4 ms·

> Roosevelt was probably sicker and had to travel all the way to Ukraine. That is a bit sensitive these days, but Crimea wasn't Ukraine at the time. It was tra

> Roosevelt was probably sicker and had to travel all the way to Ukraine. That is a bit sensitive these days, but Crimea wasn't Ukraine at the time. It was transferred to Ukraine in 1954 by N.Khrushchev (without much elaboration). He did many such transfers at the time. 40 years later, that caused several wars. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/why-did-russia-give-away-crimea-sixty-years-ago?gclid=CLHnyZC7ndACFSLicgod-UEIXw https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/why-did-russia-give...

decebalus1 8y ago
> He did many such transfers at the time. 40 years later, that caused several wars. All these types of things in my opinions were 'investments' in the future. Geopolitical instability is always a good lever for waging war. First think which came to mind when reading your comment was Transnistria.
- toyg 8y ago
  More likely, they were the result of brokering agreements between officials: you give me this, I give you that. When everyone answers to you, moving some land from Commissar X to Commissar Y (as a prize or punishment) is just business. The independence of places like Ukraine was nominal, so giving them a sweetener here and there looked like the smart choice.
- lainga 8y ago
  I'm not sure Khrushchev intended it that way, many in the 50s-era USSR were still pretty confident that the various "people's republics" in the Warsaw Pact would soon apply for membership in the Union, followed by the gradual obviation of national borders, and then the state itself. I think they played fast-and-loose with moving territory between the soon-to-be-obsolete territorial units for that reason.
poilcn 8y ago
This transfer happened because the territory depends on the "mainland" which happened to be Ukrainian Republic. Most of the transportation happened through Ukraine, which also supplied with electricity and water. Crimea has no reliable source of fresh water, pumping it out from the ground turns the land into desert. They didn't believe it was possible that the soviet project would fail and the republics would turn hostile against each other.

decebalus1 8y ago

> He did many such transfers at the time. 40 years later, that caused several wars. All these types of things in my opinions were 'investments' in the future. Geopolitical instability is always a good lever for waging war. First think which came to mind when reading your comment was Transnistria.

toyg 8y ago
More likely, they were the result of brokering agreements between officials: you give me this, I give you that. When everyone answers to you, moving some land from Commissar X to Commissar Y (as a prize or punishment) is just business. The independence of places like Ukraine was nominal, so giving them a sweetener here and there looked like the smart choice.
lainga 8y ago
I'm not sure Khrushchev intended it that way, many in the 50s-era USSR were still pretty confident that the various "people's republics" in the Warsaw Pact would soon apply for membership in the Union, followed by the gradual obviation of national borders, and then the state itself. I think they played fast-and-loose with moving territory between the soon-to-be-obsolete territorial units for that reason.

poilcn 8y ago

This transfer happened because the territory depends on the "mainland" which happened to be Ukrainian Republic. Most of the transportation happened through Ukraine, which also supplied with electricity and water. Crimea has no reliable source of fresh water, pumping it out from the ground turns the land into desert. They didn't believe it was possible that the soviet project would fail and the republics would turn hostile against each other.