Humanities desk
< January 22	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 24 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 23

Countries that were intended as temporary creations and as stepping stones to annexation by some other, larger country?

Which countries were intended as temporary creations and as stepping stones to annexation by some other, larger country? So far, I can think of the Republic of Texas, the Bear Flag Republic, and the Republic of Hawaii in regards to wanting annexation by the United States (ultimately fulfilled) and the Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic in regards to wanting annexation by Russia (ultimately unfulfilled, at least as of right now). Of course, there was also the Tuvan People's Republic between 1921 and 1944, but I am unsure if the goal of this republic was actually outright annexation to Russia from the very beginning of this republic's existence like it was (in regards to annexation by Russia and by the United States) for my other examples above here. Futurist110 (talk) 07:10, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Roman Empire set up puppet states (client kingdoms) in Egypt, Judea and Asia Minor.
Sleigh (talk) 09:14, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Cretan State would be an example, as would be the current Republic of Cyprus (where a prospect of eventual unification with Greece was considered a political goal by many when it was founded). Kosovo might count as another example (eventual unification with a "Greater Albania" being a goal of some of the Albanian insurgents during the war). Fut.Perf. su 09:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly Manchukuo? Alansplodge (talk) 11:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Transnistria was originally set up to be annexed by Russia, but it was just too far apart geographically for that to work, so it lives on in legal limbo to this day. Xuxl (talk) 14:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that it's more isolated than Kaliningrad oblast. Some observers have claimed that the Post-Soviet Russian government likes having legally-dubious and not-finally-settled situations in the "near abroad", such as Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Nagorno-Karabakh, etc. AnonMoos (talk) 15:32, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kaliningrad can be accessed from Russia by sea, though. In contrast, Russia would have to go through another country's territory to access Transnistria since Transnistria can't actually be accessed by sea due to it having no coastline at all. Now, if Russia were to conquer Odessa (say, with Russian paratroopers, as the Germans did with German paratroopers with their own invasion of Crete back in 1941) and to annex it to Transnistria, then it would become a different story in regards to this. Futurist110 (talk) 19:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, with your frozen conflicts list here, you forgot to mention the Donbass Republics. Futurist110 (talk) 19:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To get to Transnistria, they would not have to cross the land territory of any other state, but rather sail up the international Dniester river, right? AnonMoos (talk) 21:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And blockading this river would be an act of war? Futurist110 (talk) 05:12, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Declaration of Independence of the Republic of Crimea was days before the Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, but it may not count for several reasons. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:28, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why exactly wouldn't it count for this? Futurist110 (talk) 04:01, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because it was just a stepping stone to Crimea's expected absorption into Russia's sphere. <-Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots-> 22:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Our Dniester article does not mention it being an open river. Does some law apply by default? --Error (talk) 03:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that I expressed myself poorly; what I basically meant was that the part of the river which is within the Ukraine in the south (and which is actually a river) is rather short, and if Transnistria were an independent state (or annexed to Russia), much of the rest of the river would lie along international boundaries. Since an independent/annexed Transnistria would be separated from the sea by a short stretch of wide river, it's more like those countries that are cut off from international waters (which includes some countries with a seacoast, like Slovenia), rather than a truly landlocked country such as the Central African Republic or whatever... AnonMoos (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't the Baltic freeze in winter? Or maybe Kaliningrad and the Black Sea are the only Russian ice-free ports? --Error (talk) 03:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you mention the Republic of Cyprus, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is a better example. --Error (talk) 03:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Catalan Republic (1641), Catalan State (1873) and Catalan Republic (1931). Canton of Cartagena and the cantonal rebellions. Ezo Republic. Danzig? Trieste? Tanger? Republic of Austria? [The Baltic states created by the Germans after the Russian retreat and peace. Kingdom of Etruria? British Hongkong to be reannexed by China? Basque Republic? Gibraltar? Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia. Paris Commune. --Error (talk) 03:40, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sovereign Council of Asturias and Leon and other instances of cantonalism. --Error (talk) 03:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on your historiography, many of the Republics of the Soviet Union started as initially "independent" states that later joined in free association with Russia to form the Soviet Union; another perspective is that these were set up by Russia as a means to expand its influence over its satellite states and incorporate them into the Soviet Union, which was dominated by Russia from the start due to its massively larger population and geography within the Union. The legal fiction of being independent republics was even maintained in the United Nations, as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic were given full membership as sovereign states, even though they had no functional independence from the USSR. In the case of the Baltic states, the Soviet Union didn't even pretend they joined the union of their own free will; they were forcibly annexed and the Soviet Union installed a Soviet-style government in each of them; its why they were the first to go in the dissolution of the Soviet Union. --Jayron 32 12:13, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Summary judgment and letters of credit

I was given the following statement to elaborate on: "The summary judgment procedure is said to be an advantage of Letters of Credit". It refers to Part 24 of the UK Rules of Civil Procedure, thus we are talking about English Law. No more information is provided. After some research, I have not found one source that mentions this "advantage" (also, advantage compared to what?). Case law suggests that enforcement of letters of credit is indeed often sought through summary judgments, but I am unable to find a connection between the two. Does anyone have an idea what this statement is referring to? Regards, XanonymusX (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@XanonymusX: What do you mean it was given to you? Is this a homework assignment? RudolfRed (talk) 18:07, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is part of a course on Trade Finance, yes. –XanonymusX (talk) 18:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I assume it means that summary judgment is not available in all cases. The thing with summary judgment, at least in U.S. law, is that it avoids the time and expense of going to trial, having witnesses testify, etc. I would suspect that with a letter of credit, the letter itself is sufficient evidence for judgment, and thus the perfect case for summary judgment. 69.174.144.79 (talk) 18:59, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And, guessing, the supposed advantage (viz., less delay in receiving payment) may be in comparison to other payment mechanisms in case the payment to the beneficiary is unduly withheld, stemming from a diminished prospect of the defaulting payer to successfully defend the claim and thus an increased chance of claimant (the beneficiary) being awarded a summary judgment. --Lambiam 10:11, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense, thanks!--XanonymusX (talk) 18:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fate of POWs at the end of WWII

Near the end of World War II, what did the Germans & Japanese do with their prisoners-of-war? Did they execute them, moved them to other POW camps or let them live and stay? 86.133.195.11 (talk) 20:52, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Japanese treated prisoners throughout the war rather poorly; I'm not sure that much changed towards the end. It was among a number of steps by the Japanese authorities -- such as not even bothering to tell their soldiers about the Geneva Conventions, attacking Pearl Harbor without a declaration of war, refusing to surrender during or after a battle even when such refusal had little real military value, sometimes deliberately killing civilians (or encouraging civilians to commit suicide) while refusing to surrender (as at Okinawa), "kamikaze" suicide attacks, etc -- which persuaded most in the U.S. that they had no morality or ethics, and set no value on human lives (their own or others')... AnonMoos (talk) 21:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Stalin's Soviet Union was somewhat unique in mistreating its own soldiers who had been prisoners of war in other countries... AnonMoos (talk) 21:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See Sandakan Death Marches for an example of what Japan did. Death orders were also ordered for civilian internees, for example at Batu Lintang camp, but the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had a salutary effect and they were not in the end carried out. Of course many internees had already been starved or beaten to death, died from medical neglect, or been "executed" without any legal basis. DuncanHill (talk) 21:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the Far East, see RELIEF OF PRISONERS OF WAR AND INTERNEES.

In Europe, many prisoners from the Western Allies were held in camps in the eastern part of the Reich and were moved on foot in early 1945 to avoid the advancing Soviet forces, in appalling winter conditions; see our article, The March (1945) - "almost 3,500 US and Commonwealth POWs died as a result of the marches". Alansplodge (talk) 23:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]