Top 10 results of NATO Baltics' membership

[jonas]

On March 29, 2004 Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia joined NATO. It was a historic turning point for the defence policy and security of the whole region. The event marked not only a strategic, but also an emotional period in the transition and integration of the Baltic States into the Transatlantic community.
wiktorkovalski.livejournal.com/40489.html

 

[gazzzwp]

I tend to take a very simplistic view that membership is their way of ensuring as far as possible that the iron yolk of the USSR never hijacks their nations again.

It will take generations for those nations hijacked to regain their wealth and development that was stolen from them after WW2.

No amount of Russian protest is likely to change matters.

 

[KiwiRob]

I tend to take a very simplistic view that membership is their way of ensuring as far as possible that the iron yolk of the USSR never hijacks their nations again.

It will take generations for those nations hijacked to regain their wealth and development that was stolen from them after WW2.

No amount of Russian protest is likely to change matters.

None of those countries had long histories as independant nations they were part of Russia, part of Germany, part of Poland, so what was stolen from them? 10-15 years of independance at best. I'm writing this post from my hotel in Klaipeda, you can see the German/Prussian influence everywhere.

 

[swerve]

20 years of independence, not 10-15 at most, & they'd had growing independence movements (especially in Estonia IIRC) for decades before that.

What was stolen from them? Many killed, mass deportations to the Gulag & exile i remote corners of the USSR, state-directed immigration of Russians which was well on the way to turning Latvians & Estonians into minorities in their own countries . . . the USSR was trying to turn them into peoples like the Mari or Komi or Mordovians, swamped by Russians & becoming more & more Russianised.

Klaipeda is atypical. It was mostly German (or Germanised - Lithuanians who'd lost their identity) by WW1, after being German-ruled for 500 years. BTW, the rest of Lithuania wasn't quite part of Poland. Poland & Lithuania united in the 14th century when the ruling prince of Lithuania (then pagan, the largest country in Europe, & expanding) was bribed to become a Catholic. The bribe consisted of a young Polish princess - & Poland. The united country was called Poland-Lithuania for a few hundred years. Lithuania had a lot of history as an independent country.

 

[Feanor]

20 years of independence, not 10-15 at most, & they'd had growing independence movements (especially in Estonia IIRC) for decades before that.

What was stolen from them? Many killed, mass deportations to the Gulag & exile i remote corners of the USSR, state-directed immigration of Russians which was well on the way to turning Latvians & Estonians into minorities in their own countries . . . the USSR was trying to turn them into peoples like the Mari or Komi or Mordovians, swamped by Russians & becoming more & more Russianised.

Klaipeda is atypical. It was mostly German (or Germanised - Lithuanians who'd lost their identity) by WW1, after being German-ruled for 500 years. BTW, the rest of Lithuania wasn't quite part of Poland. Poland & Lithuania united in the 14th century when the ruling prince of Lithuania (then pagan, the largest country in Europe, & expanding) was bribed to become a Catholic. The bribe consisted of a young Polish princess - & Poland. The united country was called Poland-Lithuania for a few hundred years. Lithuania had a lot of history as an independent country.

One might compare it to early-Renaissance France, where each province spoke it's own language and considered itself Gascone first, and French second. Only an intense policy of Frenchification allowed the union of these entities into a nation-state. Yet today it's a different picture. Imagine the USSR pursued a similar policy instead of providing a space for indigenous cultures (funding their arts, education, etc.) Today there might not be any Mordovians, or Balkarians. Or Estonians. Should we go on a crusade to liberate Aquitane from the evil French imperialists, and help them restore Occitanic culture to it's "rightful place"?

You're going to get into even more trouble when you look at the Caucuses, where third village is a new ethnicity and language.

 

[swerve]

Quite a big difference between France & Russia.

There were no forced or state-sponsored population movements to change the ethnic balance of provinces of France. The Russian Empire & the USSR both did that, with people being deported from the Empire, or within the USSR, & Russians being moved in. Nor did the French state attempt to decapitate potentially rebellious subject peoples by selective deportation or massacre of leaders & organisers. The USSR both murdered en masse & deported to camps, & the Empire deported outside its borders.

The French policy was originally merely the imposition of an administrative standard 500 years ago requiring that official documents be in French. Previously, legal documents were generally in Latin & often poorly understood. The original intention was to make documents more accessible & comprehensible to the central administration rather than force minorities to assimilate. That came much later. It was never even proposed until the revolution, AFAIK, & wasn't an effective policy until standardised free & compulsory primary education - in French only.

BTW, each province of France did not speak its own language. There were distinctly non-French languages in border areas (German in Alsace, Basque in the far SW, Flemish/Dutch around Liege, Italian dialects in the far SE, Catalan in Roussillon) & Brittany (Breton is Celtic, closely related to Welsh), but apart from that there was a dialect continuum, with two main written forms, what we now call French in the north & Provençal (Occitan) in the south. It's a bit like Russian & Ukrainian.

 

[Feanor]

Quite a big difference between France & Russia.

There were no forced or state-sponsored population movements to change the ethnic balance of provinces of France. The Russian Empire & the USSR both did that, with people being deported from the Empire, or within the USSR, & Russians being moved in. Nor did the French state attempt to decapitate potentially rebellious subject peoples by selective deportation or massacre of leaders & organisers. The USSR both murdered en masse & deported to camps, & the Empire deported outside its borders.

The basic principle is the same, however. It's assimilation with the intent of forming a nation-state. Without getting into a messy argument about your claim of "murder en-masse", the primary point here is that lots of nationalities have historically disappeared, and new ones are frequently created.

The French policy was originally merely the imposition of an administrative standard 500 years ago requiring that official documents be in French. Previously, legal documents were generally in Latin & often poorly understood. The original intention was to make documents more accessible & comprehensible to the central administration rather than force minorities to assimilate. That came much later. It was never even proposed until the revolution, AFAIK, & wasn't an effective policy until standardised free & compulsory primary education - in French only.

Oh it was more then that. There was conquest, and local rebellion, and while there wasn't systematic mass murder, the taking and pillaging of a city in those days was it's closest equivalent. Entire areas could be depopulated simply due to soldiers raping, and murdering, everything within arms reach (see Germany in the 30 year's war). Let's not even get started on St. Bartholomew's Night.

BTW, each province of France did not speak its own language. There were distinctly non-French languages in border areas (German in Alsace, Basque in the far SW, Flemish/Dutch around Liege, Italian dialects in the far SE, Catalan in Roussillon) & Brittany (Breton is Celtic, closely related to Welsh), but apart from that there was a dialect continuum, with two main written forms, what we now call French in the north & Provençal (Occitan) in the south. It's a bit like Russian & Ukrainian.

Funny, I was just about to bring up the Russian and Ukrainian example. Some were dialects and some were separate languages, and some were in between just like in the Russian empire. Lithuania is definitely a border are for the Russian empire to the analogy holds there.