Talk:List of rump states

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WHY DO WE LIST STAR WARS IN THIS? C'mon people.

[edit] Italian Social Republic

Italian Social Republic was not the remnant of a once-larger government, it was a puppet state built up by the Nazis, who were an occupying force in Central and Northern Italy when this "state" was created (after the armistice). The Kingdom of Italy was the only legal government in Italy during WWII. Clap 10:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Many more entries

Boy, have I been on a roll in this newly-discovered category to me! I'm a history buff to begin with, and I thought of scores of rump states from all time periods and located in Europe, Asia, Africa, and Latin America! I don't intend to brag about this, but check the history of each country and empire for yourselves. --Heff01 04:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bolivia

Bolivia merits a little discussion here. The War of the Pacific was a war over natural resources, namely in this case the nitrate deposits of the southern Atacama Desert. Chile instigated this war in March 1879, rapidly seized complete control of the Bolivian province of Litoral, and went on to defeat Peru. Although to some the loss of only a single-digit percentage of a nation's area may not constitute a reduction to a rump state, Litoral was economically critical for Bolivia, and its loss and resulting landlocking had a profound negative impact on the nation's development to this day. Only an increase in the world market price of silver prevented a Bolivian depression. --Heff01 01:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warsaw Pact

I did not add the nations of the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War to the list, but I feel it merits discussion anyway. A sound argument can be made for the Warsaw Pact nations besides the Soviet Union being rump states, since none were free to leave the Pact, the USSR reserved the right to intervene in their internal affairs, and Hungary and Czechoslovakia suffered Soviet invasions when they attempted to leave the Pact. --Heff01 18:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Partitions of Poland

I actually first saw the term "rump state" used in describing Poland after its Second Partition of 1793. Its partitioning powers were its neighboring empires of Russia, Austria, and Prussia. Even though Prussia received the smallest piece in the First Partition of 1772, that accelerated Poland's collapse, since Prussia gained control of Baltic access for 80% of Poland-Lithuania's trade, which it levied extortionate customs duties upon.

There is a sound argument for Poland being a rump state prior to 1772, due to the amount of leverage Russian minister to Warsaw Nicholas Repnin had in forcing many concessions from the Polish Sejm (Diet) in drafting its constitution of 1768. He had four vocal opponents of his policy that year arrested and imprisoned in Kaluga, and if that sounds like a blatant violation of Polish national sovereignty, in 1773 he had vocal opponents of his policy exiled to Siberia!

Part of the reason Catherine the Great had the convocation of the Repnin Sejm was to obtain a Polish government that would be ineffective at governing itself, hopelessly weak, and controllable. When she saw 20 years later that Poland was reforming itself and had abolished the liberum veto, she was angered and invaded Poland again. Without foreign intervention, Poland was doomed. It had already been betrayed by its longtime ally Austria due to effective Russian and Prussian diplomacy, and the hands of its last remaining ally, France, were tied at home. Heff01 02:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Should this be a list?

Through my research over the past six weeks, I've learned and posted how world history is replete with examples of rump states. We're already into the triple digits in the count. I don't know how the Wikipedia editors would feel about the matter, but would such a well-developed page serve better if it were made a list? Heff01 04:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, if this were a list, it would have to be trimmed (particularly of "See also" portions) and would not be as informative. Heff01 18:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

On October 28, 2006, this was made a list with no change in format or contents. Obviously this CAN work as a list. Heff01 03:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] German-language link maps

I have used the Siebenbürger (German-Transylvanian) Online Forum page SibiWeb's maps for the links in the cases of Austria, Hungary, Saxony, Serbia, Venice, Bohemia, and Bulgaria, which are found there as Österreich, Ungarn, Kursachsen, Serbien, Venetien, Böhmen, and Bulgarien, respectively. This website has historical high-resolution maps of Hungary, Romania, and surrounding lands from a large number of times since AD 1000. Heff01 02:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Late 20th century deletions

The late 20th century examples of Lebanon, Afghanistan, Chad, and Iraq were wrongfully removed. Lebanon has repeatedly been invaded by Israel and Syria, Chad was partially occupied during its civil war by Libya, and Iraq and Afghanistan have suffered overall foreign occupations. Since Iraq was forbidden by the United Nations to fly over the majority of its own land area, it's safe to say that it has been a rump state since 1991.

I mainly use my home computer to edit this page, but occasionally use another computer to do so. The IP recorded is not consistent, even from the same computer in the same session. I stand by my submissions and have renewed them with my user name. Heff01 14:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Iroquois Confederacy

There may be literally scores of examples of indigenous rump states in North America from before and during European settlement and colonization if searched for hard enough. While including too many such entries in this article would likely be deemed to occupy unnecessary bandwidth and trivialize the subject, I feel that the Iroquois Confederacy merits inclusion, since it represented a group of six well-known US tribes, covered tens of thousands of square miles, had an intertribal council governed by the Gayanashagowa constitution, and made treaties as a unit with Great Britain and the United States. Heff01 01:36, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Denmark

Denmark is literally a shell of its past existence. It went from being the master of the Nordic countries in the early 16th century during the Kalmar Union to losing Norway to Sweden in 1814 to losing Schleswig-Holstein in 1864. This region belong entirely to Denmark until then and almost half of the area of the Jutland peninsula was lost to Denmark in one fell swoop. I altered this last entry for it to reflect the fact that this rump state condition continued to exist after World War I and to this day, since Germany only ceded back northern Schleswig and has maintained the overwhelming majority of S-H to this day. Heff01 00:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Iran

Iran appears several times in this article, as Parthia, the Sassanid Empire, Safavid Persia, and modern Iran. The Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907 included a plan to partition 2/3 of Iran's area between Russia in the north and the British in the southeast. Only a major international outcry, accompanied by threats from Germany and the Ottoman Empire, prevented (or rather delayed) the plan's implementation until World War I. In both World Wars, Russia and Britain made pre-emptive invasions of Iran in order to prevent it from joining the German side and to protect access to Iranian oil.

These moves were all rotten, and did it ever occur to the two aggressors that the only reason that Iran even considered an alliance with Germany was to preserve its sovereignty, because the aggressor empires should have left it alone, but didn't? It is little surprise that Iranians have generally hated The West for a century. While the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the United States had the Anglo-Russian interventions against Iran as precedent to justify pre-emptive aggression, at least Britain and Russia did not resort to "regime change" in those cases (although Britain would in Iraq during World War II.) Heff01 02:14, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course, Western intervention in Iranian affairs didn't end during the Cold War. The US government opposed the oil nationalization policy of democratically-elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh so bitterly that it actively back a coup to reinstate Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi in 1953. Iranians obtained their revenge in 1979 in the form of the Iran hostage crisis. Heff01 17:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Palestine

I'm removing "Palestine", since no usage of this term fits, even remotely, the definition given in the opening paragraph ("the remnant of a once-larger government, left with limited powers or authority after a disaster, invasion or military occupation). -- uriber 12:03, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pakistan and Bangladesh

Actually, that was good thinking about Bangladesh having slightly more people than the rump state of Pakistan in 1972. Bangladesh is an extremely-densely populated nation without the room to accomodate its growth and a super-humid, disease-ridden physical and human climate to boot. Without these handicaps, Bangladesh still could support a larger population than Pakistan. It was these set of biomal circumstances, combined with the Pakistani government's unwillingness to help the Bengali people deal with the aftermath of the 1970 Bhola Cyclone, that have left the people of Bangladesh where they are today. They are a tough, long-suffering nationality. Heff01 19:21, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

As much as I hate to say it, losing Bangladesh was likely the best thing that happened to Pakistan. Bangladesh would have progressively proven to be much more of a drag than an asset for the Indus Valley people and was not worth making sacrifices for continued rule just for the sake of power. Heff01 19:31, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Misalignment between ancient Egyptian and Biblical timelines

There seems to be a pretty noticeable discrepancy between the timelines for Ancient Egypt [1] and Old Testament Israel [2] of approximately half a century. By the time the Israelites made their Exodus, Philistia, Edom, and the Canaanite nations were already independent of Egyptian rule. The Biblical God would not have directed such an exodus if Canaan were still under Egyptian rule. I'm not positive which timeline is more on point. It doesn't look right having the example of Egypt being driven back to the Sinai Peninsula with a later time than Israel under the Judges, but the order must be logically correct. Heff01 14:40, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Finland

Can Finland really be considered a rump state form the Winter War to after the Continuation War? Axeman89 15:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

After the Winter War but not during the Continuation War. Finland was at its peak during early successes in the latter but resumed its rump state condition once the Soviets gained the upper hand. Heff01 03:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This is ridiculous

i deleted some of the more ridiculous cases from the post-wwii list. this page seems to be a personal project of user Heff01, who wants to list anything that might even remotely be considered a "rump state". i suspect the pre-wwii lists need equal of more pruning. Heff01, *please* keep this page encyclopedic and try to only list clear cases. remember that "rump state" is a subjective term. remember that statements need to be sourced. Benwing 22:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This criticism is ridiculous. History is replete with hundreds of examples of rump states. I didn't start the list, but have greatly expanded it. I use map (when possible) or text links whenever any exist online. Heff01 19:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Benwing is correct this list needs a great deal more pruning (not to mention some actual citations). (RookZERO 02:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC))

I had no idea there were so many of these!! Brutannica 00:21, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Russia

Post-USSR Russia was wrongly deleted. Once the USSR broke up into its 15 constituent "republics," Russia was bereft of almost 25% of its area, almost half of its population, and a sizable share of natural resources. Russia today is on life support as an economic power. Ask any educated Russian whether he thinks that his nation is a rump state. Chances are that he feels the economic pinch enough to nod his head. Heff01 00:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

That's only true if Russia was still claiming to be the Soviet Union (as opposed to its successor state - which is a different thing entirely). Russia was not bereft of almost 25% of its area, etc. because Russia was a constituent of the Soviet Union and the government of Russia after the dissolution of the USSR was not the remnant government of the Soviet Union and Russia still had the same area before and after the USSR (Ukraine, Belarus and the other republics were not a part of Russia, they were a part of the Soviet Union, just like Russia was). If the Netherlands broke up today, then Holland would not be a rump state since it was a constituent of the Netherlands, just like the other provinces (provided that the government of the Netherlands did not continue to rule Holland and claim that Holland was the Netherlands). The Soviet government completely disbanded itself, Gorbachev did not continue to rule as the Russian president, Yeltsin did (and Yeltsin's government was in power before the fall of the USSR, and since Yeltsin's government had authority over the same area before and after the dissolution, then it cannot be a "rump" state). Whether or not the majority of Russians feel that their country is a rump state, that doesn't constitute proof that Russia fits the definition of a rump state as outlined in the introduction of the article (just as how if the majority of the world's population were to one day feel that America was becoming a dictatorship wouldn't mean that America was a dictatorship).72.27.85.108 16:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

72.27.85.108 hit the nail on the head. (RookZERO 02:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC))

However, those former Soviet Republics were part of the Russian Empire prior to the Communist Revolution. One could, perhaps, say that Russia under the Soviet Union was a rump state, with its former possessions being (nominally) co-equal members of the USSR, but in reality, the Soviet Union was, effectively, Russia. So, I think it does make some sense to refer to modern Russia as a rump state, assuming that a loss of ~25% of territory is enough to count as a rump state (I'm not sure that would be enough) Nik42 18:48, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] origional research and associated crap

I didn't put the origional research tag on, but whoever did was right. Most of these assertions are uncited at best and outright wrong at worst. Some of the citations I have checked are dead links, only go to link farms or are wikipedia maps. I am not enough of an expert to be able to verify or refute every item on this list, but the ones that appear clearly wrong and are not cited I'm going to deleted. (RookZERO 02:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC))

Unless I see one that I missed, I'm through pruning for now. I've left in several that are debatable, as well as several that I really don't know enough about to form a conclusion. (RookZERO 17:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Liquidated?

I don't know about anyone else, but in my experience, "liquidated" is mostly a financial term, used to describe the liquidation of somebody's assets. Liquidation, as far as I know, means the exchanging of property for money. That is, property is a solid, while cash is a liquid, and other economic metaphors. Wouldn't disestablished, or dissolved, or conquered be more appropriate word choices? 75.111.50.34 15:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of Spurious Additions

This list is full of rather specious examples. As someone who first expanded the article toward its current ungainly proportions, I'd suggest some of the "rump states" listed here are stretches at best. If anyone has particular issue with any of the ones I've removed, I'd be happy to explain my rationale in more detail. hellenica 19:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Former colonial powers

Should former colonial powers be considered rump states? Many of them lost considerable amounts of long-held territory, often due to rebellion. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 09:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Successor states

Should a successor state be considered a rump state if it is' predecessor held a significantly larger territory, like the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Turkey or the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation? -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 09:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] East and West Germany

I have removed the unsourced references to post-World War II East Germany and West Germany from the list. Neither were even remotely rump states within the meaning of the article. While there were minor and symbolic limitations on the sovereignty of the two Germanies based on such things as the Four-Power Agreement, each was a fully-fledged state with full government authority over its territory, control of its borders and infrastructure, taxation, judicial system, and personal jurisdiction over its citizens. One historical development strongly confirming this fact is that after reunification, the resulting state remained the Federal Republic of Germany - the same legal entity; a new state was not created.

In the case of East Germany, its status was no different than that of Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, or Bulgaria, during the era of the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact. Those regimes are not listed here, and neither should East Germany. --MCB (talk) 06:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Reunified Germany was the same legal entity as West Germany, the Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany), East Germany was the Deutsche Demokratische Republik (German Democratic Republic). Also, unlike Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia or Bulgaria, East Germany lost about 2/3 of its' pre-war territory to West Germany and West Germany lost about 1/3 of its' territory to East Germany. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 23:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Visigothic Iberia

"Visigothic Iberia from AD 526 until its Islamic conquest in 718. [21] See also Umayyad conquest of Hispania."

That can be hardly correct because the post-526 state was actually larger than the pre-526, as the Goths were able to conquer the Byzantine province of Ispania and even had established an outpost in Ceuta by the year 600. Unstable and largely unpopular, yes. Rump, no. If it is considered rump the post-Napoleonic Russian Empire should be considered "rump" too, as it faced similar problems.--150.244.23.134 (talk) 14:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fictional rump states

Should we add a section on notable fictional rump states, such as the Star Wars' Imperial Remnant or Battlestar Galactica's Twelve Colonies? -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 23:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] American Civil War

Would the Civil War era Union and count as a rump state? It was the same legal entity as the pre-war and post-war USA, and during the war, and it lost considerable territory due to the Confederacy's secession. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 23:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Territory loss

Does territory loss count as limited power or authority? The example at the start of the article, the Selucid Empire, strongly implies that it does, as it only mentions territory loss. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 23:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)