Belgium 'abolished'

[Asick]

Originally Posted by Przemolog

1st Jan 2008 for land traffic, 1st Apr 2008 (or something around) for air traffic. Not sure about the sea traffic.

From this point of view (transits) the land traffic is more important, since you can stay in the 'behind the border' zone at international airports making a connection there, right? So, it's just a year remaining... not bad.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

Well, are so long trains journeys cheap enough to prefer them to taking the plane???

Yes if you travel from Russia or Ukraine or any exUSSR. Trains and buses are much cheaper in this part of the world. Also, some people (like me) just like to travel by trains and buses because you can visit many interesting places on your way too. And, which is for sure, there's always some people who are sick of aerophobia.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

Must it be done personally? Can't travel agencies do those "paper transfers"?
In Poland travel agencies do that kind of job at least for Russian and Belarusan visas (and used to do the same for Western European or Israeli visas as long as they were required).

No, it usually should not be done personally when you apply for a EU visa. Luckily, EU countries do not require a personal interview for a visa applicant (but the States and UK do it, so you can get their visa only in person). However, travel agencies take too much here for such the services. For example, my aunt was applying for an Austrian visa while we had no Austrian consulate in St.Petersburg (now we still don't have it but Austrian visas are issued by the Finnish consulate here since 2005). The cheapest service for sending her documents to Moscow and back that she found was about 150 Euros (while the visa costed about 35 Euros itself). You can imagine how much a person should pay for sending documents from Vladivostok to Moscow via a tourist firm, for example... I don't say it's the problem that can't be solved, eventually, but look, it would have even been possible to go abroad from the USSR, if you had been ready to get this as the purpose of all your life and to bother much. I mean there should be some more adequate instruments in 21th century, such as Internet visas, simplified procedures for those who has other EU visas normally used etc and now it's not the time for building new walls in Europe, eventually. Talking about Russian and Belarussian visas... well, it's just the reflection of the rules that EU sets, nothing more.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

In 1972 there was even an experiment of full free trafic and full currency convertibility between Poland and GDR. Free traffic remained but there was a lack of balance about currencies - eastern Germans reamined with millions of Polish zlotys and with empty shops .

Oh, I can imagine this. GDR was known to be the most rich 'soclalist' country in the whole East Europe, USSR was spending MUCH money to support this rich state of them to keep the contradiction between two German economics not that huge. So, it's quite reasonable why it had been ruined being gathered with another budget.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

However, when the passport policy loosened later in the 1980's, about 1 million Poles emmigrated anyway.

Oh, this is really interesting info that I have not heard here before. Surely, it could not be published in USSR in 80s, and now it's just the socialist Europe history detail which is not generally interesting for Russian media.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

It was visible especially if to consider that before 1988 there were only 2 road and 3 railway border crossings between Poland and USSR available for public use (the border length was over 1200 km).

Which ones? One is surely Brest, and which was another road crossing? Anyway, it's perfectly clear why USSR inhabitants were not allowed to easily visit 'socialist' countries. From the Soviet point of view, people in these countries lived much better than Soviet people, and they had much more 'rotten' things in their lifestyles that made them closer to the 'rotten' West. It was 'half West', so it would have ruined the Soviet lifestyle itself if it had been too close. Also, if they allowed Soviet people to easily travel to Poland or to GDR, then millions and millions from here would have bought all the goods they find abroad, making the situation much worse that it was in 1972 with GDR-Poland. Remember, in 70s and especially in 80s Soviet people had much money that they could not spend (deficit). Money exchange limitation? Well, it's a problem, but there's always used to be the black market. It's known you could exchange soviet rubles to crones or zlotys and back in hotels etc., even though it was illegal and the rates were much worse than in official banks. From the other hand, it was not very difficult to visit USSR for people from the West in 70s and 80s, here were many Finnish 'vodka tourists' in that time, for example, or even Finnish workers building some hotels and other things. Also, here were West German, French, Italian or even American tourists... Not millions of them, but quite enough to create special layer of services for them (hotels, shops selling western goods for dollars etc.).

[Przemolog]

Originally Posted by Asick

From this point of view (transits) the land traffic is more important, since you can stay in the 'behind the border' zone at international airports making a connection there, right? So, it's just a year remaining... not bad.

Unless you have to transfer to another airport....

Originally Posted by Asick

Yes if you travel from Russia or Ukraine or any exUSSR. Trains and buses are much cheaper in this part of the world. Also, some people (like me) just like to travel by trains and buses because you can visit many interesting places on your way too.

Yes, I realise that, but you mentioned travelling by train from Russia to Turkey. Then you must travel via Romania and Bulgaria paying an international train tariff - it's not that low even in eastern Europe now.

Originally Posted by Asick

The cheapest service for sending her documents to Moscow and back that she found was about 150 Euros (while the visa costed about 35 Euros itself). You can imagine how much a person should pay for sending documents from Vladivostok to Moscow via a tourist firm, for example... I don't say it's the problem that can't be solved, eventually, but look, it would have even been possible to go abroad from the USSR, if you had been ready to get this as the purpose of all your life and to bother much. I mean there should be some more adequate instruments in 21th century, such as Internet visas, simplified procedures for those who has other EU visas normally used etc and now it's not the time for building new walls in Europe, eventually. Talking about Russian and Belarussian visas... well, it's just the reflection of the rules that EU sets, nothing more.

Yes, it seems crazy to me that I can travel without visa not only to most Europe but also to countries so distant as Japan, New Zealand or Argentina but I can't cross the border with Belarus 100 km from my home .
Now it looks incredible but there used to a strange time in Poland between October 1990 and April 1991 when despite freshly regained freedom and democracy it was possible to travel without visas, vouchers or invitations only to Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and... Argentina . Also 24-hrs transit was allowed via Czechoslovakia or the USSR.

Originally Posted by Asick

Oh, I can imagine this. GDR was known to be the most rich 'soclalist' country in the whole East Europe, USSR was spending MUCH money to support this rich state of them to keep the contradiction between two German economics not that huge. So, it's quite reasonable why it had been ruined being gathered with another budget.

Yes, they had better living conditions than we did. E.g., my aunt who lives in Świnoujście (the north-west "corner" od Poland) used to buy Polish toilet paper in GDR (because it was permamently missing in Polish shops)

Originally Posted by Asick

Oh, this is really interesting info that I have not heard here before. Surely, it could not be published in USSR in 80s, and now it's just the socialist Europe history detail which is not generally interesting for Russian media.

Well, the official propaganda was silent about this wave of emmigration (as well as any after 1945 emmigration in general - who wanted to escape from socialist paradise ?) - these are 1990's estimates.
However, even more Poles have emmigrated since the EU accession - but at least they are only economical emmigrants - not political ones.

Originally Posted by Asick

Which ones? One is surely Brest, and which was another road crossing?

Medyka-Shegini on the Kraków-Przemyśl-Lvov route. Railway crossing where Medyka, Terespol-Brest and Kuźnica Białostocka-Grodno (Warszawa-Vilnius-Leningrad route). There used to be a Dorohusk-Jagodin railway crossing on Warszawa-Lublin-Kiev route in the 1950's but it was closed and reopened only in 1988 or 1989. There were no border crossing with Lithuanian SSR and Kalinigradskaya oblast'.

Originally Posted by Asick

Also, if they allowed Soviet people to easily travel to Poland or to GDR, then millions and millions from here would have bought all the goods they find abroad, making the situation much worse that it was in 1972 with GDR-Poland. Remember, in 70s and especially in 80s Soviet people had much money that they could not spend (deficit).

Well, the same applied (perhaps even more) to Poland in 1980's. So, despite the ideological reasons, "friendly" socialist countries protected their economies from "invasion" of Polish "shopping tourists". This fear was so great that Czechoslovakia opened it's borders only in 1991 when it truned that Czech and Slovaks buy more in Poland than Poles in Czechoslovakia

Originally Posted by Asick

From the other hand, it was not very difficult to visit USSR for people from the West in 70s and 80s, here were many Finnish 'vodka tourists' in that time, for example, or even Finnish workers building some hotels and other things. Also, here were West German, French, Italian or even American tourists... Not millions of them, but quite enough to create special layer of services for them (hotels, shops selling western goods for dollars etc.).

They were source of precious convertible currencies - it was more important than ideology

[Asick]

Originally Posted by Przemolog

Unless you have to transfer to another airport....

Oh, yes, this is a problem. However, it's often used to be the only international airport per a city for most of the connections, isn't it?

Originally Posted by Przemolog

Yes, I realise that, but you mentioned travelling by train from Russia to Turkey. Then you must travel via Romania and Bulgaria paying an international train tariff - it's not that low even in eastern Europe now.

Look, the direct train to Istanbul would be expensive, you are right. However, here's a great layer of very popular cheap tours, which are half bus half train. It means the train part is used to cross exUSSR (cheap train tariffs) and then they use buses to finalize the route (buses are usually rented at border cities, such as Brest, Lviv or Cisinau). It's usually 2 times cheaper than a plane tour, which is significant.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

Yes, it seems crazy to me that I can travel without visa not only to most Europe but also to countries so distant as Japan, New Zealand or Argentina but I can't cross the border with Belarus 100 km from my home .

For Russians it's a bit strange situation too. We have visa free traffic with some really distant countries such as Columbia or Marocco, but do not have it with almost all the non CIS neighbours. We can cross freely to some exYugoslavia states (Bosnia and Montenegro) and using vouchers to Croatia. We can enter Turkey with 'at-the-border' visas valid for 2 months etc., but EU is quite closed. There are some simplifications, though. For example, Cypriot visas are free and easy to get, and people of Russian North-West may apply for a Finnish visa (usually multiple entry 30 days per 6 months or even more) without any invitation. That's why the Finnish border seems to be unlocked from here, and you can see MUCH Russians and Russian cars in South-East Finland. Some people use these visas to enter other Schengen countries, they are valid for it with some specific restrictions. However, these are rather exceptions. A private visit to EU is always a headache for a 'normal' Russian. I guess they should quit the inhumane practice of giving visas just for the duration of your visit, I mean if you shows no problems for EU (normal travel history, place of work, salary etc.) you should get a 1-2 years valid or may be more multiple entries visa on auto basis. This is what Finns in fact do for St.Petersburg inhabitants, but it's still an exception. And, which is for sure, the same should be with Russian visas for EU citizens. This is what would decrease the visa headache dramatically, while visa free regulation is still not possible. However, it seems that embassies just like huge lines at their doors and grabbing money for every travel a person does.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

despite freshly regained freedom and democracy it was possible to travel without visas, vouchers or invitations only to Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and... Argentina . Also 24-hrs transit was allowed via Czechoslovakia or the USSR.

Well... visa regulations in fact more depends on economics and crime than on politic state. Unless there's a country that specially block their borders, the level of democracy is not seriously considered there. For example, a country might be perfectly democratic, but EU or USA would never allow visa free traffic with it's citizens if their salary is about 50-100 Euros/month average. From another hand, people of Paraguay or Bruney may enter the Schengen territory without visas. Real democracy, eh?.. Russia has 300/month average and normal 1000/month in Moscow or St.Petersburg, but I guess they more consider problem of crime and North Caucasus than 'so-so' democracy.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

Yes, they had better living conditions than we did. E.g., my aunt who lives in Świnoujście (the north-west "corner" od Poland) used to buy Polish toilet paper in GDR (because it was permamently missing in Polish shops)

Oh, this is funny! I believe the money allowed to exchange was quite enough to buy all the toilet paper your aunt needed. By the way, I have a bit strange memory. You know, in late 80's rumor had that Poles were buying lots of Soviet hi-tech (mostly TVsets), so that were them who created global deficit in this layer of goods in USSR, especially in big Soviet cities such as Moscow or Leningrad. Although I'm sure it's exaggeration, is it somehow correct?

Originally Posted by Przemolog

However, even more Poles have emmigrated since the EU accession - but at least they are only economical emmigrants - not political ones.

I understand it. Here we had few political emmigrants till the late 80s (few because most of them were sent out by KGB as very 'annoying' persons, they could not emmigrate by themselves). Then it was really intensive wave of emmigrants, both political and economical. There was another wave after the crisis of 1998. Currently I guess just a few emmigrate from here since salaries are acceptable and most of the political emmigrants have already left.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

There used to be a Dorohusk-Jagodin railway crossing on Warszawa-Lublin-Kiev route in the 1950's but it was closed and reopened only in 1988 or 1989. There were no border crossing with Lithuanian SSR and Kalinigradskaya oblast'.

Oh, it's in fact seen on old Soviet maps, but I thought it was just not all the information shown. Now I see there was as it was shown. So, the road crossings at Mamonovo and Bagrationovsk (Kaliningrad area) and at Grodno are 'new'? I crossed through them in 90s and some of them looked a bit 'used'.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

This fear was so great that Czechoslovakia opened it's borders only in 1991 when it truned that Czech and Slovaks buy more in Poland than Poles in Czechoslovakia

From another hand, it was almost visa free traffic between Czech republic and Russia since 1993 or about that, so they seemed to change their view completely fast enough. I crossed Polish-Czech border a few times in middle 90s, I can hardly say the traffic was intensive and goods oriented. No, it was rather people going for a day walk and back, sometimes by feet and no goods carrying.

Originally Posted by Przemolog

They were source of precious convertible currencies - it was more important than ideology

Oh, yes, although I guess it was not that much comparing it with the oil money that USSR was getting in late 70s and early 80s.

[Malkav]

Going back to the forum title and origional topic, Yes Belgium Should be abolished....same as luxembourge and other small silly countries, andorra, monaco, san marino, the vatican...they are taking up to much space...

[AndreA]

Originally Posted by Malkav

Going back to the forum title and origional topic, Yes Belgium Should be abolished....same as luxembourge and other small silly countries, andorra, monaco, san marino, the vatican...

We just did it

Porta Pia It was through an artillery-opened breach in the wall near here that on September 20, 1870 Bersaglieri soldiers entered Rome and completed the unification of Italy.

[Asick]

Originally Posted by Malkav

Going back to the forum title and origional topic, Yes Belgium Should be abolished....same as luxembourge and other small silly countries, andorra, monaco, san marino, the vatican...they are taking up to much space...

You can call me a non modern person or a populist , but I really guess many nations do deserve independence much more than these pseudo-countries you listed above. I mean Curds, Abkhazians, Basques, Tibetians etc. These are real nations which are different from their 'owners' (often they are from another group of ethnoses) and who have been fighting for their right to get independent, while all these Andorra (in fact Catalonia), San Marino (Italy) etc. at present are too tiny and too similar to their neighbours to be really independent. So, either Curds and Basques should be independent too or Andorra should be Spain and San Marino should be Italy, the rest is unfair.

[AndreA]

en

Originally Posted by Asick

You can call me a non modern person or a populist , but I really guess many nations do deserve independence much more than these pseudo-countries you listed above. I mean Curds, Abkhazians, Basques, Tibetians etc. These are real nations which are different from their 'owners' (often they are from another group of ethnoses) and who have been fighting for their right to get independent, while all these Andorra (in fact Catalonia), San Marino (Italy) etc. at present are too tiny and too similar to their neighbours to be really independent. So, either Curds and Basques should be independent too or Andorra should be Spain and San Marino should be Italy, the rest is unfair.

Well, I understand you and your point of view is right. We have to think about REAL nations not yet live. But we have to respect other specular situations too, small is not less respect. For example San Marino: they are NOT Italy. They have italian culture and language (as Ticino in Switzerland, but no one is thinking that swiss part is... italy), but a real important national story. Yes, San Marino is the fifth least-populous sovereign country in the world but it's the oldest constitutional republic still in existence today. Not only. During the early phase of the Italian unification process of the 19th century, San Marino served as a haven of refuge for numerous persons who were persecuted because of their support for Italian unity. In memory of this support, Giuseppe Garibaldi accepted the wish of San Marino not to be incorporated into the new Italian state. Well they are so close to Italy, but so proud for the independence too.

[Asick]

Originally Posted by AndreA

Giuseppe Garibaldi accepted the wish of San Marino not to be incorporated into the new Italian state. Well they are so close to Italy, but so proud for the independence too.

Actually I know this story, but I believe a separate nation (from ethnic point of view) has more rights to get independent than a part of the same (or almost the same) nation that got a bit separated for some historic reasons. I don't want San Marino to join Italy , don't treat my words as any offence, I just mean it's not fair play while Curds or Tibetians are not independent and San Marino is. It's just because it was much easier to get independence and to change borders in 19th century than now when borders are in fact frozen, but do you think national minorities should be glad because of that change in rules?

[Przemolog]

Originally Posted by Malkav

Going back to the forum title and origional topic, Yes Belgium Should be abolished....same as luxembourge and other small silly countries, andorra, monaco, san marino, the vatican...they are taking up to much space...

But what do you REALLY mean by "abolishing Belgium"? If it were divided into Wallonia and Flanders, then instead of one small country, you would have two even smaller? So what - to join Flanders to the Netherlands and Wallonia to France? So, what's next? To share Switzerland between Germany, France and Italy? To join Austria to Germany? To reunite Serbian-language post-Yugoslavian area??? Well, if you don't like small countries, what about autonomic territories like Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Gibraltar or Faeroe? If San Marino were to become a part of Italy, why Isle of Man shouldn't be a part of UK?

Do you know the answers???

[Malkav]

Originally Posted by Przemolog

But what do you REALLY mean by "abolishing Belgium"? If it were divided into Wallonia and Flanders, then instead of one small country, you would have two even smaller? So what - to join Flanders to the Netherlands and Wallonia to France? So, what's next? To share Switzerland between Germany, France and Italy? To join Austria to Germany? To reunite Serbian-language post-Yugoslavian area??? Well, if you don't like small countries, what about autonomic territories like Jersey, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Gibraltar or Faeroe? If San Marino were to become a part of Italy, why Isle of Man shouldn't be a part of UK?

Do you know the answers???

i do like small countries its just the ting ones i find 'unusual...such as andorra, vatican san marino, they are like mini variations of there larger neighbours etc...many of the smaller ones you have to travel through one country to get there...whats the point....whereas jersey, guernsy and gibralter you can get there direct as they have indipendant borders!! (ie ways in and out that dont involve crossing another countries airspace!

techincally the isle of man is its own country, it was neurtral in ww2, it has its own parliment and laws, and issues its own stamps and passports! it is a 'crown dependency' wich is as far as i can dissern means 'that they have her maj (our Liz) as there head of state somewhat akin to canada and NZ et al but they are somewhat dependant on the uk mainland fr such things as gas, military aid etc...(though i could be wrong!)

re the kurds etc all wanting there own country, why not! 'the republic of kurdistan has a ring to it!'