Perhaps a more violent breakup, or even full blown civil war? Then again, a civil war would be very likely to go nuclear. . .
Are there any other countries that could've seceded from the Soviet Union in 1991?
- Thread starter Doctor Imperialism
- Start date
They all left the Soviet Union, or it may be more accurate to say the Soviet Union left them. It stopped existing, after all. Do you mean who could have left Russia? If so, that's a different question.
Don Grey
Banned
I think his trying to say russia. As in the various autonomis regions and republics that make up the russian federation like chechniya dahgistan etc.
Alex Richards
Donor
Chechyna's the only one which I can think of that had a chance, though it's not on as good a footing as the others.
Apart from being like 86% Ethnically Russian, thus making separation totally unlikely.
If in the unlikely chance that it did, would it remain independent or join another country?
A couple other Russian republics could have seceded, i.e. Chechnya and Tatarstan.
It would, however, have been much harder. The 15 new republics were able to obtain independence because they were constitutionally permitted to secede. Something I don't think people always appreciate is how difficult it is to actually secede in the modern world.
Since the founding of the UN, international law has recognized the inviolability of national boundaries. They are not to be altered or changed – and no secession is to generally be allowed – without the express consent of the "parent" state.
In the case of the Soviet republics, on paper they were all locked in a confederal-type arrangement. The Soviet constitution gave the republics the right to secede. That counted as consent, and so when they seceded they all gained recognition. (This was also the case for Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.)
That would not have been the case for any other autonomous republics, and unless Russia granted them independence – which they were unwilling to do – they wouldn't have won it.
(*NOTE: What's underappreciated is that this has largely been followed. Most new states came through decolonization – and existing colonial boundaries were maintained. The only exceptions since around 1950 – where states were carved out of preexisting boundaries – are Bangladesh (which obtained Pakistan's consent in the peace treaty), S. Sudan, Eritrea (a preexisting entity which merged with Ethiopia and was then permitted to leave), E. Timor and Namibia (which also were colonial entities that had been under unrecognized military occupations). The one major exception to this principle is Kosovo, which got widespread intl' recognition despite not being granted recognition by Serbia.)
It would, however, have been much harder. The 15 new republics were able to obtain independence because they were constitutionally permitted to secede. Something I don't think people always appreciate is how difficult it is to actually secede in the modern world.
Since the founding of the UN, international law has recognized the inviolability of national boundaries. They are not to be altered or changed – and no secession is to generally be allowed – without the express consent of the "parent" state.
In the case of the Soviet republics, on paper they were all locked in a confederal-type arrangement. The Soviet constitution gave the republics the right to secede. That counted as consent, and so when they seceded they all gained recognition. (This was also the case for Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.)
That would not have been the case for any other autonomous republics, and unless Russia granted them independence – which they were unwilling to do – they wouldn't have won it.
(*NOTE: What's underappreciated is that this has largely been followed. Most new states came through decolonization – and existing colonial boundaries were maintained. The only exceptions since around 1950 – where states were carved out of preexisting boundaries – are Bangladesh (which obtained Pakistan's consent in the peace treaty), S. Sudan, Eritrea (a preexisting entity which merged with Ethiopia and was then permitted to leave), E. Timor and Namibia (which also were colonial entities that had been under unrecognized military occupations). The one major exception to this principle is Kosovo, which got widespread intl' recognition despite not being granted recognition by Serbia.)
I agree with what SlideAway said re: the legal difficulties of what you propose. Ignoring that for the sake of amusement, though, I could almost see Tuva going for independence. Around that time anti-Russian sentiment was running high, and there was a surprising amount of violence...
The other "Asian" components... also hard to see happening. Buryatia certainly has more 'national consciousness' than most, but I'm not familiar with any pro-independence or anti-Russian sentiment; also the presence of some important defense industry plants there would make it awkward for Russia to give up.
In some conlang-related projects of mine I've had an independent Sakhalin or Kamchatka, though with a POD much farther in the past. In this ATL -- as in OTL -- independence movements in either location just don't seem plausible to me. If anything, I get the impression residents there would prefer closer ties (i.e., support and investment) to European Russia!
The other "Asian" components... also hard to see happening. Buryatia certainly has more 'national consciousness' than most, but I'm not familiar with any pro-independence or anti-Russian sentiment; also the presence of some important defense industry plants there would make it awkward for Russia to give up.
In some conlang-related projects of mine I've had an independent Sakhalin or Kamchatka, though with a POD much farther in the past. In this ATL -- as in OTL -- independence movements in either location just don't seem plausible to me. If anything, I get the impression residents there would prefer closer ties (i.e., support and investment) to European Russia!