1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
kenny6666 [7]
3 years ago
14

Why was catherine the greats acquisition of a warm water port so important for russia?

History
2 answers:
Aloiza [94]3 years ago
5 0
St Petersburg was frozen and unusable for half the year 
Also they didn't have fish to eat for half a year
So when that warm water port was acquired it was a game changer.
Drupady [299]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

It improved the ability to conduct trade.

It demonstrated Russia’s rising power.

It limited Ottoman Turkish expansion.

You might be interested in
Why did the Ottoman rulers begin to view Armenians as a threat?
Minchanka [31]

Answer:

Suny: That is the central question of my forthcoming book. There is a tendency on the part of some scholars - particularly Armenians - not to try to explain the genocide because – “why do you need to explain it? These are Turks, this is what they do, and this is the kind of regime it was.” Or, slightly more sophisticated – “oh, it's Christians and Muslims – they are inevitably in conflict.” Or — “it's clashes of nationalism.” Now for me, religion, nationalism, the nature of Turkish culture, Ottoman society, the state - all of these are the questionsto be asked, not the answers. That is, they need to be investigated. The way I would explain this genocide, and I think it has relevance for other kinds of ethnic cleansings and mass killings, is that the regime developed what I call an “affective disposition” - that is, an emotional understanding of who the enemy was. They constructed the Armenians as an existential threat to the Ottoman Empire and to the Turkish nation, what they conceived as the Turkish nation at that time. I try to explain the origins of this affective disposition - this mental universe - in which emotion, fear, anger, and resentment combined to create an image of Armenians. Armenians originally had been thought of as a loyal millet, but after 1878 the Armenians became an instrument of certain foreign powers to intervene in the Ottoman regime and internal policy — the Ottomans began to see them as a threat.

Remind us what happened in 1878.

This was the Russian-Turkish War of 1877-1878. The Russians beat the Turks, and they were going to impose reforms on the Ottoman Empire, and that was the beginning of the new “Armenian question” that continued right up to the war. Now, some people would say "well, you don't need to go into emotions - it was a perfectly strategic, rational choice. The Armenians were actually a threat in World War I, and the Turks decided to get rid of them for national security reasons.” My view is that's an insufficient explanation. Why did they see them as a threat? A threat is always a perception. It's about emotion, it's about understanding, feeling, sentiment, and construction - both cognitive and emotional construction. I'm taking a step backwards to see how they got into the position that they could imagine people this way and then carry out the worst possible kinds of things. I’m bringing emotion into it.

By some accounts, Armenians sided with Russia at the beginning of World War I —was that something the Ottomans could point to that the Armenians were a threat?

This is the problem. You can't say the Armenians sided with Russia. That is what the Ottomans would say, and they perceived that. So there are people who try to justify what the Ottomans did to the Armenians by saying they were with the enemy. What I try to show in the book is that the overwhelming majority of Ottoman Armenians wanted to stay in the Empire, but they also wanted reforms to protect them and allow them to prosper. They wanted Kurdish predations against Armenians to be contained, for example. The Ottoman government was opposed to these reforms, but ultimately had to agree to them in February 1914. When the war came, though, they used the first opportunity to get rid of them. I’ll give you an example. As the Ottomans are going to war, they mobilize the population. Hundreds and thousands of young Armenian men are drafted and join the Ottoman army. A few desert and go over to the Russian side. Some prominent leaders go over to the Russian side. The Russians form Armenian voluntary units on the Caucasian side against the Ottomans, but the Turks see this as treachery and demobilize hundreds of thousands of Armenian soldiers, take their weapons and uniforms away, turn them into labor battalions, and eventually murder them. So it's a very different thing. It's not that there wasn't sympathy among some for Russia, but there was also no particular love for Russia. Russians didn't like the Armenian nationalist revolutionaries any more than the Turks did so they were persecuting them as well. The Armenians were in an unfortunate position - in Persia, in Russia, and in Turkey. They were like the Kurds today.

3 0
3 years ago
Quien escribio el Compendio de la Doctrina Social de la Iglesia y en que año??
Likurg_2 [28]

Explanation:

una persona o más dicho un humano

5 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Andres young was part of which group
IRINA_888 [86]

Answer:

i think you mean andrew young

Explanation:

"(born March 12, 1932) is an American politician, diplomat, and activist. Beginning his career as a pastor, Young was an early leader in the civil rights movement, serving as executive director of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and a close confidant to Martin Luther King Jr."

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which statement describes a major advantage of a confederal system of government over a unitary system
Firdavs [7]
The major advantage is that the states have their own right to choose which laws will apply to them and in what way, based on their own interpretation of the laws.
8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés wrote the following excerpt in a letter to the Spanish king:
klasskru [66]

Answer:

OC. They were considerate and stylish.

Explanation:

In the given excerpt from Hernan Cortes's letter, he mentioned how the people of Tenochtitlan were more focused on their dresses an appearance than the other provinces around. He further went on to reiterate that this characteristic prevails in the city more than in any other place.

With the given perspective about the people of Tenochtitlan, Spanish conquistador Hernan Cortes seems to provide a <em><u>conclusion that the people were considerate and yet stylish. </u></em>

<em><u /></em>

4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What philosophers influenced the Declaration of Independence?
    13·1 answer
  • How did Kathrine Johnson from Hidden figure break the color barrier
    14·2 answers
  • Which best describes hitler's beliefs as expressed in mein kampf? a) Germans were destined to lead the world.
    5·2 answers
  • When was the Declaration of Independence read to people?
    11·2 answers
  • Which is the BEST description of the difference between the Unionist and Secessionist viewpoints regarding secession?
    10·2 answers
  • "European ___________ of the slave trade affected African states in the 1600s and 1700s in that African states competed to domin
    8·1 answer
  • 3. Why do you think Mrs. Emerson didn't give the Scotts their freedom herself?
    12·1 answer
  • How did these people survive out in the “wild” 1000’s of years ago?
    14·1 answer
  • 30)
    15·1 answer
  • Mee: 5324611502 Pa: 1234​
    12·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!