Would the UN accept an independent Routhenia?

[anotherlife]

in that region, the UN has recently accepted an independent Slovakia and an independent Kosovo. Do you think the UN will accept an independent Routhenia too?

Now that the Ukraine is leaning back towards Russia, an independent Routhenia may be a good strategic EU step. Your take?

 

[ESay]

in that region, the UN has recently accepted an independent Slovakia and an independent Kosovo. Do you think the UN will accept an independent Routhenia too?

To create a national state there must be a nation around which the state can be created. Do you know many people who call themselves Ruthenians (Rusyns)?

Now that the Ukraine is leaning back towards Russia, an independent Routhenia may be a good strategic EU step. Your take?

It seems that you are absolutely misinformed about the situation in that region. It is hard to find another country in Europe with that anti-Russia stance that Ukraine has

 

[anotherlife]

in that region, the UN has recently accepted an independent Slovakia and an independent Kosovo. Do you think the UN will accept an independent Routhenia too?

To create a national state there must be a nation around which the state can be created. Do you know many people who call themselves Ruthenians (Rusyns)?

Now that the Ukraine is leaning back towards Russia, an independent Routhenia may be a good strategic EU step. Your take?

It seems that you are absolutely misinformed about the situation in that region. It is hard to find another country in Europe with that anti-Russia stance that Ukraine has

To my understanding, when Czechoslovakia was created, they were called Rusyns, as you are saying, and added to the land borders of Czechoslovakia. I speculate, that now after separating the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it would be logical to separate the rusyns too. I read somewhere at another thread or a blog, that the rusyns were running discussions about how to set up an independent government, and it was about the choice of a one house or two house setup like the uk.

Maybe this. If the Ukraine is totally anti Russian, then Russia would support the further break up of the Ukraine by supporting an independent routhenia. This would be more difficult to sell to the EU, I guess, but maybe Poland would be on board, because south east Poland is now a part of the Ukraine.

 

[ESay]

in that region, the UN has recently accepted an independent Slovakia and an independent Kosovo. Do you think the UN will accept an independent Routhenia too?

To create a national state there must be a nation around which the state can be created. Do you know many people who call themselves Ruthenians (Rusyns)?

Now that the Ukraine is leaning back towards Russia, an independent Routhenia may be a good strategic EU step. Your take?

It seems that you are absolutely misinformed about the situation in that region. It is hard to find another country in Europe with that anti-Russia stance that Ukraine has

To my understanding, when Czechoslovakia was created, they were called Rusyns, as you are saying, and added to the land borders of Czechoslovakia. I speculate, that now after separating the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it would be logical to separate the rusyns too. I read somewhere at another thread or a blog, that the rusyns were running discussions about how to set up an independent government, and it was about the choice of a one house or two house setup like the uk.

Maybe this. If the Ukraine is totally anti Russian, then Russia would support the further break up of the Ukraine by supporting an independent routhenia. This would be more difficult to sell to the EU, I guess, but maybe Poland would be on board, because south east Poland is now a part of the Ukraine.

Independent Ruthenia is utopia, because even if you create this state on the lands of the above mentioned countries, this state would be only a small part of those lands which were called Ruthenia long ago.


The Rusyns comprise only a small part of Zakarpatie region’s population. I doubt that this will prove successful. For Russia it would be more useful to support pro-Russian movement in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. But they have lost the time.

 

[anotherlife]

in that region, the UN has recently accepted an independent Slovakia and an independent Kosovo. Do you think the UN will accept an independent Routhenia too?

To create a national state there must be a nation around which the state can be created. Do you know many people who call themselves Ruthenians (Rusyns)?

Now that the Ukraine is leaning back towards Russia, an independent Routhenia may be a good strategic EU step. Your take?

It seems that you are absolutely misinformed about the situation in that region. It is hard to find another country in Europe with that anti-Russia stance that Ukraine has

To my understanding, when Czechoslovakia was created, they were called Rusyns, as you are saying, and added to the land borders of Czechoslovakia. I speculate, that now after separating the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it would be logical to separate the rusyns too. I read somewhere at another thread or a blog, that the rusyns were running discussions about how to set up an independent government, and it was about the choice of a one house or two house setup like the uk.

Maybe this. If the Ukraine is totally anti Russian, then Russia would support the further break up of the Ukraine by supporting an independent routhenia. This would be more difficult to sell to the EU, I guess, but maybe Poland would be on board, because south east Poland is now a part of the Ukraine.

Independent Ruthenia is utopia, because even if you create this state on the lands of the above mentioned countries, this state would be only a small part of those lands which were called Ruthenia long ago.


The Rusyns comprise only a small part of Zakarpatie region’s population. I doubt that this will prove successful. For Russia it would be more useful to support pro-Russian movement in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. But they have lost the time.

I see. Well, this is then an even bigger strategic and political scenario. Very interesting. The underlying question is how to satisfy the territorial demands of existing EU members, like Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, in the same time as pushing back on the possibility of pro Russian sentiment in the Ukraine. I speculate that if this is successful, then the EU is in prime position of annexing both Kiev and Belarus, right at the door steps of Moscow.

 

[ESay]

in that region, the UN has recently accepted an independent Slovakia and an independent Kosovo. Do you think the UN will accept an independent Routhenia too?

To create a national state there must be a nation around which the state can be created. Do you know many people who call themselves Ruthenians (Rusyns)?

Now that the Ukraine is leaning back towards Russia, an independent Routhenia may be a good strategic EU step. Your take?

It seems that you are absolutely misinformed about the situation in that region. It is hard to find another country in Europe with that anti-Russia stance that Ukraine has

To my understanding, when Czechoslovakia was created, they were called Rusyns, as you are saying, and added to the land borders of Czechoslovakia. I speculate, that now after separating the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it would be logical to separate the rusyns too. I read somewhere at another thread or a blog, that the rusyns were running discussions about how to set up an independent government, and it was about the choice of a one house or two house setup like the uk.

Maybe this. If the Ukraine is totally anti Russian, then Russia would support the further break up of the Ukraine by supporting an independent routhenia. This would be more difficult to sell to the EU, I guess, but maybe Poland would be on board, because south east Poland is now a part of the Ukraine.

Independent Ruthenia is utopia, because even if you create this state on the lands of the above mentioned countries, this state would be only a small part of those lands which were called Ruthenia long ago.


The Rusyns comprise only a small part of Zakarpatie region’s population. I doubt that this will prove successful. For Russia it would be more useful to support pro-Russian movement in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. But they have lost the time.

I see. Well, this is then an even bigger strategic and political scenario. Very interesting. The underlying question is how to satisfy the territorial demands of existing EU members, like Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, in the same time as pushing back on the possibility of pro Russian sentiment in the Ukraine. I speculate that if this is successful, then the EU is in prime position of annexing both Kiev and Belarus, right at the door steps of Moscow.

Poland, Hungary or Slovakia has territorial demands to Ukraine?

 

[anotherlife]

in that region, the UN has recently accepted an independent Slovakia and an independent Kosovo. Do you think the UN will accept an independent Routhenia too?

To create a national state there must be a nation around which the state can be created. Do you know many people who call themselves Ruthenians (Rusyns)?

Now that the Ukraine is leaning back towards Russia, an independent Routhenia may be a good strategic EU step. Your take?

It seems that you are absolutely misinformed about the situation in that region. It is hard to find another country in Europe with that anti-Russia stance that Ukraine has

To my understanding, when Czechoslovakia was created, they were called Rusyns, as you are saying, and added to the land borders of Czechoslovakia. I speculate, that now after separating the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it would be logical to separate the rusyns too. I read somewhere at another thread or a blog, that the rusyns were running discussions about how to set up an independent government, and it was about the choice of a one house or two house setup like the uk.

Maybe this. If the Ukraine is totally anti Russian, then Russia would support the further break up of the Ukraine by supporting an independent routhenia. This would be more difficult to sell to the EU, I guess, but maybe Poland would be on board, because south east Poland is now a part of the Ukraine.

Independent Ruthenia is utopia, because even if you create this state on the lands of the above mentioned countries, this state would be only a small part of those lands which were called Ruthenia long ago.


The Rusyns comprise only a small part of Zakarpatie region’s population. I doubt that this will prove successful. For Russia it would be more useful to support pro-Russian movement in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. But they have lost the time.

I see. Well, this is then an even bigger strategic and political scenario. Very interesting. The underlying question is how to satisfy the territorial demands of existing EU members, like Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, in the same time as pushing back on the possibility of pro Russian sentiment in the Ukraine. I speculate that if this is successful, then the EU is in prime position of annexing both Kiev and Belarus, right at the door steps of Moscow.

Poland, Hungary or Slovakia has territorial demands to Ukraine?

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

 

[ESay]

To create a national state there must be a nation around which the state can be created. Do you know many people who call themselves Ruthenians (Rusyns)?

It seems that you are absolutely misinformed about the situation in that region. It is hard to find another country in Europe with that anti-Russia stance that Ukraine has

To my understanding, when Czechoslovakia was created, they were called Rusyns, as you are saying, and added to the land borders of Czechoslovakia. I speculate, that now after separating the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it would be logical to separate the rusyns too. I read somewhere at another thread or a blog, that the rusyns were running discussions about how to set up an independent government, and it was about the choice of a one house or two house setup like the uk.

Maybe this. If the Ukraine is totally anti Russian, then Russia would support the further break up of the Ukraine by supporting an independent routhenia. This would be more difficult to sell to the EU, I guess, but maybe Poland would be on board, because south east Poland is now a part of the Ukraine.

Independent Ruthenia is utopia, because even if you create this state on the lands of the above mentioned countries, this state would be only a small part of those lands which were called Ruthenia long ago.


The Rusyns comprise only a small part of Zakarpatie region’s population. I doubt that this will prove successful. For Russia it would be more useful to support pro-Russian movement in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. But they have lost the time.

I see. Well, this is then an even bigger strategic and political scenario. Very interesting. The underlying question is how to satisfy the territorial demands of existing EU members, like Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, in the same time as pushing back on the possibility of pro Russian sentiment in the Ukraine. I speculate that if this is successful, then the EU is in prime position of annexing both Kiev and Belarus, right at the door steps of Moscow.

Poland, Hungary or Slovakia has territorial demands to Ukraine?

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

 

[anotherlife]

To my understanding, when Czechoslovakia was created, they were called Rusyns, as you are saying, and added to the land borders of Czechoslovakia. I speculate, that now after separating the Czech Republic and Slovakia, it would be logical to separate the rusyns too. I read somewhere at another thread or a blog, that the rusyns were running discussions about how to set up an independent government, and it was about the choice of a one house or two house setup like the uk.

Maybe this. If the Ukraine is totally anti Russian, then Russia would support the further break up of the Ukraine by supporting an independent routhenia. This would be more difficult to sell to the EU, I guess, but maybe Poland would be on board, because south east Poland is now a part of the Ukraine.

Independent Ruthenia is utopia, because even if you create this state on the lands of the above mentioned countries, this state would be only a small part of those lands which were called Ruthenia long ago.


The Rusyns comprise only a small part of Zakarpatie region’s population. I doubt that this will prove successful. For Russia it would be more useful to support pro-Russian movement in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. But they have lost the time.

I see. Well, this is then an even bigger strategic and political scenario. Very interesting. The underlying question is how to satisfy the territorial demands of existing EU members, like Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, in the same time as pushing back on the possibility of pro Russian sentiment in the Ukraine. I speculate that if this is successful, then the EU is in prime position of annexing both Kiev and Belarus, right at the door steps of Moscow.

Poland, Hungary or Slovakia has territorial demands to Ukraine?

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

 

[ESay]

Independent Ruthenia is utopia, because even if you create this state on the lands of the above mentioned countries, this state would be only a small part of those lands which were called Ruthenia long ago.


The Rusyns comprise only a small part of Zakarpatie region’s population. I doubt that this will prove successful. For Russia it would be more useful to support pro-Russian movement in southern and eastern regions of Ukraine. But they have lost the time.

I see. Well, this is then an even bigger strategic and political scenario. Very interesting. The underlying question is how to satisfy the territorial demands of existing EU members, like Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, in the same time as pushing back on the possibility of pro Russian sentiment in the Ukraine. I speculate that if this is successful, then the EU is in prime position of annexing both Kiev and Belarus, right at the door steps of Moscow.

Poland, Hungary or Slovakia has territorial demands to Ukraine?

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I see. Well, this is then an even bigger strategic and political scenario. Very interesting. The underlying question is how to satisfy the territorial demands of existing EU members, like Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, in the same time as pushing back on the possibility of pro Russian sentiment in the Ukraine. I speculate that if this is successful, then the EU is in prime position of annexing both Kiev and Belarus, right at the door steps of Moscow.

Poland, Hungary or Slovakia has territorial demands to Ukraine?

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

 

[ESay]

Poland, Hungary or Slovakia has territorial demands to Ukraine?

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

 

[anotherlife]

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

But that is exactly the thing. Soviet documents show that the Poles were forcibly expelled and deported from Lwow and all lands west and south of it, in an attempt of soviet ethnic cleansing. Why should the EU and the NATO uphold such a history?

 

[anotherlife]

Poland, Hungary or Slovakia has territorial demands to Ukraine?

Polish people say, that Lviv city is Polish and not Ukrainian. Slovakians say that Munkachevo and Khust(?) is Slovakian and not Ukrainian. Hungarians say that Uzhgorod and Khust and Munkachevo are Hungarian and not Ukrainian. In any case, legally speaking, when the Zakarpatie land was annexed by Soviet Ukraine in 1946, the land was already under soviet occupation, so neither Czechoslovakia, nor Hungary were allowed to fairly negotiate and argue to keep it. So we could make the legal statement, that the Ukrainian administration on that land is illegal.

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

Is the Lendian also known as Lendiel? A Hungarian told me that Poland's Hungarian name is Lendiel.

 

[ESay]

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

Ukraine has international recognized borders, all mentioned countries (Poland was one of the first, btw) recognized Ukraine as independent state with those borders which existed at the time of the Soviet Union’s collapse. When Ukraine (then Ukrainian SSR) became one of the founding members of the UN, it had the borders it has now (except of Crimea).

In the medieval times Lviv was part of Principality of Galicia-Volyn - the state of Rus’ people (don’t confuse with contemporary Russians) and only after a couple of centuries it became Polish.

So, your last statement is doubtful.


Moreover, I think that no neighbor of Ukraine (maybe except Russia) is interested in dividing Ukraine.

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

But that is exactly the thing. Soviet documents show that the Poles were forcibly expelled and deported from Lwow and all lands west and south of it, in an attempt of soviet ethnic cleansing. Why should the EU and the NATO uphold such a history?

It may well be that Poland will demand to pass a law on restitution.

 

[anotherlife]

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

I am surprised, that Polish political leadership waved Poland's right to claim back the land that it lost to the Molotov Ribbentrop pact and the Corzov line. They must know that general public sentiment in Poland demands those lands back. If a country agrees to uphold the borders of its neighbor, to its own territorial detriment, then can it undo it?

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

But that is exactly the thing. Soviet documents show that the Poles were forcibly expelled and deported from Lwow and all lands west and south of it, in an attempt of soviet ethnic cleansing. Why should the EU and the NATO uphold such a history?

It may well be that Poland will demand to pass a law on restitution.

I think that is a very good idea. But I think that restitution needs to be not financial but territorial.

 

[ESay]

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

I doubt that Poland has a right on these lands. Despite all attempts of ‘polonization,’ throughout centuries the population of these lands were Rusyn (Rus’) and contemporary Ukrainians are descendants of these people.

And yes, I think they will uphold their agreements. No one in the EU or Nato will allow Poland to widen their borders forcibly.

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

But that is exactly the thing. Soviet documents show that the Poles were forcibly expelled and deported from Lwow and all lands west and south of it, in an attempt of soviet ethnic cleansing. Why should the EU and the NATO uphold such a history?

It may well be that Poland will demand to pass a law on restitution.

I think that is a very good idea. But I think that restitution needs to be not financial but territorial.

Why is that? Only financial and only for those people or their descendants who lost their property and were forcibly moved from those lands. Though, it may be that some properties that still exist at the present days can also be returned. Also, this law, if ever been passed, should guarantee compensations only for individuals but not the Polish state as a whole.

 

[anotherlife]

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

Some cities in present day Western Ukraine were far more Polish, than Ukrainian, such as Lwow (Lviv)

There's some Lechite tribes, or Polish tribes in Western Ukraine before the Kievan Rus, such as Lendians.

This doesn’t change the fact that overwhelming majority of Galicia’s population were Rusyns (again, don’t confuse with contemporary Russians).

But that is exactly the thing. Soviet documents show that the Poles were forcibly expelled and deported from Lwow and all lands west and south of it, in an attempt of soviet ethnic cleansing. Why should the EU and the NATO uphold such a history?

It may well be that Poland will demand to pass a law on restitution.

I think that is a very good idea. But I think that restitution needs to be not financial but territorial.

Why is that? Only financial and only for those people or their descendants who lost their property and were forcibly moved from those lands. Though, it may be that some properties that still exist at the present days can also be returned. Also, this law, if ever been passed, should guarantee compensations only for individuals but not the Polish state as a whole.

That would reduce it to what is called nominal compensation. In other words, no compensation. This is interesting too, because the EU does follow the strategy of creating ongoing conflicts alongside its borders on both sides.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

The problem is with Polish demands to the East, is that Germans will raise their demands to the East as well.

German expansion into Poland, is actually less favorable, than Polish expansion into Ukraine.

This is exactly why the Polish elite so rarely bring it up.

 

[anotherlife]

The problem is with Polish demands to the East, is that Germans will raise their demands to the East as well.

German expansion into Poland, is actually less favorable, than Polish expansion into Ukraine.

This is exactly why the Polish elite so rarely bring it up.

I understand, that uniting Poland and Germany would be like uniting cats and dogs.

But why is it made unthinkable to aDd the Polish language as a second national language in Germany, and add German as a second national language in Poland?

That would confuse Europe pretty well, especially its French - Russian axis.