• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Krushchev was rescuing Crimea when he made it Ukrainian — it must remain so

j brown's body

j brown's body

"A Soros-backed animal"
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2018
Messages
79,621
Reaction score
84,151
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
...the Kremlin handed Crimea to Ukraine not out of benevolence but because a decade of disastrous Soviet policies had left the territory an economic and humanitarian disaster. As University of Cambridge professor Rory Finnin notes, “The transfer of Crimea to Ukraine was no mistake. It was a rescue.” During a visit to Crimea in October 1953, Khrushchev witnessed the devastation firsthand. Driving through the peninsula with his son-in-law, Aleksey Adzhubey — editor-in-chief of Izvestia and one of the Soviet Union’s most influential journalists — Khrushchev encountered not only the ruins of the Crimean Tatar Bakhchysaray Palace but also vast stretches of barren land strewn with abandoned military hardware.

Khrushchev understood that Crimea’s salvation depended on reconnecting it to Ukraine’s southern steppes and the life-giving Dnipro River, ties that had sustained the peninsula for millennia. ...First, the Presidium of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic passed a resolution proposing the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR. Then the USSR’s central government — the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet — ratified the transfer on Feb.19, 1954, citing “the integral character of the economy, the territorial proximity, and the close economic and cultural ties between Crimea Province and the Ukrainian SSR.” Two months later, the Supreme Soviet amended the Soviet Constitution, officially transferring the Crimean Oblast from Russia to Ukraine. Ukraine’s Communist leadership, under pressure from Moscow, agreed to the transfer — along with the immense burden of reviving the devastated region.

Over the next decades, Ukraine poured resources into developing Crimea. In 1957, it launched the construction of the North Crimean Canal, completed in 1971, to bring water from the Dnipro River to the arid peninsula. Ukraine invested heavily in infrastructure, agriculture and tourism, building reservoirs, irrigating fields, establishing resorts and creating economic opportunities. Between 1954 and 1990, Ukraine invested close to five times more per capita in Crimea than in comparable regions elsewhere in the republic. These efforts bore fruit. By the time of Ukraine’s 1991 independence referendum, 54 percent of Crimean voters — including 57 percent in Sevastopol — chose to remain part of an independent Ukraine. A subsequent poll by Baltic Surveys/Gallup showed 65 percent of respondents favoring Crimea’s autonomy within Ukraine, with only 23 percent preferring union with Russia.

Link

Now you know the rest of the story.
 
j brown's body said:
...the Kremlin handed Crimea to Ukraine not out of benevolence but because a decade of disastrous Soviet policies had left the territory an economic and humanitarian disaster. As University of Cambridge professor Rory Finnin notes, “The transfer of Crimea to Ukraine was no mistake. It was a rescue.” During a visit to Crimea in October 1953, Khrushchev witnessed the devastation firsthand. Driving through the peninsula with his son-in-law, Aleksey Adzhubey — editor-in-chief of Izvestia and one of the Soviet Union’s most influential journalists — Khrushchev encountered not only the ruins of the Crimean Tatar Bakhchysaray Palace but also vast stretches of barren land strewn with abandoned military hardware.

Khrushchev understood that Crimea’s salvation depended on reconnecting it to Ukraine’s southern steppes and the life-giving Dnipro River, ties that had sustained the peninsula for millennia. ...First, the Presidium of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic passed a resolution proposing the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR. Then the USSR’s central government — the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet — ratified the transfer on Feb.19, 1954, citing “the integral character of the economy, the territorial proximity, and the close economic and cultural ties between Crimea Province and the Ukrainian SSR.” Two months later, the Supreme Soviet amended the Soviet Constitution, officially transferring the Crimean Oblast from Russia to Ukraine. Ukraine’s Communist leadership, under pressure from Moscow, agreed to the transfer — along with the immense burden of reviving the devastated region.

Over the next decades, Ukraine poured resources into developing Crimea. In 1957, it launched the construction of the North Crimean Canal, completed in 1971, to bring water from the Dnipro River to the arid peninsula. Ukraine invested heavily in infrastructure, agriculture and tourism, building reservoirs, irrigating fields, establishing resorts and creating economic opportunities. Between 1954 and 1990, Ukraine invested close to five times more per capita in Crimea than in comparable regions elsewhere in the republic. These efforts bore fruit. By the time of Ukraine’s 1991 independence referendum, 54 percent of Crimean voters — including 57 percent in Sevastopol — chose to remain part of an independent Ukraine. A subsequent poll by Baltic Surveys/Gallup showed 65 percent of respondents favoring Crimea’s autonomy within Ukraine, with only 23 percent preferring union with Russia.

Link

Now you know the rest of the story.
Click to expand...
Khrushchev never once, not in a million years, thought Ukraine would ever be independent of the USSR, and his efforts in hunting down the fascists so admired by modern Ukraine likewise destroys your narrative.

It’s very telling that even decades after Crimea’s supposed “rescue” , in the most optimistic time of any nation’s existence— new independence— almost half of the Crimean population still didn’t want to be a part of Ukraine.

And the strong secessionist sentiments that immediately emerged following independence only further demonstrate that point.

And there’s something pretty hilarious about celebrating Nazi collaborators as national heroes on one hand, and then turning around and trying to take credit for the hard work of loyal Ukrainian members of the USSR on the other, of course.
 
By the early 1950's, Moscow had become tired of subsidizing Crimea, which attempts to support itself on two shakey pillars... agriculture (grains and vineyards) and tourism.

What saved Crimean agriculture was the 250 mile North Crimean Canal and well placed reservoirs, all constructed by Ukraine.

With Russia's illegal invasion and annexation of Crimea in 2014, Ukraine damned the canal south of Kalanchak, about 10 miles north of the Crimean border.

Despite what Kremlin propaganda states, agriculture on the penninsula has been devastated, and tourism is now virtually nonexistant due to Ukrainian drone attacks on Crimean military facilities.

I lived for a year in Crimea, on the Black Sea coast not far from Yalta. You can sit on the promenade and watch the dolphins play. Crimea receives a few inches of snowfall roughly once every decade or so.
 
Tigerace117 said:
And had he known what would happen, he never would have ceded Crimea to begin with.

The article’s entire narrative is a falsehood.
Click to expand...

Giving up Crimea because the Soviet Union couldn't handle it suggests Khrushchev had an idea the Soviet Union couldn't survive. They tried for decades to hold off the inevitable. Giving up Crimea was part of that effort.

Now they're supposed to get Crimea back because the Soviet Union failed?
 
Tigerace117 said:
Khrushchev never once, not in a million years, thought Ukraine would ever be independent of the USSR, and his efforts in hunting down the fascists so admired by modern Ukraine likewise destroys your narrative.

It’s very telling that even decades after Crimea’s supposed “rescue” , in the most optimistic time of any nation’s existence— new independence— almost half of the Crimean population still didn’t want to be a part of Ukraine.

And the strong secessionist sentiments that immediately emerged following independence only further demonstrate that point.

And there’s something pretty hilarious about celebrating Nazi collaborators as national heroes on one hand, and then turning around and trying to take credit for the hard work of loyal Ukrainian members of the USSR on the other, of course.
Click to expand...

Putin loves you.
 
j brown's body said:
Giving up Crimea because the Soviet Union couldn't handle it suggests Khrushchev had an idea the Soviet Union couldn't survive. They tried for decades to hold off the inevitable. Giving up Crimea was part of that effort.

Now they're supposed to get Crimea back because the Soviet Union failed?
Click to expand...
Uh...what? The USSR absolutely could handle Crimea. It remained a huge Russian naval base for decades to come.

It was the Russian SSR— the local state government— which transferred Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR, another local state government. No different, really, than Michigan giving up Toledo to Ohio....except the Soviets weren’t shooting at each other over it, of course.

And given the fact the USSR only grew in strength throughout Khrushchev’s premiership— to the point where it could project power all the way into the Caribbean itself— your narrative is not supported by the facts on the ground.

The total lack of knowledge American apologists have about history is always amazing.
 
watsup said:
Putin still loves you.
Click to expand...
Don’t worry watsup, your hero Trump still plans to annex Canada and Greenland in the name of fighting against Putin, undoubtedly to your delight.
 
watsup said:
Same old lie as always. It shows desperation.
Click to expand...
Still covering for Trump by desperately denying Musk gave a Nazi salute I see.

Or have you finally worked up the courage to admit that’s precisely what he did?
 
Tigerace117 said:
Uh...what? The USSR absolutely could handle Crimea. It remained a huge Russian naval base for decades to come.

It was the Russian SSR— the local state government— which transferred Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR, another local state government. No different, really, than Michigan giving up Toledo to Ohio....except the Soviets weren’t shooting at each other over it, of course.

And given the fact the USSR only grew in strength throughout Khrushchev’s premiership— to the point where it could project power all the way into the Caribbean itself— your narrative is not supported by the facts on the ground.

The total lack of knowledge American apologists have about history is always amazing.
Click to expand...

Apparently the USSR could not handle Ukraine.

"Most telling were the desperate Russian settlers blocking the roads, pleading for water, sanitation, hospitals and schools. Soviet archives show that the entire region, roughly the size of Massachusetts, had only 24 bread stores, 18 meat stores, and eight milk stores."
 
j brown's body said:
Apparently the USSR could not handle Ukraine.

"Most telling were the desperate Russian settlers blocking the roads, pleading for water, sanitation, hospitals and schools. Soviet archives show that the entire region, roughly the size of Massachusetts, had only 24 bread stores, 18 meat stores, and eight milk stores."
Click to expand...
The Ukrainian SSR was part of the USSR dude. Your article literally goes into great detail talking about the Soviet Union succeeding in handling Crimea.

But then again, you also failed to admit that less than five years after independence a guy running on a platform of eventually integrating Crimea back into Russia won over seventy percent of the vote, so that’s not a shock.
 
j brown's body said:
Giving up Crimea because the Soviet Union couldn't handle it suggests Khrushchev had an idea the Soviet Union couldn't survive. They tried for decades to hold off the inevitable. Giving up Crimea was part of that effort.

Now they're supposed to get Crimea back because the Soviet Union failed?
Click to expand...


Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union don't forget
 
Tigerace117 said:
Still covering for Trump by desperately denying Musk gave a Nazi salute I see.

Or have you finally worked up the courage to admit that’s precisely what he did?
Click to expand...

Tigerace117 said:
Trump loves you, watsup. He admires your desperate efforts to defend him and Musk.
Click to expand...

Such childish lying posts.
 
j brown's body said:
Link

Now you know the rest of the story.
Click to expand...



That article has to be the biggest work of fiction written during this war.

The fact of the matter is it was all dirty politics. And at the time the Ukrainian Bolsheviks did not consider it a gift at all. To them it was more like a poisoned chalice. The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was much more homogenously ethnic Ukrainian than after Khruschev's Crimea gift; and up to them Russia SSR should have kept Crimea. The likes of Khruschev, Brezhnev were actually Ukrainian Bolsheviks of Russian ethnicity; they were a minority; adding Crimea- full of Russians- to Ukraine SSR increased the political clout of Russians there
 
Tigerace117 said:
And had he known what would happen, he never would have ceded Crimea to begin with.

The article’s entire narrative is a falsehood.
Click to expand...


That article beats every other article in fiction in this war; and that is saying a lot in a war full of propaganda
 
Juin said:
The fact of the matter is it was all dirty politics. And at the time the Ukrainian Bolsheviks did not consider it a gift at all. To them it was more like a poisoned chalice. The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was much more homogenously ethnic Ukrainian than after Khruschev's Crimea gift; and up to them Russia SSR should have kept Crimea. The likes of Khruschev, Brezhnev were actually Ukrainian Bolsheviks of Russian ethnicity; they were a minority; adding Crimea- full of Russians- to Ukraine SSR increased the political clout of Russians there
Click to expand...

The fact of the matter is that Moscow pawned Crimea off on Ukraine. At the time (1954) Crimea was a huge drag on the Russian economy.

After the USSR dissolved in 1991, Ukraine and Russia agreed on how to divvy up the Black Sea Fleet ships/bases and how much annual rent Moscow would pay Ukraine for leasing the Crimea Naval facilities.

en.wikipedia.org

Partition Treaty on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

en.wikipedia.org

Kharkiv Pact - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
j brown's body said:
...the Kremlin handed Crimea to Ukraine not out of benevolence but because a decade of disastrous Soviet policies had left the territory an economic and humanitarian disaster.
Click to expand...
another garbage post . Khrushchev initiated illegal land transfer just because he wants to award his native republic at the expense of Russia. Nothing prevented him to organise restoration of Crimea without any unnecessary “gifts” .
this was just a pretext. Khruchev could allocate all necessary resources to Crimea without any land GRABS By Ukraine .
Crimea was illegally stolen by the criminal Stalinist Khrustchev from Russia , and Russia has made correct decision to return what belongs to it .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom