Russia’s revocation of border treaty consistent with its perception of past
Kommentaarid on kirjutatud EWR lugejate poolt. Nende sisu ei pruugi ühtida EWR toimetuse seisukohtadega.
VanemadUuemad
Anonymous16 Sep 2005 11:28
putin's memory of russian/soviet history is not very good (might have been too much beer and vodka) ... but the soviet union in november 1918 annuled the brest-litovsk treaty of march 1918 after germany was defeated, .... then on its own accord it signed the treaty of tartu in february 1920 which was violated by the soviets in 1939 and 1940 ... which just goes to show the trustworthiness of the soviets and its current successors
Maxim.16 Sep 2005 13:36
I would advise readers to turn to the original Vahtre Estonian text-the Estonian Central Council has failed to capture the essence of Vahtre's original meaning. The Brest treaty is in reality a powerful weapon against present-day Estonia, for the simple reason that we are very much a small player in the hands of Russia and Germany who have and will continue to do with us exactly as they like. Vahtre also implies in his original article the extent to which Russia has in actual fact already given Estonia considerable leeway to play its fancy games of Independence. The trouble is that Estonia can be arrogant against Russia at the worst of times and then think she can get away with it! This opinion will no doubt bring waves of complaints, but let it be said that the opinion is not only mine, it is also Vahtre's; a man who is a far more knowlegeable historian than some of his critics give him credit.
Regean19 Sep 2005 17:46
Putin will acquiese to a stronger partner in a relationship. If Bush was his own man, he would do better to bring stability into Eastern Europe, working with people who openly want US support, without a large cost to American taxpayers.
Kommentaarid sellele artiklile on suletud.