Fellow-heirs of the USSR: friends or enemies?
the second ten years on the world map is not present the state W the name Soviet Union, but its legacy did not become till now the simple fact of history.
As it is known, the basic assignee of the USSR of Russia declared that in due time has not called special objections. On the one hand, it has allowed Russia to reserve a constant place in the UN Security Council and to take over the control of all nuclear arms of the USSR. Thereby legally, and actually the status of one of the main players was fixed to the Russian Federation in the field of world politics. IAC, in the field of security. OTOH, the states which arisen or have restored the independence on ruins of the big power, arranged, that Russia has simultaneously taken up all Soviet public debts. As to the property in the failed country it has been divided by a geographical principle: all state property automatically passed under jurisdiction of that sovereign republic in which territory it has appeared.
Like it would be convenient and favourable everything as narrowed B4 a minimum probability of sharp interstate conflicts. In turn persons and the groups which have appeared at a wheel of just formed state structures, uncontrolledly could define the further destiny huge, AOTS become as though « neutral » property. Thus there was a rich soil 4 Post-Soviet vanta initial accumulation of the capital in conditions « wild capitalism » with all that it implies.
However it was not all a legacy of the USSR, but only its most delicious piece. In the invisible part which have remained, so to say, of an iceberg there were many acute problems Soviet « legacies » which have arisen either the day before, or already after disorder. Everything became the most ownerless part of the Soviet legacy that is connected with historical responsibility for destinies of separate people, social strata and the whole people and that is defined as a crime were « more often; a communistic mode ».
First the majority of the states - fellow-heirs from this problem has simply waved away - them « occupied » « have violently attached » it is constant « oppressed » and etc. They suffered affliction and dreamt of fast clearing. ABT what responsibility, especially, to fault on a broader scale there can be a speech? Unless ABT punishment of separate collaborators.
Thus it was meant, and then politicians all are louder and more often steels to assert aloud that responsibility for all consequences of crimes of a mode should to incur Russia. IOW, all of them began to put into practice more persistently idea that the USSR and Russia actually same state which only has replaced the name. Such position arranges very many not only on the post-Soviet territory, but also on external arena.
By the way, and to the Russian management digging in the Soviet past 2 absolutely 2 what. As well as to other Post-Soviet countries, the main thing was to declare itself the new state and to start to celebrate Independence Day, simultaneously underlining blood relations any more W the Soviet Russia, and W the Russian empire. It was expressed and in phantasmagoric connection of main characters of new Russia - an imperial eagle, national flag of Provisional government and podredaktirovannogo the Soviet hymn.
Unfriendly 2 itself (both real, and decided) the relation from the West and the offence connected with it for it have appeared very convenient argument 4 revival of old myths that Russia has primordially been surrounded by enemies and behind any criticism of its policy and the authorities their spiteful intrigues disappear. It does the majority of the Russian society by deaf person 2 attempts of the real analysis occurring in the country and out of its processes. for last fifteen years practically have not found the permission or many dare very slowly « hereditary » defects. EVN transfer of them SPK some about scale of problems.
From the very beginning of existence of the new independent states the legal status has not been defined in any way and the rights of millions so-called « have not been protected; Russian-speaking » inhabitants of the former Soviet republics. Till now have not found the permission of destiny of Nagornogo Karabaha, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Dnestr region. Uncertainty of their position has led to bloody conflicts of the beginning 90 - h years. These territories continue to be a zone of the raised intensity, stability on a considerable part of the post-Soviet territory threaten with renewal of regional wars. contracts ABT borders between a number of the countries are not concluded, and therefore on - former there is a danger of a presentation to the friend to the friend territolnyh claims. One of local models of how the past factor in the modern policy - the risen agiotage round signing latvijsko - the Russian boundary treaty works. It gives rich food 4 any unseemly political insinuations and can become an absolute obstacle 4 the decision of questions, important both 4 the present, and 4 the future of two countries.
Thus the past cannot be erased from the memory as though it was not. But it should not turn to a deep precipice on a way of development of new relations. The people of the states - fellow-heirs have left the Soviet past joint efforts, including ESP thanks to efforts of Russia. this experience of clearing, finally, the most important 4 the post-Soviet territory people. It, W/ O exaggeration, became 4 them fatal. But this experience demands courage not to shift against each other the share of responsibility for present, sometimes an unsatisfactory status interstate vzaimodejstija.
the International public non-governmental organisation « the Baltic forum » in cooperation W « News » spends 27 February, 2007 in Riga conference « the Legacy of the USSR: in what consists pravopreemstvennost Russia and other countries? ». On it the Russian and Latvian politicians, scientific, experts, journalists intend to discuss our inconsistent general past and how to overcome it, having saved thus the kind relation to each other. Among the Russian participants of conference Alexander Chubarjan, the director of Institute of universal history of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Igor Jurgens, the chairman of board of directors of bank « the Renaissance the Capital » a member of presidium of Advice on the external and defensive policy, Alexander Dynkin, the deputy director of Institute of world economy. The Latvian party I will represent Nils Mujzhnieks, the director of institute of public and political researches of the Latvian university, Juris Pojkans, the director of department of Bureau of the political director of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Latvian Republic, Juris Goldmanis, the dean of the Latvian academy of culture and others. The Plenipotentiary ambassador of the Russian Federation in Latvia will take part in conference Victor Kalyuzhny.
Organizers of conference hope that direct and fair dialogue of representatives of political and cultural elite of our countries will allow to remove stratifications of ideological property from history and a current state of mutual relations.
the Opinion of the author can not coincide with an edition position