Freedom for non-reckonized states in the former Soviet Union

I"ll be referring to several regions and locations in Russia, so here"s the link to the map I"ll be using: http://upload.wikimedia.org... There are two main reasons why the Russian republics should not be given independence, and I'll go into as much detail as I can with both of them.1. Economic trouble and dependence on home countries would result.The Russian economy is not in a good position to give up twenty-one of its territories. Giving up resource-rich regions that benefit it greatly would send the shaky Russian economy over the edge.The European recession and falling oil prices slowed Russia"s economic growth in recent years.[1] The twenty-one Russian republics made up about 5% of Russia"s annual GRP in 2008[2], which might not sound like much, but 5% of the Russian economy in 2008 was equivalent to 112.6 billion dollars. Some of the republics also house major Russian cities (such as Kazan, which is located in the Republic of Tatarstan), and losing these pivotal hubs would deal a significant blow to the economy. Taking such a loss would push the Russians into a deeper hole. The same economic problems would be seen in Azerbaijan and Georgia if they were to give up territory.Imagine, for a moment, if Russia were to grant independence to each of its republics. Many of these hypothetical new nations would not be strong enough, either economically or politically, to begin self-governing themselves right away, especially countries like Chechnya and Ingushetia that would still be struggling with internal conflict. They would need support from both Russia and the international community. Also, some of these new countries would be completely landlocked by Russia, and thus would rely heavily on Russian infrastructure and trade to sustain themselves. Like I stated before, Russia would struggle after losing such a sizable chunk of territory and resources, so all of the new economies would struggle as well. If the republics stay part of Russia, then this economic crash will be avoided, and internal conflicts like the ones in North Caucasus can be handled more efficiently than if the conflict were spread among multiple nations. 2. Sovereignty would not stop the problems, only increase them.My opponent seems to believe that granting independence to the nonrecognized states would stop all of their problems immediately, which sadly isn't the case.Before I get into that, however, I want to bring up how not all of the unrecognized Soviet states want to secede. Most of them have secessionist movements or had them in the past, but the only ones with any real support are in Chechnya, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Sakha, and Ossetia.[3] Even so, these popular movements still don't have enough popularity to result in a successful secession.Anyway, back to the second main point: conflict would not stop should the twenty-five nonrecognized states gain independence. In Russia, internal migration has changed the percentage of different ethnicities in different regions, so not every republic is representative of its ethnicity.[3] The Russian republics all have a fairly large percentage of Russians that make up the population, which should be expected, considering that they are part of Russia. If they were granted independence, then the Russians that live in these republics wouldn't take kindly to being cut out of their homeland. More ethnic conflict would arise, as Russians who wanted to remain part of Russia either flee back into what's left of Russia or begin causing trouble with acts of terrorism, just like the Chechens are now. The same would go for the Georgians in Adjara, Abkhazia, and South Ossestia and the Azerbaijanis in Nagorno-Karabakh; people don't like being separated from their own country. For proof, look at Crimea in Ukraine. The area had (and still has) a majority of ethnic Russians, but it became part of Ukraine after the USSR dissolved. This led to tensions between Russia and Ukraine, but eventually Crimea became an autonomous republic that remained part of Ukraine. Even today, there are tensions between the two countries over this territory. In the case of North and South Ossetia, the conflict between them would still exist after being given independence. Georgia considers South Ossetia occupied by Russia, which means both countries have a stake in its fate; if South Ossetia were to gain independence, it could very well lead to another Russia-Georgia war over the territory. North Ossetia, meanwhile, would still face ethnic clashes between the Ossetians and Ingush. These problems will not be solved with independence; further dividing North Casaucus would only dilute the attemps at stopping the disunity. I will now begin my refutations for my opponent's points."As you said these states show a diffrent wthics in the Russian Federation This is same with Yugoslavia or in slavic (Land of the south Slavs" Yugoslavia was very divers relgiously and ethnicly Sufi Muslims in Kosovo Sunni Muslims in Bosnia but were discussing russia the same will happen to Russia the Mujahideen in Chechnya&Daghestan are winning as the mujahids of bosnia&Kosovo"Comparing the Russian Federation to Yugoslavia doesn"t translate your point very well, as the breakup of Yugoslavia did not stop the disagreements over territory or bloodshed. Seven countries arose from Yugoslavia, but they did so mostly through wars and ethnic cleansing.In addition, the economies of the new sovereign nations that came from Yugoslavia were hurt by the breakup. Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, and Macedonia are all on the list of the top ten poorest European countries[4]. If Russia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan were to let go of their republics in any way, peacefully or through violent means, their economies, along with the twenty-five new economies of the freed republics, would suffer, as I stated earlier in this round."the Russian Fediration needs to fall it went from one union to another there is genocide in Chechnya"Putin has made it clear with Russian involvement in Chechnya, and other republics, that Russia has no intention of giving up any of them, so should all the other republics instead forcefully take their independence through a series of costly wars, even if they aren't particularly interested in sovereignty? Killing does not warrant more killing."if chechnya was free "terrorism" in russia would stop and the loss of life will also stop and for chechens reading Allah Korusun Musluman Chechenya'm"I"m not sure why you put the word 'terrorism' in quotes, because the methods that certain Chechens are using to attempt to gain freedom is definitely "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion".[5] The massive school shootout that killed hundreds of people was instigated by Chechen terrorists, for example.[6]I already addressed how independence for Chechnya and the other unrecognized states wouldn"t stop of the loss of life earlier in my argument.On to you, Pro.[1] http://www.economist.com...[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...[4] http://www.techscio.com...[5] http://www.merriam-webster.com...[6]http://www.cnn.com...