Russian Colonial Empire
Russia's attempts at overseas colonies were limited and often short-lived due to geography, logistics, and foreign competition.
In Europe, after Napoléon Bonaparte conquered Venice in 1797, a Russo-Ottoman fleet under Fyodor Ushakov expelled the French and created the Septinsular Republic in the Ionian Islands, giving Greeks their first semi-autonomous self-rule since 1453, though France regained the islands in 1807. At the same time, Kotor in the Bay of Kotor, now part of Montenegro, was briefly under Russian control from February 1806 to August 1807 for similar strategic reasons.
In Asia, Russia leased the Liaodong Peninsula from Qing China in 1898, fortifying Port Arthur and founding Dalny (Dalian), but lost the port to Japan in 1905 during the Russo-Japanese War. In 1900, Russia gained a concession in Tianjin, but it was relinquished by the Soviet Union in 1924.
In Africa, Russian adventurer Nikolai Ivanovich Ashinov attempted to establish a settlement called "New Moscow" at Sagallo in the Gulf of Tadjoura in 1889 with 165 Terek Cossacks. The expedition had no official backing, and the Russian government disavowed it. French forces quickly destroyed the settlement.
In North America, Russia built the most sustained colonial presence. Exploration of Alaska began in the 18th century, and after Vitus Bering's 1741 expedition revealed valuable sea otter pelts, the Russian-American Company established coastal settlements like Kodiak and Sitka. The colony relied on Indigenous labor, devastating populations through disease and exploitation. Russia also founded Fort Ross in California in 1812 and attempted to expand into Hawaii in 1815 under Georg Anton Schäffer, but both efforts were temporary. High costs, isolation, and foreign competition forced Russia to withdraw from California in 1841 and sell Alaska to the United States in 1867.
Modern Russia IS a colonial empire. At the dawn of the age of exploration it was far smaller than today. Its expansion since the 1500s into areas that were inhabited by other peoples is no different from the other colonial empires. Everything near to and beyond the Urals is just as much a colonial possession as anything France or Britain ever had
Not for nothing were the newly acquired territories north of the Black Sea named "New Russia"; there was already a New Spain, a New France, a New England, a New Holland – why should Russia be left out?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novorossiya
Yes
It's no different from the United States and their idea of manifest destiny. Russia is as much a modern colonial empire as the United States is today a modern colonial empire.
The legacy of the Soviet Union keeps the indigenous siberians autonomous in their governance and cultural/linguistic rights.
You really want to compare it with the enclaves the US calls reservations?
Google the word "Colony". I suggest going to Wikipedia.
Read some Marx or Lenin.
It is not colonial empire anymore, even if you think it once was. Unless you think that USA or Canada are currently colonial empires?
"Everything near to and beyond the Urals is just as much a colonial possession as anything France or Britain ever had"
What makes a territory colonial possession? Is southern France colony? Becasue it use to be Occitania.
Of course USA and Canada are colonial empires
The economic relationships are totally different. Hinterland Russia is essentially a resource production appendage belonging to the Russian core west of the Urals. The USA does not have that relationship to Britain - as a whole it is not a colony of anywhere. Although parts of the US are basically colonies of the hubs of capital on the US coasts, and Canada is basically an economic colony of the US.
They still exploit the land and people as much as possible so, yeah it is.
Don’t bother. In his mind “Russia = bad and colonial empire = bad therefore Russia = colonial empire”.
He doesn’t actually know what those words mean. It’s a logical fallacy. In reality Russia can be bad without necessarily also being a colonial empire but that’s too much nuance for some people
The US doesn’t seem like as much of a colonial empire because nearly all the indigenous people were killed. I’d call it post-colonial.
Meanwhile, some of Russia’s colonies still function as subject ethnonations (although there are also many ethnic Russians living east of the Urals as well).
So Russia is more colonial in nature but that’s mostly because the US government was a genocide machine throughout the 19th century (although to be fair Russia was a genocide machine in the 20th).
Bullcrap. Since soviet times the ethnic minorities got the right to govern themselves at a local level, with full linguistic autonomy and being equal russian citizens.
Britain and France never had anything close to citizenship in Africa. Only for small selected elites. Not to mention straight up extraction colonies like India or Cambodia.
If your logic was to be followed, the United States would be a colonial empire, as well as Canada, Australia and others.
Russia's most sustained colonial presence was in Asia, not in North America. Large swathes of Asia remain populated by the descendents of Russian colonists and under the control of the Russian Federation.
If there is no ocean between you and people you genocide and opress it doesnt count as colonialism!
The famous "colonization is when boats" argument!
I mean not every opression and genocide is colonialism. I think that imperialism and colonialism are different things. And yes, existence of ocean does play a role too, because it often influence whether new territory is integrated into proper country or turned into status of colony.
I've been to Fort Ross.
How was it? It looks a bit dull based on google maps
Still remnants of the Russian fort on Kauai
Russians like the cold
How could they control that one bit all the way on the left when the rest of it is on the right?