When we talk about the Soviet Union we immediately must talk about the following factors that apply to it. The first factor has to be the impact of Soviet federalism on the non-Russian peoples. The other factor is what the Soviet Union did to the surrounding countries. We will discuss whether or not the Soviet Union created nations, harmed nations, or both. Two important historians will help shape my argument and maybe even each other’s. Whether it was a positive or not, the fact of the matter is Soviet federalism had an impact on the non-Russian people. It is unclear what the relations were exactly during the early 1900’s although they appeared to be negative as the Soviet Union seemed to not care about the non-Russians. Kappler claimed
…show more content…
I feel that Kappler said it best when he said, “The order of the new federal state was based upon territories defined by language and nationality.” He is clearly referring to the creation of countries. It went against the ideology of the communist movement and ignored the demographics of the Russian empire but was essential for the Soviet Union. They needed a new country, one other than Russia, to help show that they were a legitimate political power. The perfect example of this is brought up by Kappler when he said, “Not until 30 December, 1922 where areas controlled by the Bolsheviks (pre-Soviets) united to form a federal state.” The state would later be named the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. It was through the creation of this state that they also redrew the boarders of Middle Asia. As a result nations were destroyed or lost land. Nations were also created as a result of this redrawing of boarders. Its important to mention that all of this came after the return to the federalist principle. Another example of the destruction of nations is when Russia destroyed the Chechens land. Brauer expresses this by saying, “The deteriorating relations between Checens and Russian leadership, culminating in two wars in the 1990’s, have involuntarily turned Kazakhstan again into a place of exile 50 years later.” Basically Russia and the Chechens never once got along as Russia exiled them during the Second World War. They destroyed the place that the Chechens resided in but it also can be argued that they created a new nation. By relocating all of the Chechens to Kazakhstan they essentially made a new nation. The Chechens kept all of their traditions and stylistic beliefs, they just simply relocated. All in all, Kappler supports what the Soviet Union did to an extent but Brauer never once supported
I feel that Kappler said it best when he said, “The order of the new federal state was based upon territories defined by language and nationality.” He is clearly referring to the creation of countries. It went against the ideology of the communist movement and ignored the demographics of the Russian empire but was essential for the Soviet Union. They needed a new country, one other than Russia, to help show that they were a legitimate political power. The perfect example of this is brought up by Kappler when he said, “Not until 30 December, 1922 where areas controlled by the Bolsheviks (pre-Soviets) united to form a federal state.” The state would later be named the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. It was through the creation of this state that they also redrew the boarders of Middle Asia. As a result nations were destroyed or lost land. Nations were also created as a result of this redrawing of boarders. Its important to mention that all of this came after the return to the federalist principle. Another example of the destruction of nations is when Russia destroyed the Chechens land. Brauer expresses this by saying, “The deteriorating relations between Checens and Russian leadership, culminating in two wars in the 1990’s, have involuntarily turned Kazakhstan again into a place of exile 50 years later.” Basically Russia and the Chechens never once got along as Russia exiled them during the Second World War. They destroyed the place that the Chechens resided in but it also can be argued that they created a new nation. By relocating all of the Chechens to Kazakhstan they essentially made a new nation. The Chechens kept all of their traditions and stylistic beliefs, they just simply relocated. All in all, Kappler supports what the Soviet Union did to an extent but Brauer never once supported