Talk:Treaty of Tartu

Comments

I made some changes, of which most are uncontroversial, I hope! However, it's to be noted that the Soviet Union strictly speaking didn't exist yet in 1920, why the correct link better is to Bolshevist Russia. Further more, Finland had not as far as I know annexed any areas in East Karelia, why the notion of "joined" areas is exchanged for occupied. /Tuomas 13:29, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Reply to Tuomas:

I know. Repola was joined and occupied. If you can Finnish, see pages:

http://www.student.oulu.fi/~saka/sultsina2000/bobi.html I copied the main points here: "Suomessa oleskelevien Itä-Karjalan johtomiesten tavoitteena oli tosin vain autonomian saaminen kansalleen, mutta myös itäkarjalaisissa esiintyi halua liittyä juuri itsenäistyneeseen veljesmaahan Suomeen."

"Vaikka Vienan retki ei onnistunutkaan, niin Aunuksen puolella, sen pohjoisosassa sijaitseva Repola päätti kaksipäiväisessä pitäjankokouksessa 31.8-1.9. 1918 liittyä Suomeen."

"Aunuksen retken ainoana konkreettisena tuloksena Repolan naapurikunta Porajärvi oli liittynyt Suomeen."

I'll translate: "There were wish to join Finland among East Karelians", "Repola decided to join Finland during two day parish congress 31.8.-1.9. 1918", "During Aunus expedition Porajärvi joined to Finland"

http://www.repola-seura.org/kyla/rkysaannot1920.html

After that of course Finnish forces went to parishes and occupied them.

A text from Aunus Expedition:

The only "gain" from the expedition was that the parish of Porajärvi declared that it wished to join Finland. As had the parish of Repola already done in 1918. Some volunteer forces were left in these two villages. In the treaty of Tartu in 1920 Finland and Soviet Union agreed on their common border. Repola and Porajärvi were left on the Soviet side and the Finnish troops had to be withdrawn before February 14, 1921. The young police chief in Repola, Bobi Sivénin shot himself in protest.

/81.197.10.131 8:23, 6 May 2004 (UTC) (?)

As far as I know Finland did not formally annex the two parishes. Note the difference in your text: "Porajärvi (joined during Aunus expedition)" and mine: "Porajärvi declared that it wished to join Finland". (Compare also with Åland: they votet to join Sweden, but that had no real effect). -- Jniemenmaa 07:51, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, yes, there is difference. But if one say only "Finland occupied Repola", he cut a lot of information out. -- Kahkonen

English text for Russo-Estonian treaty

Please note that a contemporary English text of the Treaty of Tartu is available in my homepage: http://www.hot.ee/almanach/tartu.htm

Erki Kangro

That's Russo-Estonian treaty. Is there somewhere English text for Russo-Finnish treaty? Kahkonen 08:11, 2004 Jul 24 (UTC)

Separate articles

I think there should be two separate articles for these two separate treaties: Treaty of Tartu (Russo-Estonian) and Treaty of Tartu (Russo-Finnish). Kahkonen 13:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. --Jaakko Sivonen 06:59, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Not quite. The Treaty of Tartu is discussed/seen/known in Estonia solely as Russian - Estonian agreement. The Finnish part is not discussed in this issue. Thus there should be left at least a link to the Finnish - Russian agreement.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.50.145.22 (talk • contribs) 17 November 2006 (UTC)