pact can be assessed from different points of view.
In principle - that they wanted the Bolsheviks - the Russian conditional and unconditional Estonian? They wanted development to the same scenario, which carried out Stalin in 20 years.
- based on the declared "right of nations to self-determination", the Estonian Bolsheviks declared the independence of the Estonian Socialist Republic. Which vsilu its socialist orientation, enters into an alliance with other Soc. republics to form the new - socialist state within the borders of crown lands of the Russian Empire, but with Reset internal boundaries, according to the principle of national self-determination.
In general, this is all that mutili Bolsheviks in part gos.ustroystva.
similar situation has been and with Finland. only it was meant friendly, but outside the state. Since the preservation of the Grand Duchy of Finland under the hand of the Red or White King not postulated to nation-building.
At the end of the Great War - Nikolai Alexandrovich felt first need to get rid of from V.Kn.Finlyandskogo and V.Kn.Polskogo. The Bolsheviks also were not interested in Finland, apart from the establishment there of the union of the regime.
in Estonia were group-oriented an alliance with the West and the alliance with the East.
Second - this is the Estonian Estonian Bolsheviks and the Whites (probably mainly from the Germans, the Estonian identity navryadli national elite could comprehend such a complex union).
first - is in the best position. Because they had a choice - the Germans and the Entente, nor interested in creating a pro-Western regime.
As a result - they have the support of both. Entente left by German troops in the Baltics, while supporting pro-Western modes of military force.
What is the difference between the first and second? The fact that the latter operate within the Russian Empire, pereplaniruya internal borders, or claiming within it the principles of social, self-determination, etc. That is - all of them eventually returned to re-create the saved state with the modified criteria.
The first - certainly acted against the interests of the Russian state in all its guises. As an agent of the annexation of the National territory. Agents of external forces, carrying out the task of the deposition of the strategically important territories under the control of foreign countries. This function has no nothing to do with the "right of nations to self-determination."
good for the Estonians that they became an ally of external anti-Russian forces? None. For them it is very bad. Not having an unconditional right to a territory not having enough people, the Estonians themselves can not administer the territory. They become an object control from outside. That is - to lose a national subjectivity.Given inherent in their independence facto annexation of the Territory's laws of the Russian Empire by their existence is the full protection of illegal alien regained possession, and the confrontation with the legitimate owner.
Naturally, the confrontation with Russia and Russian - is in itself a sentence that is not appealable. But even without this fact, such a model national structure - deprives nation of any prospects for development, including the mechanism of negative selection.
So - Estonians actually signed a verdict as constituted nation. The question of its enforcement - is still open. But the process of putting - is already running. Of course, their own hands
0 comments:
Post a Comment