 
Dr. Sergei Khruschev was an engineer on guidance systems for missiles and Soviet space craft before he emigrated to the USA in 1991. His first doctorate was from the Ukrainian Academy. His own father had been a fitter repairing machinery underground in a Ukrainian coal mine before he was catapulted into high level Soviet politics after the Russian revolution. Sergei’s grandfather had been a Russian migrant, married to a Ukrainian, working as a coal miner in the Ukrainian Donbas steel town known as Yuzovka. This astonishing industrial centre had been founded in 1869 as Hughesovka by the Merthyr-born iron master John Hughes and 100 Welsh miners and steel workers who went with him to Ukraine to make steel for Czar Alexander II’s navy. Hughes’s four sons ran the coal mines, blast furnaces and steel mills until the revolution of 1917, after which the city became Stalin from 1924 and Stalino in 1929.
 
In 1961, during Nikita Khruschev’s second wave of de-Stalinisation, the city took a new name, this time Donetsk from the Severtsky Donets river. Their leading football team Shakhtar Donetsk, known as the ‘Miners’ or the ‘Moles’ , were UEFA Cup winners in 2009 and trace their origins back to the Hughesovka Sports Association founded by the Welshmen in 1911.
 
On March 1, pro-Russian demonstrators lowered the Ukrainian flag on the Donetsk Oblast Regional State administration building and after Sunday’s predictable landslide in the pro-Russian referendum in the Crimea, the council of the Donetsk Oblast  voted to have their own referendum about their relationship with Russia.
 
Sergei Khruschev edited his father’s memoirs before they were smuggled to Western Europe and told reporters last week that the true motives for giving the Crimea to Ukraine  were all about heavy engineering and irrigation, damming the River Dnieper to generate electricity and deliver water to the dry steppes of Ukraine and Crimea. He said he could recall his father’s words: ‘As the Dnieper and the hydro-electric dam is on Ukrainian territory, let’s transfer the rest of the territory of Crimea under Ukrainian supervision, so they will be responsible for everything.’
 
‘And they did it’, said Dr Khrushchev. ‘It was not a political move, it was not an ideological move – it was just business.
 
‘And now we have this speculation that my father wanted to satisfy Ukrainian democracy, that he even made a gift to his wife, my mother, because she was Ukrainian – all this has nothing with reality. It was just an economical issue, and not political.’
 
The son of Stalin’s political commissar at the Battle of Stalingrad has no time for a military solution in 2014: ‘I hope there will be no shooting, because nobody is interested there in fighting. And the Ukrainian military who are serving in Crimea, they are Crimeans and they don’t want to start fighting that will be against the interest of their own people and their own country. And I think the Russians also don’t want to fight. Why do they have to fight?’
 
He won’t have forgotten that his father’s first wife died in a Ukrainian famine, that his father went to school in Yuzovka, worked as a Communist party organiser in Yuzovka, Kharkov [Kharkiv] and Kiev [now Kyiv] before being taken to see Stalin in Moscow by Lazar Kaganovich [Kogan], the Jewish general secretary of the Central Committee of the Ukrainian Communist Party. When a famine broke out in Ukraine in 1946, as Stalin was crushing the Ukrainian nationalist resistance, Nikita Khrushchev, as first secretary of the Ukrainian Communist Party, dared to resist Stalin’s demands for ever more Ukrainian grain – ruthless demands which had beggared Ukraine in the 1930s. It was Khruschev’s ability to distribute food in Ukraine and re-start  agriculture that took him back to Moscow in 1949 to work again for the megalomaniac in the Kremlin.
 
Faced by today’s deadly revival of nationalism, touted by kleptocrats in Moscow and Kyiv, would Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev have had a response to yesterday’s sabre-rattling by the British Foreign Secretary? 
 
William Hague’s frightening simplicity: ‘For the UK and her allies the Crimea remains part of Ukraine’ would surely have been judged reckless by the former commissar at the battles of Stalingrad and Kursk. Khruschev’s personal conduct in the years of Stalin’s tyranny might have been very questionable, but we know from our own experience that he was neither a nationalist, nor a kleptocrat, nor a warmonger.
 
Neither was the Soviet Union’s last premier, Mikhail Gorbachev. Despite being a regular critic of Putin’s authoritarian regime Gorby described the Crimean referendum result as ‘a happy event’ in today’s Slon.ru business news. They report him saying it ‘showed people really wanted to return to Russia’ and that the people of Donetsk [formerly Hughesovka in Eastern Ukraine] should also vote to settle their own future.
 
One could argue that yesterday’s annoying announcement from William Hague: ’We are witnessing a clear attempt to pave the way for the annexation of part of the sovereign territory of an independent European state, through military force and an illegal and illegitimate referendum’ merits the notorious Khruschev reply, as delivered at the United Nations General Assembly in 1960.
 
After listening to provocative speeches from Lorenzo Sumulong of the Philippines and Harold Macmillan for the United Kingdom, the Soviet Premier grabbed one of his new German shoes and rapped the top of the USSR delegate-desk with its heel. Harold Macmillan famously calmed the row between thermonuclear nations by asking the Irish assembly president Frederick Boland for a translation. The translation came years later. Khruschev’s regular interpreter Viktor Sukhodrev explained that his boss had taken off a pair of ill-fitting new shoes well before the annoying speeches. When he responded to America’s allies by banging his fist, he hit the delegate-desk so hard that his watch stopped ‘which only infuriated him further and prompted the switch to the shoe’.


Top Picture: Nikita Khruschev

with General Kirichenko, Alexey  Chuyanov, and General Yeryomenko on the Stalingrad Front on December 1, 1942. Novosti Archive.

[hazard]

Tako bese i Jugoslavija dodelila Albaniji neko parce Kosova da bi ovi mogli da grade neku elektranu?

[Roger Sanchez]

 

Under capitalism this would have been impossible. In history there could not be and cannot be such relations between republics. In the past, and especially under capitalism, desires for territorial seizure and the desire of strong countries to feast on the territories of weak countries formed the very basis of relations between countries. Only in the conditions of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was such a just solution of all territorial issues between union republics possible based on administrative and economic advisability with complete mutual friendship and the fraternal cooperation of their peoples. The transfer of the Crimean Oblast' from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR meets the interests of the Russian and Ukrainian peoples and the overall state interests of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics…Both in the distant and not-so-distant past enemies repeatedly tried to take the Crimean Peninsula from Russia and use it to pillage and ravage Russian lands, and to create a military base there to attack Russia and Ukraine. But more than once in joint battle the Russian and Ukrainian peoples severely beat the insolent invaders and threw them out of Ukraine and Crimea. Ukraine and Crimea are closely tied by a commonality of economic interests; this has already been eloquently said here by both the presenters and the comrades who spoke. The cultural ties between Crimea and Ukraine have especially grown and deepened. The transfer of the Crimea Oblast' to the Ukrainian SSR will undoubtedly strengthen these traditional ties still further …

We know and are glad that the Russian, Ukrainian, and all the other peoples of our boundless country will henceforth develop and strengthen their fraternal friendship. Let our great Motherland, the fraternal Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, strengthen and develop!

We have no other questions today.

I declare today's meeting closed.

^_^

[Prospero]

treba da kvotuješ sledeću rečenicu: nema sssr-a - nema pravednog rešenja sporova u duhu međusobnog prijateljstva.

 

bummer za kijev

[cirus]

Tako bese i Jugoslavija dodelila Albaniji neko parce Kosova da bi ovi mogli da grade neku elektranu?

 

Не доделили него дозволили да нам потопе део долине Дрима због акумулационог језера - Фиерза 1978.