Talk:Kaliningrad question

ALL this reminds me of the DANZIG-QUESTION!!! Do You want another WAR???

80.151.9.187 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:27, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

ALL OF PRUSSIA AND SILESIA ARE GERMAN LANDS AND ARE OUGHT TO BE RETURNED TO GERMANY !!! WEATHER WAR OR NO WAR !!!! Bukhara (Kingdom of Bukhara) (talk) 01:35, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

You seem to have a strong POV. I request you to stop. CheeseInTea (talk) 14:28, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Possible transfer to Lithuania?

According to Lithuania Minor#Lithuanian claims there have been (presumably fringe) opinions that the Kaliningrad Oblast should be attached to Lithuania, so it's not just Germany that has been considered. (Since the Duchy of Prussia was a Polish fief, opinions favouring its attachment to Poland would also not be out of the question.) Double sharp (talk) 16:12, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Here's an article considering this option (and here is another one that is quite similar). According to the Wikipedia article, the Arka monument in Klaipėda has the top broken off specifically to symbolise the Kaliningrad Oblast, so the viewpoint seems to be notable enough to mention (even though I have no idea how much support it actually has among Lithuanians). Double sharp (talk) 14:15, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Another article (not proposing the above solution). Double sharp (talk) 15:16, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Article name

'Kaliningrad question' seems to be used mostly to refer to the Iskander missile situation, and the tension with NATO countries more in general. Perhaps a name like Status of Kaliningrad Oblast or Irredentism in Kaliningrad Oblast would be more precise.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2018 (UTC) @Simen113: @Double sharp:

This is perhaps correct. I was influenced by the Karelian question as a model of article name. --Simen113 (talk) 07:43, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Does anyone have a sense as to how popularly/universal the phrase "Kaliningrad question" is in use (if at all commonplace)? Is this the standard phrase used to refer to the question of Kaliningrad's territorial status?
Perhaps this article would be best renamed Political status of Kaliningrad and expanded in scope to additionally outline the current and historical political status of Kaliningrad. This title would resemble those belonging to a number of existing articles such as Political status of Crimea, Political status of Transnistria, Political status of Nagorno-Karabakh, Political status of Taiwan, Political status of the Cook Islands and Niue, and Political status of Puerto Rico.
To a lesser extent it would also resemble the titles of the articles Status of Jerusalem, Status of Western Sahara, Constitutional status of Cornwall, Status of territories occupied by Israel in 1967, Disputed status of the isthmus between Gibraltar and Spain, and Disputed status of Gibraltar. Alternatively, it could be retitled as Proposed political status for Kaliningrad. This would be a similar title to that of the article Proposed political status for Puerto Rico.
SecretName101 (talk) 17:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Per the article's page statistics, @Underlying lk: is currently the article's top contributer in (amongst other measures) their number of published changes to this article (50-plus). Perhaps they could provide some imput?
SecretName101 (talk) 18:35, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

I think Political status of Kaliningrad Oblast might work.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 18:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Good call. More specific in that it encompasses the status of the entire Oblast.
SecretName101 (talk) 20:50, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

I have opened a similar discussion about the name of the (earlier mentioned) article currently entitled "Karelian question". The outcomes of these two discussions may differ. It seems possible that we might retain that article's title whilst still changing the title of this article. SecretName101 (talk) 21:31, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

As far as I can see the most sensible names are the present name, and the Königsberg question. An article on the Political status of Kaliningrad should be about the political status of the city/oblast within the present-day Russian federation, which is an entirely different topic. Toddy1 (talk) 10:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

and the unified Germany)

Using the term "unified Germany" in the instance of the 3rd German Empire is not so good as "Unified Germany" stands more for the event which took place in 1990! Germany in 1870 was NOT divided, every German state saw itself as dominant! 80.151.9.187 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:24, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

You're confusing "German Unification" with "German Reunification". The event in 1990 explicitly refers to reunification, while 1871 is explicitly known as the German Unification, founding the country of Germany. 142.207.85.130 (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Opinion of inhabitants?

This article is completely lacking information about the opinion on the issue of the people actual living there nowadays. This should be (the) most relevant information. Without it, the article doesn't meet the quality standards of Wikipedia. Can someone please add any information on this? Gollem (talk) 03:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

The city was ethnically cleansed by bombing and anyone who survived was driven out at gun point or shot. They then brought in 8,000,000 Russian peasants to repopulate the place. Why would you ask the violent occupiers of stolen land what they think? We know what they think, the same thing everyone who went through the Russian school system (including myself until I learnt the history of it and my ancestry) that it, like Ukraine, and Poland, and eastern Germany, and the middle east "was always Russian, is always Russian, and will always be Russian" because that's what we're raised to think and you DO NOT question that. 121.210.33.50 (talk) 09:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

What you write is exactly the kind of information that should be added, in a bit more neutral wording and citing sources. Gollem (talk) 10:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Bad POV angle.

>A fringe position also considers the return of the province to Germany from the Russian Federation, or its independence from both.[4][5] The former question is mostly hypothetical, as the German government has stated that it has no claim to it, and has implemented legal and constitutional mechanisms which prevent any territory east of the Oder from ever becoming part of Germany again.[citation needed]

Konigsberg is the ancestral seat of power of Prussia and the Germanic people from pre-history. It's not "fringe" it would be like Canada attacking America, giving half of the country to Mexico, and taking Washington DC as their own, ethnically cleansing it with fire and steel and then fifty years later people saying "Washington DC is totally Canadian and it's fringe to say it's American."

This is beyond historically ignorant I suspect it was literally written by a Russian government employee trying to spin doctor the issue. The breaking up of Germany caused WWII, directly. Stealing land from nations is never a peaceful way forwards for any party, and the redress of the theft is important to Germanic people globally. Just because ONE head of government said something stupid doesn't mean ALL Germans and ALL Germanic people of Prussian ancestry think this. I would say the belief that Konigsberg is stolen land and the mass murder of its occupants a war crime is common across all Germanic people aware of the history of the region or the land grabs from The Holy Roman Empire, Weimar, and Germany all three had their borders eroded over and over again turning them from a huge continent spanning nation into what they are today. 121.210.33.50 (talk) 09:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Kaliningrad question and the Russian constitutional amendment

Russian constitution was amended on July 4, 2020, which bars giving Russian lands to other countries. Does this mean the Kaliningrad question is closed for good?

45.74.75.99 (talk) 16:21, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I'd say: no. Mainly because the proposed amendment (as I understand it) doesn't prohibit granting independence to a territory. (Which is what many have suggested for the Kaliningrad Oblast.)Rja13ww33 (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Also a hard "no" in this reply. The question is not closed by whether or not a country bars giving away land, but by resolution over the land internationally. As long as there are multiple parties with claim to a land, and the claims are substantial, it remains a question here as it does in any other comparable example. 142.207.85.130 (talk) 22:19, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

"Support for independence" section...

I've removed, for now, the "Support for independence" section, which read as follows:

"Since the early 1990s there has been a strong drive for independence from Russia and the formation of a "fourth Baltic state" by many of the local people. The Baltic Republican Party was founded on 1 December 1993 with the platform of founding an autonomous Baltic Republic. Moscow however has cracked down hard on such sentiments due to the military and strategic importance of the oblast to the Russian Federation."

A number of issues here, including the fact that the only citation was to an opinion piece published by the Jamestown Foundation think tank.

Moreover, the rhetoric here about a "strong drive for independence" "by many of the local people" strikes me as quite weaselly, and frankly rather misleading....If such a "strong drive" really existed then surely there would be some polling data to back this up. So I would see this more as wishful thinking on the part of the anti-Russian think-tank.

Elections data don't show evidence of particularly strong support for a Western-aligned "4th Baltic Republic" either. Looking at the results of the 2012 Russian presidential election, we see that the more pro-Western liberal candidate, Mikhail Prokhorov, got 13.56% of the vote in Kaliningrad, which, to be fair, was significantly more than he got in most of Russia, but still far from a majority, and well less than what he got in Moscow and St. Petersburg....And of course it would be a big leap to assume that all, or even most, of those voting for Prokhorov supported separation from Russia!

Conversely though, it is pretty safe to assume that the 52.55% who voted for Putin, the 21.33% who voted for Zyuganov (communist), and the 7.79% who voted for Zhirinovsky (ultra-nationalist) do not support Kaliningrad separating from Russia. Incidentally, all three of these candidates got a higher percentage in Kaliningrad than they did in Moscow.

So not only is the idea that Kaliningrad Oblast is a hotbed of separatist sentiment not well-supported, there is in fact compelling evidence to the contrary. -2003:CA:8748:5CFC:98D:44F2:EA2D:98C5 (talk) 23:08, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@2003:CA:8748:5CFC:98D:44F2:EA2D:98C5: after looking over the source again I agree it makes sense to remove. Sorry about undoing your edit but at first it appeared as vandalism to me. Sudonymous (talk) 23:25, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

@Sudonymous - Sure, no problem. An honest misunderstanding. To be clear, I'm not even inherently opposed to there being such a section, if someone can show some better evidence that significant support for independence among Kaliningrad residents in fact exists - e.g. polling data, or news coverage about large pro-independence demonstrations, etc. I'm just not aware of any such evidence, and like I said above, the elections data (to the extent one can use that as a proxy), don't provide supporting evidence either. -2003:CA:8748:5CFC:98D:44F2:EA2D:98C5 (talk) 23:34, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

References

The elimination of Prussia

This state was considered the cause of much of the troubles of Europe for centuries. The elimination of it, and its traditions, was a goal of both the western allies and the Soviets. This is the main reason for the elimination of east Prussia, the heart of old Prussia, and its capital, Königsberg (the city of the kings). Stalin just was heavy-handed about it (in his usual way), expelling the whole population.

This is the reason the enclave exists. Some mention of it, with proper sourcing, would improve the article. Also, Stalin’s reasoning in filling it with Russians instead of handing it to Lithuania ( then a possession of the Soviets as Lithuania SSR). He did that with the other part of East Prussia, handing it to Poland (then a Soviet satellite) after expelling the Germans. 5.81.195.50 (talk) 08:48, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Care to provide some sourcing? Slatersteven (talk) 12:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Königsberg (Kaliningrad?) is definitely not Russian/lack of information about affiliation/same case as Crimea

Königsberg (Kaliningrad?) is definitely not Russian and the article is missing information about affiliation of this region to Germany, Poland and/or Lithuania, and it's the current situation. It's the same case as widely disputed Crimea, Karelia, or Northern Territories. Kaliningrad is a Russian name and has nothing to do with the original name for this region or Königsberg itself. Königsberg is located in Europe - it borders with Lithuania and Poland in Europe, so it's far away from Russia. Eurohunter (talk) 19:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

The history section mentions all of this (and the intro talks about a possible return of the region to Germany - kind of only possible if it ever belonged to Germany. Everybody is of course welcome to add more explanations on this point. Concerning comparison to Crimea, I am not aware of anyone who disputes the current affiliation of the region with Russia, and the article also does not mention any official claims - in this sense, it is not a disputed territory. Ymblanter (talk) 10:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Yes, somehow there is no official claims and I curious why. It's like Ukraine would have no claim on Crimea. Instead of it, sometimes you can hear unofficial Polish citizens claims to Ukrainian Lviv (it's like "urban legend"). I would rather focus on claims to Russia than Ukraine. Eurohunter (talk) 19:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Now I am lost. Is your question why no country (and no serious politician) officially claims this exclave? Ymblanter (talk) 19:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Yes but even people who live in Poland, Germany and Lithuania speak no word about it. Eurohunter (talk) 13:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Just because the exclave went to Russia according to signed treaties, and we usually like not to break the signed treaties. Some irredentist sentiment indeed exists but it is reserved to really marginal groups. Ymblanter (talk) 15:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Whatever the complex and perhaps unfair 20th century history of the Kaliningrad Oblast, it's simply false to say that "it's definitely not Russian" -- its current inhabitants are Russian citizens and mostly ethnically Russian, it's governed by Russia, it's internationally recognized as part of Russia, and no other state claims it as part of their territory. It's not similar to Crimea, because Crimea is internationally recognized as part of Ukraine but occupied and administered by Russia.

Germany would be the other state that has the most historical right to claim the territory, for the reasons you describe; but during the Cold War, both East and West Germany came to accept the Oder–Neisse line as the eastern border of Germany as part of the process of reintegration into normal political relations with neighboring states. Irredentist claims to land east of that line, including the Kaliningrad Oblast, became associated with far-right politics that was shunned by mainstream parties in both states. This attitude held after reunification. --Jfruh (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

@Jfruh: Both German Democratic Republic and Polish People's Republic were a Soviet states created by Soviet Union while official governments were located in Federal Republic of Germany and Polish government-in-exile in the United Kingdom. Saying that some treats with Soviet Union puppets has any legal power is like saying that there should be some treaties with Islamic State. Btw. why there is no left-wing irredentist claims? Both left, and right wings are often extremes in certain fields, and often some fields are attributed to left or right wing policy, which is ridiculous. Eurohunter (talk) 13:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

"Saying that some treats with Soviet Union puppets has any legal power is like saying that there should be some treaties with Islamic State" is a position you are welcome to hold, but it is not one that has ever been held by any state governments or that has held in international law. If you're asking a serious question of "Why don't other countries treat Kaliningrad the way that they treat Crimea," multiple people have answered you explaining the motivations of various nation-states and international legal opinions. If you think other countries should treat Kaliningrad the way they treat Crimea and are asking why more people don't share your opinion, feel free to advocate for that in the appropriate forums, which this talk page is not one. --Jfruh (talk) 18:58, 6 January 2024 (UTC)