From: pakstas@idt.unit.no (Algirdas Pakstas)
Subject: Re: 
Reply-To: pakstas@idt.unit.no (Algirdas Pakstas)
Organization: Div. of CS & Telematics, Norwegian Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 92 17:19:57 GMT

In article <01GOFQ9FCU4W8ZE0DW@MPS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>, VIZNYUK@MPS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (SERGEI VIZNYUK) writes:
|> > From: sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
|> >
|> > Sergei Viznyuk writes:
|> >>As you noted yourself, the question in "TransDniester" republic is
|> >>HOW to teach Moldavian language, while in "democratic" Estonia the
|> >>question is "to teach or not to teach Russian at all".
|> >
|> >At least no one has even discussed the possibility of using a Latin
|> >script for Russian.
|> 
|>   As you may know, the ORIGINAL script of MOLDAVIAN
|> language was Cyrrilic, except for the time, Moldova was
|> occupied by Romania, i.e. during 20 years. 

What about occupation of Besarabia (i.e. Moldova!!!) by russian troops
and "joining" Besarabia to Russia? Was this factor influenced to
cyrilization of Moldavian (i.e. Romanian) script? 

BTW, this "joining" Besarabia to Russia was result of war between
Russia and Turkey and Russia ASKED Romania to allow russian army go
through Besarabia for battles with turks. And Romania ALLOWED it.
When war was finished and Turkey was crashed (by Suvorov !!! who also
is famous as suppressor of rebellion in Lithuania and Poland !!!)
then Russia included in peace treatment between Russia and Turkey ...
question of "joining" Besarabia to Russia (i.e. cutting of foreign
territory). Turkish Pasha protested for such violation of
international law but after long diplomatic "work" he agreed to
signature this treatment.

Is such "joining" to Russia any basis for claiming that original
script of Romanian language used in Moldova (Besarabia) was cyrillic?
Is it non-natural that switching to Latin in Moldova was done 1989?

|> [..]

|> > Nagorno-Karabagh belongs to the people who live there. If the
|> > majority of them want to be part of Azerbaijan, Qarebagh also
|> > belongs to Azerbaijan. However, apparently people in Artsakh
|> > does not want to be part of Azerbaijan.
|> > --
|> > Erland Sommarskog - ENEA Data, Stockholm - sommar@enea.se
|> > F|rst till kvarn f}r f|rst vankiva

I think that more presicely Nagorno-Karabagh belongs to Armenia
because it IS historical armenian lands, because it is populated by
Armenians (who want to join to Armenia) and because current situation
that Nagorno-Karabagh belongs to Azerbaijan is just usual result of
Stalin' internal policy: "divide and dominate".

|>   Now, after reading what you wrote, dear Erland, may ask
|> you to repeat the statement above (but only if you consider youself
|> as honest person), but with some changes in names, as e.g.:
|> 
|> 1. Narva region of Estonia belongs to the people who live there. If the
|>    majority of them want to be part of Estonia, Narva also
|>    belongs to Estonia. However, apparently people in Narva
|>    does not want to be part of Estonia.

Was Narva part of historical russian lands? No...

Was Narva populated by Russians because it was part of Lenin's
national politics? Yes...

Are Estonians who lives in Narva region interested to be with Estonia? Yes!

|> [...]

|> S.V.

-- 
_______________________________________________________________
Algirdas.Pakstas@idt.unit.no                  NTH IDT
Ph.: +47-7-594485                             N-7034, Trondheim
FAX: +47-7-594466                             Norway

Disclaimer: all opinions are my personal, employer can disagree
_______________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: talk.politics.soviet