The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Whether are necessary to historians of category of the state geniality and incurable wounds?



UDC 327

A.I. Kuznetsov


On historical examples features of formation of the bilateral interstate relations are found. Two inconvertible options defined or on a positive contribution of the operating international subject to formation of the new state — option of the relations with the added value further, or on intended destruction / interruption — option of the difficult relations are possible subsequently. Interruption of sovereignty leaves an incurable mark in national memory and leads to long alienation between the countries.

Historical examples reveal the peculiarities of bilateral intergovernmental relations. There are two non-convertible variants, based on the positive contribution of the actual international agent into the formation of a new state — the prospective added value variant — or aimed at deliberated suspension/breach of relations — the prospective tension variant. This suspension of sovereignty leaves a permanent scar in the national memory and leads to continuous alienation of the states.

All states in the world can conditionally be divided into two groups. In one group of the relation between subjects develop on the ascending trajectory as offenses of the past were forgotten, there are also no new solved problems. Among these countries occur also such, the relations between which differ in special rational sense and even warmth. These relations are steadily good even if they are not quite symmetric. In other group in peace post-war conditions the serious tension remains, and the relations are burdened by cargo of last offenses. In interpretation of the reasons and assessment of results of World War II very serious disagreements remain. In certain cases the official end under World War II is not put still (Russia — Estonia, Moldova — Romania). In particular, it concerns agreements on frontier which could play a role of peace treaties successfully.

It is possible to carry such couples as Poland and the USA, Poland and France, Russia and Finland (the relations differ in broad pragmatism and constructivism) to the first group, and recently — Russia and Germany. It is characteristic that the Russian Prime Minister

Bulletin of the Russian state university of I. Kant. 2009. Issue 12. Page 90 — 98.

V.V. Putin on the actions devoted to the 70 anniversary of the beginning of World War II in Gdansk on September 1, 2009 determined the level of the Russian-German partnership as not inferior today to the level of the well-known French-German reconciliation [1].

On an opposite pole there are relations between Russia and Poland, Russia and the Baltic States, in a certain measure — between Russia and Ukraine and also Russia and Georgia. After Gdansk the foreign press drew a conclusion on continuation of "violent confrontations" between Russia and Poland concerning estimates of the past [2].

The moment of truth from a Pandora's box

From a huge ball of historical interlacings we allocate only one factor which we submit as a thesis for discussion. This factor is genesis of statehood of any given people (nation). Genesis in our understanding includes emergence of own statehood, strengthening of the state sovereignty and also possible interruption and elimination of statehood. We believe that such genesis plays huge, maybe, even the defining role in the nature of the interstate bilateral relations also now.

Allocation and priority consideration of sovereignty and statehood by us "separately", kind of in a separation from all historical complex, are promoted by the facts similar to the following. In November, 2008 the Polish sociological service CIOM conducted population survey for the purpose of examination that is "the greatest success of Poland for the last 100 years". More than a half of respondents answered that restoration of the state independence in 1918 was such success. On the second and third places with considerable lag there were an entry of Poland into the EU (39%) and overthrow of communism (37%) [3].

On a chronological axis "emergence — strengthening — interruption (or elimination) statehood" which is at the same time and an eventual cause and effect chain for some states in their relations with other states is available (angrily) qualitative heterogeneity. It is between phases "emergence & #43; strengthening" and "interruption". In this place there is a rupture of the general space of historical states on two essentially different parts. Here Rubicon defining development and typology of the interstate relations for long times is located. If in the history of two states there was a period when one of them significantly helped strengthening of statehood of other nation or generated it (approximately as the USA and Russia played a role of midwives in the state formation of Kosovo, Abkhazia and South Ossetia), then the relations of such states with high probability become is irreversible good. It is possible to call them the relations with the added value (with an added value). The space of positive prepotent values or the interstate relations with a plus is formed of cases such (see the table at the end of article).

If was differently, namely: one of the states (independently or together with others) was a subject of destruction or "just" interruptions of statehood of other country, such options form space of negative meanings. Diplomatic relations are established on a minimum and have character of "the cold world". It is characteristic that in both cases time of action of the generating reasons (limitation period) can be very big.

We will formulate our statement and in other form, in a journalistic way. If this state was born by means of another or other states, then between them there is a warm friendship. If one state "killed" other state once, then to wait in the future for something other, different from vendetta at the state level, difficult. White is white, and black there is black.

Ivan and Hans — friends seriously and for a long time?

The offered thesis can be confirmed with concrete examples from history of the interstate relations in the region of the Baltic Sea. Let's review in the beginning, perhaps, the most important example: Russia — Germany. There is no need to give illustrations of that how difficult and contradictory, sometimes bloody history of their relations is. At the same time the attention to that circumstance that the parties helped each other at the critical moments of history in the most decisive way addresses a little, namely: in issues of strengthening of statehood.

Concerning Germany the list of noble acts from Russia (USSR) looks in brief as follows. Formation of the German Reich in 1871 was possible only at a favorable neutrality of Russia which conceived value of decisive support to Bismarck in his largest historical act. The contract in Rapallo between the Weimar republic and the USSR in 1922 was support not only for the USSR, but also for Germany defeated World War I which winners in Versailles reduced to the provision of a defective international subject. History knows many bends. One of them happened during the solution of a question what to do with Germany after defeat of Hitler's regime. I. Stalin decisively opposed complete elimination of the German state though such moods among allies then were quite strong. The generalissimo presented us expression which sounds as an aphorism: "The Nazism together with Hitler comes and leaves, and the great German people will remain!" And one more fresh example: reunion of Germany in 1990. And personally M.S. Gorbachev played more positive role, than the western states which were rather afraid of it vossoyedineniya1 in this process of the USSR.

In turn and Germany helped formation of the Soviet or Russian statehood much. Let's call the Brest world and mutual establishment of diplomatic relations here in March —

1 It is known that M. Thatcher "asked the Soviet leader to interfere with falling of the Berlin wall" as "neither Great Britain, nor Western Europe would like the reunification of Germany" [4].

April, 1918. Though this world is known as unequal, and V.I. Lenin called it even "obscene", you should not forget that already negotiation at the official level was the first de-facto recognition of the Soviet Russia as the subject of the international relations. The great leader dissembled when he quarreled on the Brest world. Its positive value for Bolsheviks was ogromno2.

Not without reason the left Social Revolutionaries in the summer of 1918 killed the German ambassador to cause indignation of Germany and to receive it in allies for overthrow of the regime of Lenin. About Rapallo value it was already told. Let's add that the joke is even connected with this document: it is called "the contract in pajamas" as at the first meeting of partners at night the German diplomats did not manage to change clothes [6]. And one more important episode: Germany the first of the leading foreign states recognized (26.12.1991) the Russian Federation as the international subject — the successor of the USSR. It is possible to mention also such example. The doctrine Hal matte forbade Germany to establish diplomatic relations with those countries which recognized the GDR as the independent state. The exception in the spirit of IeaGroShk was made only for the USSR.

It is possible to tell that at Germany and Russia not only the terrible experience is accumulated, but there are also big mutual merits in providing the highest priority of any nation — sovereignty and own statehood. At the same time never it happened so that one of the state parties participated in liquidation of other party. The relations of Russia and Germany are located in space of positive dominants now. On the way of reconciliation and confidence-building between two people it is made so big progress that V. Putin gave the relations between Germany and the Russian Federation even as an example for Russia and Poland [1] today.

The German literature contains a statement that the foreign policy of Germany never was successful if it was not possible to find a common language with Russia or the USSR ("shy Ksh81apd odeg the tag Bosch-] e1itop auszukommen") [7]. Told it is possible to carry also to strengthening of the German statehood.

The relations Russia (USSR) — Finland became an axiom of a possibility of forming of very good good-neighbourhood interactions, despite the tragic periods of mutual history ("winter war" of 1939 — 1940, the allied relations of Finland with

2 Even after severance of diplomatic relations in November, 1918 the Soviet part "looked after" representatives of Germany. The mission manager for prisoners of war G. Hilger who had then no full diplomatic status was invited to a diplomatic reception on the occasion of the third anniversary of the October revolution. Here is how it described the participation in an action: "Chicherin on that evening disdained all rules of the protocol (with which it had to be the sign since old times) because he forced me to sit down to the right of himself, among themselves and his assistant Maxim Litvinov properly to emphasize presence of the first and only representative of the great power from the West... In the same evening the Soviet government announced for the whole world on radio... names of all persons who visited this lunch... My name that is essential, was at the head of this list" [5].

Hitlerite Germany, noterya Finland parts of the territory in a nolza of the USSR). Pain of the put losses komnensirutsya grateful namyatyyu about talent imneratory by Alexander II in 1863 of the constitution, obesnechivshy to Finns wide autonomy, and about a nredostavleniye of the state independence of the Soviet Russia of December, 1917

Poland — the USA and Poland — France. Poles (not only T. Kos-tyushko) were at war for independence of the USA in the most initial neriod their existence, and France made a big contribution to restoration in 1918 and protection of the revived statehood of Poland in 1920. The relations of Poland with both countries always were at least by degree tenly, than nrosto good-neighbourhood.

Negative duet

Russia — Poland. The sovereignty of each other of the party began to be isny-tyvat long ago, nr it right at the beginning business went peacefully, but according to norms of the time. In 1573 nroiskhodit nervy elections of the king of Poland, and the Moscow tsar Ivan IV Grozny was one of nretendent to this "position". Then the Russian novelitel nro-played elections which were nryamy and as zero-sky authors like to nodcherknut, free (viritim) [8]. Whether not from here a nroizoshla our national peculiarity — dislike for free elections?

In 1b10 the tsar of Russia the king's son Vladislav was elected the Moscow boyars nolyak, however these elections were not free, and nrokho-Dili in the conditions of the actual okkunation of Moscow nolsky troops. The hurting force of these and other events of the Time of Troubles which humiliated then the Russian sovereign vanity is big as in any other case. Therefore snustya nocht four hundred years in the Russian Federation the state nrazdnik on November 4, nanominayushchiya about release of the country from nolyak and recovery of its nolnotsenny state identity was founded. There is no other nrazdnik with similar nodo-nleky in modern Russia. Anniversary of exile of the French from Moscow is not celebrated at all as then Moscow was not the capital. Nanoleon its capture did not disgrace the Russian statehood and did not hurt the Russian national feelings so strongly that long-term Russian-French vendetta began. Establishment of a nrazdnik on November 4 the Russian side even more updated a subject of okkunation and sections, nodkrenit a nozition of Poland in permanent preservation of a namyata about tragic element of own statehood.

Events of all the 18th century in the history of Poland the series of three Sections 1772, 1793 and 1795 of the nrivedshy to elimination by Austria, Prussia and Russia of the nolsky state on neriod record duration in 123 years crown. The Polish state did not exist either de jure, or de facto. A considerable part of this time there was no national nravitelstvo in exile even. In this regard the fourth partition of Poland in 1939 was "better" — since September, 1939 worked as a nravitelstvo in exile, and nrezident the countries. The last from nre-zident in emigration R. Kachorovsky neredat the power very nozdno, in

December, 1990, to the elected president L. Wałęsa. The Polish state was completely restored, but deep wounds remained. Their pain is more severe than a rational reflection and examples of reconciliations of other countries. And in Russia "the deposit of 1612" remained. Moreover what deposit if founded a public holiday.

O. Bismarck, S. Sazonov

Very clever politicians considered a possibility of drawing incurable wounds. Perhaps, German Chancellor O. Bismarck was the first. In 1866 after defeat of the Austrian troops at Garden Bismarck opposed capture by Prussian troops of Vienna what the king and generals insisted on. He objected in that spirit that "it is important whether there will be a mood in what we will leave our opponents, irreconcilable and whether there will be wounds which we will put them to vanity, incurable" (Italics of the author. — A.K.) [9]. He acted so not because was a great humanist but because knew: Austria is required to it as the partner soon therefore it is impossible to offend it in any way and to humiliate excessively. If winners of Germany in World War I humiliated it so strongly, then can be and Hitler did not come to the power?

The contemporary history confirms Bismarck's correctness — occupation (occupation) of the capital in the long-term strategic plan is Pyrrhic victory. It is possible to cite as an example occupation the general Zheligovsky in 1920 of the capital of Lithuania of Vilnius and the followed Vee-lenshchiny incorporation in the structure of the Polish state. Consequences of these events are very painfully let know about themselves still today. In particular, still it is not possible to resolve an issue of writing of the Polish proper names of inhabitants of the Vilnius region, at the same time the problem is regularly included into the agenda of the Polish-Lithuanian summits (see, for example [10]). Also the issue with names of streets in Polish is not resolved. The subject has so conflict character that know about it even in OSCE. Will not be mistake to tell that final Polish-Lithuanian reconciliation is not reached yet.

The ex-Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Empire S.D. Sazonov who wrote in the memoirs [11] that "also focused on this issue... general Zheligovsky... beheaded the revived Lithuania, having deprived of it the historical capital... It is hard to say how there will be in the future Polish-Lithuanian relations, but to expect that they will be friendly, there is hardly a basis". Let's add that using Sazonov's memoirs, it is possible to synthesize one more formulation: incurable wounds are components of insuperable alienation between the countries.

It seems that "crimes against statehood" have no limitation period, as well as crime against humanity. The ambassador of Sweden in Poland T. Bertelman in November, 2005 on behalf of the Swedish people expressed a regret to Poles for those sufferings which were brought by the "Swedish flood" 1655 [12]. Let's remind that Sweden was then, among other things, one of coauthors of the idea and the accomplice of the contract (about intentions) about the very first partition of Poland [8]. The idea about the partition of Poland was born long before it occurred really in 1772. The Swedish ambassador apologized with an ulterior motive.

For such accidents as gain and the partition of the country, destruction of sovereign statehood, occupation of the capital, a denortation of indigenous people, neriod even in hundreds of years it is time too short that it was succeeded to forget about them. Wounds really are incurable. Even nokayatsya in perfect aggression it is easier, than to get rid of pain of century incurable wounds. It is, probably, one of the most important lessons of the present.

Difficult continuity

In the Baltic States much attention is paid to a nroblema of a nenre-ryvnost of existence of the state (its continuity) [13]. It and nonyatno as the history of statehood of Latvia and Estonia of a nok is short. Besides, knows such nonyatiye as "sanctity of contracts", meaning a nenreryvnost of legally zakrenlenny states. It nroyavlyatsya also in what in constitutions of the countries sometimes nrisutstvu-t an unominaniye about God (invocatio Dei). Therefore artificial nreryva-ny statehood blasphemous act is treated as the noistena. Sensitive people nerezhivat nr it the feelings close to anokalinti-chesky. The tragedy of the nolsky Frantsisheka Knyaznina noet which went crazy is well-known, having learned about the third partition of Poland [14]3.

The Baltic genesis of statehood was difficult and very nrotivorechivy, the situation changed from one extreme to another. The interstate relations with Russia usnet to nobyvat both in a nlyusa, and in minus. In a condition of alienation, but to opinion of the author, they are and now. So, the nanrimer, with Estonia is not up to the end issued "peace treaty", more precisely the contract on frontier with Russia. But happened and differently. The conclusion of peace treaties in the 1920th of nroshly century of the party mutually nomogl each other in an ukrenleniye of the international nriznaniye. Even the dinlomatichesky miracle in the form of the Baltic conference in Riga in March, 1922 where nredstavitel of Latvia, Estonia, Poland and the Soviet Russia developed a joint nozition nered the Genoa conference took place. With Estonia and Latvia on January 12 and 13, 1991 respectively there were nodnisana contracts on bases of the interstate relations of Russia with these countries — nervy such documents in that rough time.

The president of RSFSR B. Yeltsin the Decree nri-knew on August 24, 1991 independence of Estonia and Latvia. Before Russia it was made only by Iceland (on August 22). On the sixth of September, 1991 the State Council of the USSR also nriznat independence of all three nribalty-sky countries. New Russia has difficult nereotsenimy contribution to recovery of statehood of the Baltic States.

Unfortunately, over this nolozhitelny dominant a nolny set of the negative dominants which arose to in time and to the nosla hangs

3 It is possible to give one more example of importance of a continuity. It would seem, modern Germany has nothing in common with the last Nazi regime. Nevertheless the German taxpayers long time gave from the pocket money for compensation by the victim of crimes of Nazis.

World War II (see the table). Apparently, for this main reason of the relation the Baltic — Russia are after all "in minus".

The river of time flows in one direction

In historical science and diplomacy the category of the incurable wounds got by the sovereign nations is not developed. In international law the firm positions are taken only by the principle of respect of territorial integrity of the states, or, paraphrasing on our harmony, the principle of inadmissibility of amputation of the state. However, it is obvious that it does not cover all sensitive aspects of sovereign statehood. The big countries — grandees of world politics, though lost a part of the territory and the population, but never lost completely the sovereignty (the truth, was necessary to endure occupation of the capitals also to them). Therefore they are also silent on the subject touched by us which for them kind of neinteresna4.

Now the voice of small subjects of the international life which statehood was interrupted amplified. Except the new Baltic States also Poland which in the leading geopolitical parameters enters the six European liderov5 treats their number, and it gives to group of "activists" significant geopolitical weight. These countries not only give an independent assessment to the past, but also try to change radically coordinate axes of the European history, to replace in certain cases "plus" with "minus" (for example, a role of the USSR in World War II). In a word, they write the contemporary history.

It is known that time passes only in one direction, it is irreversible, and historical events are irreversible. Also the state sovereignty submits to the unidirectional development — irreversibility is generally characteristic of it. The number of the independent states continuously grows in the world, and their disappearance is today that exception which confirms the rule. Even if entry of the Baltic states into structure of the USSR would be voluntary, it would become the abnormal phenomenon contradicting laws of the nature. Abnormally wrong it is possible to consider the purpose of some politicians in Moldova today — merge of the Moldavian state to Romania, or requirements of some political forces, for example PACE, about refusal of Russia of recognition of independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia [15].

Told kind of the happening European integration with gradual loss of sovereignty by the states contradicts. It is a separate big subject, however here it is possible to tell that in this case sovereignty does not disappear, and it is delegated to "integral", increasing in force.

4 The author happened to meet repeatedly the ambassador of Austria in Russia (till 2003) Mr. Franz Zede. The ambassador with big sense of humour told how Austria lost all wars which waged, dropped out of category of great powers and now well feels in a friendly number of the small states.
5 Top six in the European Parliament elected in June, 2009 on number of deputies looks so: Germany — 99, Great Britain, Italy and France — on 72, Spain and Poland — on 50.

Enduring dominants in the history of the bilateral interstate relations

Positive Negative

Implantation of statehood of other nation by one state Elimination (interruption) of statehood of one state by other state

Effective actions of one state for strengthening of statehood of other nation Capture and occupation of the capital or other part of the primordial territory of other state

Deportation of a part of the population and large-scale repressions against the population of the subordinated country

List of references

1. V. Putin. Pages of history — iovod for mutual nretenziya or a basis for an irimireniye and a trtnerstvo. URL: 0/12274.html
2. Inopress: Russia and Poland exchanged charges but to World War II novod. URL:
3. New Poland. 2009. No. 2. Page 24.
4. Thatcher Nrosil Gorbachev to add a nadeniya of the Berlin wall. URL:
5. G. Hilger, A. Meyer Russia and Germany. Allies or enemies? M, 2008. Page 78 — 79.
6. History dillomatiya / lot of an edition of A.A. Gromyko, etc. M., 19b5. T. 3. Page 282.
7. Internationale Politik. 1997. No. 2. P. 41 — 4b.
8. A. Dybkovskaya, M. Zharyn, Ya. Zharyn. The history of Poland since the most ancient times up to now. Warsaw, 1995.
9. O. Bismarck. Thoughts and voshominaniye. M.; L., 1940 — 1941.
10. Osrodek Studiow Wschodnich. Wiadomosci. 2009. No. 150. URL: http://osw. waw. pl/news/08/090831.htm
11. Sazonov of S.D. Voshominaniya. M, 1991. Page 39b.
12. Osrodek racjonalistyczno-sceptyczny im. de Voltaire&a Racjonalista. URL: http://www. racjonalista. pl/index. PHP/s, 20/t, 5755
13. L. Myalksoo. Soviet annexation and state continuity: international nravovoy the status of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania in 1940 — 1991 and the nosl of 1991 Tartu, 2003.
14. Dictionaries and entsiklonediya. URL: nsf/ruwiki/38b1b
15. PACE. Resolution 1b33 (2008). The consequences of the war between Georgia and Russia URL: /ta08/ERES1633.htm

About the author

A.I. Kuznetsov is Dr., nrof., RGU of I. Kant,


Prof. A. Kusnetsov, IKSUR,

Brenda Anne
Other scientific works: