Talk:Buffer state

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

That is pure speculation that Iraq is a buffer state. The general agreement is the war in Iraq was most likely a personal goal of George W Bush to "finish" the job in Iraq his father the first President Bush didn't. Iraq was never a buffer between anything. Iran and Israel had good relations while the shah was in power. When Iraq and Iran warred Israel also dealt with Iran. Futhermore even if Iran did somehow annex Iraq or turn it into a puppet state Jordan would still be a buffer. And with the large amount of Sunni Palestinians living there there is no way Iran could annex that. Buffer states seperate other states, they don't seperate states from other states with yet another state between it.bcz its so late

Original research

Ok, I know we're not supposed to do original research, but I did it anyway. The rationale of the US invasion of Iraq also most likely included the creation of a buffer state (Iraq) to prevent war between Iran and Israel. So if you don't like my original research, stfu. 69.218.213.128 22:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

should remove either: In the 19th century, the manipulation of buffer states like Afghanistan and the Central Asian emirates was an element in the diplomatic "Great Game" played out between the British and Russian Empire for control of the approaches to strategic mountain passes that led to British India or Afghanistan was a buffer-state between the British Empire (which ruled much of South Asia) and Russian Empire (which ruled much of Central Asia) during the Anglo–Russian conflicts in Asia during the 19th century. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.37.100.203 (talk) 15:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Canada

Somebody said that Canada was a buffer state between USA and USSR, but that makes no sense. Alaska was right next to Siberia, so it could almost be seen as a buffer 'state' - of course not an independent one. A buffer state has to be right between two greater powers. Although it is true that if flying over the Arctic from Russia to America one would have to pass over Canada, that is hardly the only direct route from Russia to America. Canada doesn't seem to meet the definition.

I would disagree. The buffer state definition is a state that is much weaker than the two opposing states and geographically lies between the two. In the case of Russia, Canada, and The United States, Russia and The United States are separated by Canada, either between Alaska through Canada and then the United States or across the Arctic Sea, which is far wider Canadian boarder. Hence, ICBMs could be launched on the Russian side of that sea, cross the sea, enter Canadian territory, fly over it and hit the US. The Americans would intercept those missiles over Canadian soil. Guess where they might fall. If using Alaska with land troops, they would have to cross Canadian territory before entering The United States. Guess where the Americans would try to stop them. Presently, Russia is reactivating bases on the Arctic Sea and America has challenged Canada's sovereignty of the Arctic straights. Torontofred (talk) 15:53, 8 December 2021 (UTC)TorontoFred[reply]

Restored Ukraine, with some wording changes and an additional RS citation

I have restored the recently deleted mention of Ukraine, with some wording changes and an additional RS citation.
.
The stated reason for deletion was: Irrelevant and outdated opinion. Contradiction with definition :1) Ukraine had Russian military base Sevastopol on her territory. 2) Recent events have not led to war between Russia and NATO..
.
I have dealt with 'opinion' by adding 'has been described' (backed by 2 RS citations), and with 'outdated' by adding 'at least up to the ousting of Yanukovich' (backed by one RS citation). At least up to then, Ukraine did not clearly contradict the definition given by our lead. ("A buffer state is a country lying between two rival or potentially hostile greater powers"). The Russian military base at Sevastopol did not make Ukraine any kind of formal Russian ally, just as the US military base at Guantanamo in Cuba does not make Cuba an ally of the US. Neither our definition nor our lead paragraph requires demilitarization (as indicated by the word 'sometimes' in the 'demilitarization' sentence in the lead). Neither our definition nor our lead paragraph requires that Russia's intervention must lead to war between Russia and NATO (as indicated by the word 'often' in the 'war' sentence in the lead). But even if there were a conflict, it would be our currently unsourced definitions which would currently be the problem (it is somewhat strange that the deletion deleted what at the time was the only reliably sourced statement - indeed the only statement with any kind of source - in the entire article). If and when Reliable Sources can be found that claim it was never a buffer state, then the sentence should be modified in accordance with our long-established guidelines for dealing with conflicts between reliable sources (for instance here).Tlhslobus (talk) 03:30, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Study by Tanisha Fazal (see in article) lists all buffer states in the period 1816-1992

If someone has the time to add all those states into the article, that would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snooganssnoogans (talk • contribs) 18:45, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]