2 ms·
> I don't think the verdict of "History" is as clear as you seem to think it is. Well, I think it is - because the verdict was documents signed by Russia that
by libertine 2y ago
> I don't think the verdict of "History" is as clear as you seem to think it is.
Well, I think it is - because the verdict was documents signed by Russia that stated clearly that each country is entitled to its own sovereignty, territorial integrity, foreign policy, alliances, and strategic decisions.
The documents are:
- UN Charter
- Helsinki Accords
- Charter of Paris for a New Europe
- Russia–NATO Founding Act
If Finland made their strategic decisions to appease Putin, including not joining NATO, I don't know. And it would be great if you could share some sources on this information because it made me curious. I'm finding it hard to believe Finland was on a tight leash from Russia (especially because they rebuilt and maintained their military without restrictions).
- hollerith 2y ago>If Finland made their strategic decisions to appease Putin . . . That is not what I said: I said Finland and Austria appeased the Soviets in the ways I described from 1945 to at least 1990.
- libertine 2y agoI see what you're saying. But as I stated, the world changed, and Russia (and even the USSR) changed during that period and signed the documents to marked such change. Going back in time just because "Russia has nukes" doesn't seem like a very viable option - not to mention that others also have nukes.