POLAND AND RUSSIA HAVE CONFLICTING STRATEGIC INTERESTS (Ukraine)

Rzeczpospolita, Polish News Bulletin, Warsaw, Poland | Jul 13, 2005 | Joanna Strzelczyk

[RussianBoor]

Just a small correction, Ivan: Norilsk supports R&D on fuel cells because catalysts there are platinum and palladium, also produced by Norilsk :-)) Purely nickel catalysts aren't efficient enough.

[RussianBoor]

It is the height of hypocrisy for Russians to lament support of the Chechens when they themselves support separatists in Georgia.

Agreed. At the same time, isn't it the height of hypocrisy for the US to support Kosovo albanians, Taiwan and Tibet, while not supporting separation of Ulster, for instance?

[RussianBoor]

All right. Please give me examples of Ukrainians (living in Ukraine) being in conflict with Russia. Over what?

Ukraine's problems are solely of Ukraine's making, do you want it or not.

[Tailgunner Joe]

We should not support Kosovar separatists, but Taiwan and Tibet are not "separatists." Taiwan has never been part of the PRC so it could not be considered "separatist." Tibet is not historically part of China. It is a vanquished nation conquered by Communist bandits. We should support the Tibetans and all others who want to be free of communist slavery.

[RussianBoor]

I agree but technically all these cases are about separatism. Taiwan was a part of China for many centuries. Tibet was conquered all right but technically it is a part of China. On the other hand, absolute majority of population in Kosovo is now Albanian and by all democratic means it should be allowed to join Albania. Any referendum will say this. You see, one cannot judge the situation using different standards. You probably like the UK and do not like China. So Ulster should stay where it is and Tibet should not. There are many other cases like that. Indonesia, for one. Why East Timor is luckier than Falklands or Ulster?

Russian policy in Caucasus in fact is not as bad as you think. Russia's prime interest is to prevent further war, either in Abkhasia or in Chechnya, as much as possible. Very simple.

[Tailgunner Joe]

You see, one cannot judge the situation using different standards.

Of course we can. China has no legitimacy as a nation and no claim over it's own territory, much less Taiwan or Tibet. Separatists should not be supported in free nations which have a right to protect their borders, but China is a tyrannical communist empire, so separatists against China should be supported.

[j24]

Please give me examples of Ukrainians (living in Ukraine) being in conflict with Russia. Over what?

For example over Ukrainian elections. Ukraine's independence is a thorn in Putin's Russia's flesh. Haven't you heard that Russian OMON (riot police) was ready for action during the "orange revolution"? Do you think that Russians reacted in that way (even if that story about OMON on the outskirts of Kiev was not quite true) without any reason? I can suspect everything about Moscow's governement, but not that they do not know where their strategic interests lie.

Ukraine's problems are solely of Ukraine's making, do you want it or not.

It depends on what you mean: in the short run: yes, it is true. But in the long run Ukraine's problems are the problems of all the post-soviet countries (that is that countries that had emancipated themselves from the Russian occupation)

[j24]

There is a difference: a concentration camp or a POW camp. We should be careful about definitions.

[j24]

Wherever there is a definite territory, and we can make a plebiscite on this territory, and ask the people who live there, if the want to be an independent nation or not, then, if the answer is yes, they should have an independent state, no matter what. That's what I think.
Chechens want it? Let them have it. Taiwan wants it? Let them have it.

[sergey1973]

"Wherever there is a definite territory, and we can make a plebiscite on this territory, and ask the people who live there, if the want to be an independent nation or not, then, if the answer is yes, they should have an independent state, no matter what. That's what I think.
Chechens want it? Let them have it. Taiwan wants it? Let them have it."

Sounds nice, but utopian. What if some ethnic groups consider their borders unjust and want piece of their neighbors ? I.e. once Chechnya and Dagestan were united under Imam Shamil in 19th century during a war against Russian Empire. Chechnya in its present borders was drawn by Stalin and then redrawn by Kruschev. What if some Chechen Nationalists will demand return to Chechnya "historic borders". What if Islamists in Chechnya will say that Chechnya is only the first step of the "Jihad" against Russia and will call for "liberation" (read Islamic revolution) of the entire North Caucasus and beyond ?

What about American Southwest that is increasingly Hispanic ? Some Mexicans and their supporters who are illegally entering US through US-Mexico border are claiming that they are settling on the "historic Mexican homeland" that was "stolen" during Mexican-American war of 1848-1849.

What happens if Germans will demand return to previously German lands in Western Poland from which they or their ancestors were expelled at the end or after World War II ?
What if they want to secede from Poland and reunite with Germany ?

Who will determine which claims to which land are more valid ? On what basis ?

You see what happens when respect to currently internationally recognized borders (no matter how they came to be previously) is completely substituted by emotions about history and sympathies to this or that ethnic or national group? We may open Pandorra box of historical claims and counterclaims.

[j24]

Sounds nice, but utopian

This is not utopian. This is just a norm of decent behaviour, like: "Thou shall not kill". Has anybody in the human history complied wholly to this norm ?

What if some ethnic groups consider their borders unjust and want piece of their neighbors ?

Yes, this is a real problem. But I think it can be solved. First of all, they have to establish what lands they want to put to the plebiscite. This is of course a part of the negotiation. If there are disagreements, they can always divide the disputed territory into very small parts, and put every part to plebiscite separately. This has been tried out in the history: e.g. Polish-German plebiscites in 1918-1922 (I hope the dates are correct: I don't have my history book at hand).

What if some Chechen Nationalists will demand return to Chechnya "historic borders"

This is a real problem too. But you have the same problem with Basque nationalists for example, and Serb nationalists. All extremistts should be treated equally: i.e. harshly. But first make the referendum, then fight the extremists.

What happens if Germans will demand return to previously German lands in Western Poland from which they or their ancestors were expelled at the end or after World War II ? What if they want to secede from Poland and reunite with Germany ?

You found my raw nerve, because I'm Polish. But I'll tell you this: if there was a solid territory in Poland, inhabited by a majority of Germans, and those Germans would be in favour of independence, or the reunification with Germany, I would say (mind you, I'm risking banishment now) : yes, let them have it.

Who will determine which claims to which land are more valid ? On what basis ?

I think my criteria are very clear. The basis is the will of the nation.

You see what happens when respect to currently internationally recognized borders (no matter how they came to be previously) is completely substituted by emotions about history and sympathies to this or that ethnic or national group? We may open Pandorra box of historical claims and counterclaims.

I do not think so. My theory is fully rational. No emotions at all. I think that the situation when the internationally recognized borders are unjust is far more dangerous.

[A. Pole]

We need a help of western companies but now they are more interested in this Russian project through the Baltic Sea.

What do you think, why do they (Germans and others) want to get Russian oil through the Baltic Sea?

[A. Pole]

It is the height of hypocrisy for Russians to lament support of the Chechens when they themselves support separatists in Georgia.

"support of the Chechens"? By whom?

[A. Pole]

Incidentally, ArRosGazprom has been purchasing the gas at 54 dollars per 1,000 cu.m. since 2002, but selling it to consumers at 73 dollars per 1,000 cu.m.

Looks to me like standard business practice - you buy at lower price than you sell.

[anonymoussierra]

"Let's learn from the past but look toward future -:)))"Thank you"sergey1973"TRN -
"I'm afraid it might be too late; though nothing is too late: it depends on people actions and their motives as how far they want to push this. This is political cluster rollercoaster in its own sense. Neither side wants to let it go: either fore they are stick into old mentality of projecting power without hesitation according to their self absorb mentality. Please keep in mind all of you this has nothing to do with Russian or Polish people; this is strictly political impasse or strictly business; let God be a judge not us as who did what. I can't emphasize enough importance of being able to succeed you need to humble yourself and you need to let certain things go. Debate continues for it has receivers; how this debate ends is by decision of recipients to put on end and get to one point of conclusion. Once again all of you Putin neither Kwasniewski represent people desires. Facts are facts and none can be denied; history can be denied and manipulated for they are not written in stone: either fore nothing is but memories are; learn from mistakes."thank you all

[A. Pole]

Taiwan was a part of China for many centuries.

And Taiwan was the seat of nationalist Chinese government after the Communist takover of the mainland. So in a sense Taiwan is MORE Chinese than the mainland.

[Tailgunner Joe]

Is not the UK harboring Zakayev? Hasn't Putin alluded to this since the London bombings? When Russia supports separatists in other nations it undermines its own tenuous claims to moral superiority.

Considering that Basayev himself fought alongside Russians in support of Abkhaz separatists, Russia should have learned a lesson about the foolishness of such a course of action and the potential for blowback.

[A. Pole]

Basayev himself fought alongside Russians in support of Abkhaz separatists

Did he? Could you elaborate?

[Tailgunner Joe]

He even called his brigade the "Abkhaz Battalion."

I know that Georgians have a hard time sympathizing with the Russians about their Chechens problem since they supported Basayev's beheading of Georgian Christians in Abkhazia in 1992 and 1993. Now Russia has "UN peacekeepers" in Abkhazia, and they complain about the UN and Nato in the Balkans!

Although Basayev is hated by a lot of Chechens, there is a widespread belief that he owes his freedom to the loyalty of a network of supporters that stretches across the whole region and dates back to his involvement in the coalition that joined the Abkhaz fighting against Georgia in 1992-3.

Ruslan, a former fighter who was with Basayev in that conflict, told IWPR, “He’s kept a lot of old friends in the North Caucasus since the war in Abkhazia.”

In Abkhazia, Basayev led a battalion and was commander of the army troops of the Confederation of Mountain Peoples, a group formed in 1991 to unite the nations of the North and South Caucasus. Its president was Musa Shanibov, now a lecturer at the Kabardino-Balkar State University in Nalchik. Basayev later became the deputy defence minister of Abkhazia.

Ruslan believes that Basayev spends a lot of time outside Chechnya, moving constantly around the North Caucasus and relying on old comrades.

“There were people fighting in Abkhazia from practically all of the nationalities in the North Caucasus: Kabardinians, Cherkess, Balkars, even whole units of Cossacks,” Ruslan said. “And naturally, Basayev, being the deputy defence minister, had contact with all of them and continues to have contacts now.” - LINK

On October 2, 1992, Chechen and other North Caucasian volunteers blasted their way into the Abkhaz city of Gagra, on the frontline in Georgia's burgeoning civil war. Basayev was at their lead and, indeed, was soon de facto commander of the volunteer army of the Confederation of the Peoples of the Caucasus, the ideological brainchild of intellectual Musa Shanibov. Forces under Basayev's control soon outnumbered even the Abkhaz. The volunteers saw action in nearly every major battle in the Abkhaz War, hardened into what Basayev called his "Abkhaz Battalion." The troops would later make up the nucleus of the Chechen armed forces. - LINK

[A. Pole]

What you presented demonstrates that he "fought alongside Russians" only in a sense that Chechens or other Islamists are Russian. You could say as well that Basayev is Russian himself.