Talk:Ukrainian SSR

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ukrainian SSR is part of WikiProject Soviet Union, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the Soviet Union. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

"After World War II it was internationally recognised as an independent state in its own right (with a seat in the United Nations)." It was? There any documentation of this? Thanx 68.39.174.150 03:56, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

here is an article off of the united nations page that should clear up your doubt

http://www.un.int/ukraine/Ukr-UN/Ukraine-UN/Ukraine%20in%20the%20UN.htm

[edit] UN seat

I simplified the following lengthy

This had only a symbolical meaning at that time's reality where Ukraine (as a Soviet republic) had no voice of its own in international affairs. In reality it meant little more than giving the Soviet Union extra seats (and votes) in the UN, which in itself was rather symbolical and had little effect in international affairs. The important seat of the UN Security Council permanent member was occupied by the USSR.

to

In reality it simply meant giving the Soviet Union extra seats (and votes) in the UN, since Ukraine (as a Soviet republic) had no voice of its own in international affairs.

Which says basically the same, but without POVish weasels: "symbolical meaning" (twice!), "little more", etc. Also, the permanent seat sentence is irrelevant here: there is nothing special that Ukraine, like nearly all otther countries, didn't have perm. Also, "at that time's reality" is a useless (and I would say misleading) phrase, since Ukrainian SSR never had any independent say. mikka (t) 02:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

The original phrase might have been sloppily written but the new one misses a significant point that the vote Stalin gave to Ukraine (in UN General Assembly) meant little since there were 100+ members and the General assembly resolutions are meaningless anyway since there is no enforcement mechanism. OTOH, the resolutions of Security Counsil, where the seat belonged to the USSR itself, did matter, hence the vote there too. That what I wanted to say originally. --Irpen 03:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I am afraid you are a bit wrong: Ukraine sat several times at the Security council, where her vote did matter to an extent. USSR had a permanent seat, which had the power of veto, which was used when USSR (or USA, btw) could not outvote by majority. To say or to hint in any way that General Assembly resolutions are meaningless is a disrespect to the body and misunerstanding of its purpose. Nevertheless the point is not missed, since it is covered in the overall general-purpose claim: Ukraine had no international say of its own.

On the other hand, if it is true that UkrSSR had no other, even nominally independent, international authority, this should be mentioned. For example, UkrSSR was not a member of Comecon, Warsaw Pact, etc. Do you know anything in this respect? mikka (t) 03:18, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I will see what I can find out. Also, the Ukr SSR had its own Ministry of Foreign Affairs, perhaps just to support the UN mission. I don't know. Many states had consulates in Kiev, but so did they in Leningrad, so it doesn't mean much international recognition. It is interesting to find out to what international organization Ukraine belonged as a separate member. I will see whether I can find anything out.

On the side note, I am sorry if it hurts the General Assembly, but its resolutions were indeed meeningless. Every year or so it passed (and maybe still the passes) resolutions condemning Israel for something and it has no effect and they are not ever remembered. OTOH, the single UN Security Council Resolution 242 despite being so old is being brought up all the time despite this particular resolution had no enforcement mechanism. --Irpen 03:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I look at this from other side. It would be truly horrible to have a single world power with abilities to crush anyone. UN is good to arrange cooperation where cooperation is possible. Where it is not possible, it shows who sits on which side of the fence. What it does is pretty useful. mikka (t) 03:52, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Unreferenced?

Please explain at talk what in particular is doubted by "underefenced" tag? Entire article? Something particular? Thanks! --Irpen 23:40, 20 November 2005 (UTC)