Crimea, the Tinderbox | Hacker News Reader

Crimea, the Tinderbox

nytimes.com

34 pointsytNumbers16 comments

Crimea is routinely described as “pro-Russian,” given that an estimated 58 percent of the population of two million is ethnic Russian, with another 24 percent Ukrainian and 12 percent Crimean Tatar.

Because Stalin deported, murdered or otherwise replaced people who used to live there.[1] Genocide works.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tat...

>Because

No. Russians had already become by far the largest ethnic group in Crimea before any deportation had taken place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Demographics

The deportation happened in 1944, the 1939 census shows Russians at 49,6%. Crimean Tatars were down to 19,4%.

That still doesn't excuse Russian intervention the last few days, though.

>Genocide works.

Genocide and deportations or ethnic cleansing are distinct things. Deporting hundreds of thousands of people is already bad enough, no need to use terms that don't apply to it.

I just watched two BBC programs about the Great War (WWI) [1] and the similarities between that episode in history and this one are chilling.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think we will have WWIII but the way the pieces are moving on the set (at least so far) is eerily familiar.

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/tv-and-radio-r...

EDIT: in case people as for details, the most obvious is the treaty that Belgium and UK had entered into which became the casus belli for the UK once Germany invaded Belgium.

Today there's the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances [2] between Russia, the USA, and the UK and Ukraine of course.

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security...

I'm surprised this situation hasn't materialised earlier. With all the "forced migrations" happening during and after WWII both to and from the area of todays Ukraine, the country became a tinderbox a long long time ago. Most of that is the result of Churchill and Roosevelt giving up on that part of Europe during Yalta, for the benefit of Stalin.

It's not only that Crimea is massively pro-Russian, it's the fact that it was a part of Russian Federation (a part of Soviet Union back then) before it was "gifted" to Ukraine by Khrushchev in 1954. It was more of a formality back then, but it doesn't change the fact that a lot of its population still consider Crimea a part of Russia.

After they deported the original ethnic group, the Crimean Tatars

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tat...

World War One began a hundred years ago, and today it feels like Europe hasn't progressed at all in those hundred years. Sadly, the Marx Brothers "Duck Soup" remains as relevant as ever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_Soup_(1933_film)

You think Europe hasn't progressed? Tell me how many shots Russian and Ukranian troops have fired at each other (at the time of me writing this comment).

Alternatively, how many shots have soldiers from the UK, France, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Sweden, and Norway fired at each other in the past 60 years? Sure, there's more the Europe than the west, but we're doing pretty well when it comes to peace in that area.

Or, on a more practical note, how many millions of dollars of value has been added to the economies of European states due to agreements such as the EFTA, CEFTA, and the EU Customs Union? How many trade disputes have been resolved?

I agree. Freedom of movement and capital has been a giant leap, and something no other region in the world has achieved. In the mean time if you travel within the US don't be surprised if you are stopped at a random DHS checkpoint.

I'm not aware of such checkpoints in the US. Unless you count airports, but airport security is invasive and terrible everywhere in the world.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Border_Patrol_i...

> Freedom of movement and capital has been a giant leap, and something no other region in the world has achieved.

I agree that it is a giant leap, but disagree that no other region of the world has achieved this. India and China have larger populations than the EU. And, the USA has built itself on having decent freedom of movement between the 50 states, and has far fewer barriers to that movement.

I take it that your comment refers to border patrol overreach and note that even Schengen (EU border agreement) allows border patrol up to 50km past the border.

Comparing 25+ countries vs 1 country makes the point.

Sixty years before the WWI was also an unprecedented time of peace. I'm not saying that we're looking at anything similar here but people used to believe that trade and wealth it generates are so great that Europeans would never go to war. And then they did.

Another argument missing the point is that Russia currently is in no state for any large organized military operation. It's true. But it was also true after the WWI, in 1920, and it didn't stop them from trying[1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Soviet_War_in_1...

From Wikipedia [1] , in the 60 years prior to WWI (1854-1914), the following wars were fought within and between the Great Powers in Europe:

1. The 1863-4 Polish Rebellion (in the Russian Empire). 2. The 1866 Austro-Prussian War. 3. The 1870-1 Franco-Prussian War.

And this is not counting assorted wars between Great Powers and smaller countries (e.g. Prussia against Denmark) or civil wars in smaller countries (like Spain).

Seriously, Europe's come a long way. There have basically only been the Soviet suppression of uprisings in Eastern Bloc countries during the Cold War, and the assorted Yugoslav Wars. Not perfect, but not too shabby.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conflicts_in_Europe#19t...

Europe as a whole has made a lot of progress since WWI. Russia not so much.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com