The Karelian question

[Jopo1980]

Ok, this question is between the Russians and the Finns. In WW-2 in the Winter War, the Soviet Union under the leadership of Stalin, launched an unprovoked attack without a declaration of war and invaded Finland. While being massively outnumbered, the Finnish army made the Russians pay heavily for their conquered land in blood. Eventually though the Russians were able to breach the Finnish defenses and the Finnish government was forced to sue for peace as there was no help forthcoming from either Germany or the West, nor from Sweden. As a result the Soviets imposed harsh conditions on the Finns including the cessation of Finnish Karelia, a major and valuable part of Finland, along with all the property on that land.

 

After the war, the allies supported the Soviets in enforcing the unfair peace treaty of Moscow and the ceded territories remained in Russian hands. Although officially the relations between our governments are good, the Karelian question lingers on in the minds of the people and perhaps there is hope that someday, either through peaceful means or by force, the karelian territories and other areas may be returned where they belong, to Finland. Other nations such as Japan also have territorial disputes with Russia.

 

So, what are your opinions on this issue?

 

AND I DON`T NEED ANGRY RUSSIANS FLAMING THIS THREAD !! But I also won´t just SHUT UP AND LET THE SLEEPING DOGS LIE as it is said, this question MUST be debated, otherwise we are giving in to a fear of angering the Russians and are becoming Finlandiziced.

 

Besides this is not a predominantly Russian forum, I doubt there are too many Russians here and even Boris Yeltsin acknowledged that the Winter War was unjust.

[Werne]

It's not technically stolen, they fought for it, they won. Russians wanted the area and Finland gave it to to them because they MUTUALLY AGREED that it's required to restore the peace. Therefore Finland is as guilty for that as Russia. The stronger one won, and winner takes all, it's that simple.

 

EDIT: You really decided to stomp on Russians today, eh?

Edited November 27, 2011 by Werne

[Jopo1980]

So, in your opinion it´s theirs because MIGHT MAKES RIGHT? The land was Finnish and the Russians had no claim over it. The right of conquest is not a good foundation for international law, it gives the powerful nations a free hand to take what they want. It is said that powerful nations act like gangsters and little nations act like prostitutes. It is a colossal mistake to acknowledge the right of conquest.

 

In the Moscow peace treaty of 1940, the Finnish government was FORCED to accept the conditions the Soviets placed on us, we DID NOT AGREE to any of their demands. Remember that before the war, the Russians made territorial demands by diplomatic channels and when the Finnish government refused to cede any territory peacefully, they attacked.

 

Maybe in a future war with Russia the EU and the US will beat the Russians and then we will take Karelia and other lost territories back using that same right of conquest, hmmm?

 

All Finns have a good reason to dislike the Russians, just look at our history. We were under Russian rule for over a 100 years and we have tasted their oppression and russification policies. We have fought them numerous times in the past and probably will have to fight them in the future. The enemy always comes from the east.

[Werne]

They might, and if they do than the russians will ask the same question you ask. Violence creates violence, that's why war is never a good solution to deal with problems.

 

Croatia has the same problem right now, but our government is an American marionette so they dance the way America wants. Slovenia wants to claim the area that is ours since we came to europe 1300 years ago, Hungary wants some as well, Serbia as well, Bosnia as well. We need to give it to them because America sais so, Finland is no different. Finland has no right to clain anything untill everyone else argees, like Croatia, so you're pretty much screwed like us.

 

EDIT: So you hate russians because they oppressed you 100 years ago? Figures, people still hate me because I'm a Serb in Croatia because of the Yugoslavian war. I'm partially rusian, my grandfather is from russia, does that mean you dislike me too? You don't even know me, or anything about me and still you hate me because I'm a russian. It seems Finland is no different than the hell-hole I'm living in.

Edited November 27, 2011 by Werne

[Aurielius]

Actually if I remember my history correctly before the spring offensive of 45 the Finnish government offered terms that were refused by the Soviets and Stalin who wanted the territory and would accept nothing less. Though the Finn's were technically allies of the Reich, they were not the most willing ones and had just to much fear from the Soviets after the Russo-Finnish War of 39-40. To my knowledge the territory was always traditionally part of Finland. It is analogous to Northern Ireland, it doesn't matter how long it has been occupied the Finn's believe in their hearts it is home territory and won't concede the point. Just the observations of an outsider with no particular Axe to grind.

[Jopo1980]

I thought the Yugoslavian territories had been settled since the breakup of Yougoslavia, but I guess there are always some areas of contest where ethnic minorities or other reasons seem to give some other state a claim to territory. If the lands have belonged to Croatia for 1300 years, then they have a pretty good claim to it, same as with Karelia, it has been part of Finland for most of its history.

 

The problem with Karelia nowadays is that it is populated by Russians, since the Soviets were clever and insisted that all Finnish people had to be evacuated when the territory was ceded. If we gained Karelia back now, we could not just kick the Russians out, that would be ethnic cleansing and in todays world it´s a big no-no, but in WW-2 it was done a lot and no one cared.

 

The international community offered a lot of sympathy for Finland but no real help. Where were the American marines when we would have needed them? It is true what the plaque in Viapori Fortress says: "Future generations, stand here on your own ground without trusting in outside help", because that help might not be forthcoming.

 

Aurielius: It was the offensive of 1944, part of the Continuation war and no, we were not formal allies of the Reich until at the very last moments and even then it was just a personal agreement between Ribbentrop and President Ryti which became void when Ryti resigned. We would have preferred to side with the western allies, but after the conquest of Norway and Denmark, all our links to the west were cut, so there would have been no way the allies could have helped us, so the government turned to the only available source of help which presented itself, Germany, which wanted Finlands help in attacking the Soviets and the Finnish government was also eager to regain the territories lost in 1939-40, so we joined the Germans as Co-Belligerents, not formal allies.

 

Also Finland became quite dependent on German imports of food and other stuff and weapons, so we could not disengage from the war so easily.

 

Edit: I have no problem with the average hard-working Russian people, it´s mostly the government that is disliked. It was the Russian Czars government which oppressed the Finns and it was the Soviet government which attacked us and mostly the average Russians opinion on those matters was not consulted as those governments were non-democratic.

[HeyYou]

Problem becomes here, if the land IS returned, it sets a rather interesting precedent. Especially here in the states, as the Indian nations would IMMEDIATELY be pressing their claims to have their land returned to them. After all, they were here for thousands of years before the white man showed up, and booted them off.

[Lisnpuppy]

I don't really know much about this so have the Finn's been asking for this land back all along? Or is this a recent request?

[Marxist ßastard]

Problem becomes here, if the land IS returned, it sets a rather interesting precedent. Especially here in the states, as the Indian nations would IMMEDIATELY be pressing their claims to have their land returned to them. After all, they were here for thousands of years before the white man showed up, and booted them off.

Um, what? Seriously?

 

Do you really have no concept of how much land has already changed hands in the aftermath of WWII and the breakup of the USSR?

 

Do you really believe that there are legions of angry natives waiting patiently for a land dispute in the armpit of Russia, so they can – what? cite it as “precedent” and politely ask the Supreme Court to make the “white man” go back to Europe?

 

Also, Karelia goes to Sweden. That's the way it's always been in my Empire: Total War games.

[Nintii]

@ Jopo1980 ... Unfortunately the Karelian territory has been in dispute between Finland and Russia (Novgorod Republic) since the 13th century.

It is quite unlikely that the Russians are going to part with the land since they took it over in 1940.

 

It has become predominantly "Russified" so my question to you is this, "Do you want a piece of land filled with Russians (because that's what it is)" ?

Where are you going to send the Russians ?

The arguement that they stole the land from us doesn't really mean much in the face of the present day reality, you can't just wish them away or send them off somewhere, that's now their home,

This IS the reality of today ...

 

Where I come from there are people who still hunger after the old days when the land was their's, and rightfully their's by international law but you know what, the world changes and so does

territories.

The strongest wins ... and that's it, until the next guy comes along and takes it from him.

Just wait until the Chinese begin to "claim" territories around the China sea, then I'd like to see what happens ... not much land has changed hands in our time by force has it ?

And if they do claim iy back then what about Israel ?

Edited November 27, 2011 by Nintii