Why Russians 'Will Want to Return Crimea' to
Ukraine (20 Minutes, Ukraine)
"If
large-scale military hostilities were to break out in which Russia were to fight
a considerable portion of the modern world, it would most likely face a
coalition of states whose combined military, economic and demographic strength would
surpass Russian forces by at least 16-18 times. The outcome of such a confrontation is easy to forecast.
Russia would be defeated and its economic, housing and infrastructure capacity utterly
destroyed. The threat of mass starvation and epidemics would be great. On top
of these losses, as has been shown in past world wars, the dead from this new
conflict would run into the tens of millions. A significant portion of Russia
would be occupied by foreign powers which would establish an occupation regime."
Why
should the Crimean Tatars
have special authority over the fate of Crimea? What way is there (other than through
a dictator) to ensure Crimea's return to Ukraine?
I
will try and clarify both points:
1. The special authority
of the Crimean Tatars
To
begin with we should remind ourselves of the earlier principle of who precisely
has final authority to determine territorial jurisdiction over Crimea: The
question of the ownership of Crimea can be determined by only one subject of
international law - the owner of the territory. The owner of the Crimean
peninsula is the state of Ukraine. This and only this entity has
the authority in the area to change the affiliation of this territory.
"Indigenous
peoples have the right to freely determine their own political status and purse
their choices of economic, social and cultural activities."
Indigenous
peoples are defined as people who inhabited lands before the formation of existing
state borders and the arrival of migrants from other areas. The indigenous
peoples of the Crimean peninsula, who have no homeland outside this territory,
are Crimean Tatars, Krymchaks and Crimean Karaites.
The Greeks, Genoese, Jews, Armenians, Russians, Ukrainians, Germans and other
modern peoples, representatives of which at one time settled in Crimea, have
their own homelands outside this territory. The three indigenous peoples of
Crimea do not.
Third,
in less than two centuries, the ethnic structure of the population of Crimean has
radically changed. The indigenous people of the peninsula - the Crimean Tatars -
have been subjected at least three times to the mass repression of their ethnic
and religious beliefs. Prior to Russia's 1783 annexation of Crimea, the Crimean Khanate [vassal
state of the Ottoman Empire] was essentially a mono-ethnic state. The Crimean
Tatars were an absolute majority on the peninsula until 1864 (over 50 percent) and
were a significant ethnic minority until the end of the 19th century (around 36
percent in 1897). For about a century and a half (from 1783 to 1944), the
Crimean Tatars have experienced three demographic catastrophes: after the
unification of Crimea with Russia (1780s-1790s), after the Crimean War (1850s-1860s) and
May 18-20, 1944.
As
a result of the first demographic catastrophe (genocide and emigration) the
Crimean Tatar population in Crimea was reduced by 75 percent; after the second emigration
following the Crimean War it was cut in half again, and during the third (the
deportations of May 18-20, 1944) almost the entire population of Crimean Tatars
was forcibly deported to Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. According to various
estimates, the death rate during the deportations and upon arrival in their new
settlements was between 25 and 46 percent.
The
second half of the 1980s saw the Crimean Tatars begin to return to their
historic homeland. According to the 2001 census there were 248,000 Tatars in
Crimea (in Crimea Republic and Sevastopol
combined), or roughly half as many as lived on the peninsula three centuries
before, at the beginning of the 17th century. Given the natural and immigration-related
population growth among Crimean Tatars, their numbers grew to approximately
300,000 at the beginning of 2014, or roughly 12 percent of Crimea's total
population.
The
ethnic Russian population, which was virtually non-existent in Crimea until the
end of the 18th century, increased their presence on the peninsula to almost
1.5 million over the following two centuries. Over a million either moved to
Crimea or are descendants of people who immigrated there after the deportation
of the Crimean Tatars in 1944.
Considering
the tragic fate of the Crimean Tatars, taking into account their lack of a national
home outside the peninsula, based on the U.N. Declaration of the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples, I suggest that these people are entitled to the additional
authority to determine the fate of Crimea.
2. When will Russians
themselves want to hand Crimea back to Ukraine?
The
following is a possible timeline of events.
With
its aggression against Ukraine, its occupation and annexation of Crimea and the
war in east Ukraine, the Putin regime has destroyed the foundations of the
international order in Europe which has existed since the end of World War II.
The Kremlin’s aggressive intentions have, alas, not diminished. Furthermore,
there are clear signs of growing preparations for a large-scale, tough, and protracted
confrontation with the outside world amounting not only to another Cold War,
but a full-blown hot war.
During
the First and Second World Wars, the aggressor-countries who were at the center
of military conflict (Germany in both wars, Austro-Hungary, Russia, the USSR)
sustained enormous devastation, suffered huge military losses and civilian casualties
amounting to tens of millions. The number of victims ranged between 10 to 15
percent of the pre-war populations in these countries. With the development of military
technology the destructive power of weaponry has risen dramatically.
If
large-scale military hostilities were to break out in which Russia were to fight
a considerable portion of the modern world, it would most likely face a
coalition of states whose combined military, economic and demographic strength would
surpass Russian forces by at least 16-18 times. The outcome of such a confrontation
is easy to forecast. Russia would be defeated and its economic, housing and
infrastructure capacity utterly destroyed. Supplies of electricity, water and
gas would be suspended in large portions of its territory. The threat of mass starvation
and epidemics would be great. On top of these losses, as has been shown in past
world wars, the dead from this new conflict would run into the tens of
millions. A significant portion of Russia would be occupied by foreign powers
which would establish an occupation regime.
Posted
By Worldmeets.US
At
the end of the war, the victorious powers would take steps to prevent the restoration
of the material foundations of Russian militarism, chauvinism and aggression.
To this end Russia could be obliged to pay reparations and compensation to the
victims of Russian aggression. In part to ensure these commitments, some of the
current territory of Russia which historically belonged to neighboring states and
was subsequently annexed could be returned. Territories could be handed over
which from time to time have been subject to public and private claims from
abroad: For example, Pytalovskiy Oblast could be
returned to Latvia; the Kingiseppsky District of Leningrad
Oblast to Estonia; the north Karelian
Isthmus, Prionezhsky District and Pechenga to Finland; Kaliningrad
(aka/East Prussia) to Germany; Smolensk
and Bryansk
Oblasts to Belarus; Belgorodsk, Kursk, Voronezhsk and Rostovsk Oblasts and Krasnodar Krai to Ukraine; the Omsk steppes to
Kazakhstan; at least 1.5 million square kilometers of Siberia and the Far East
to China; and the Kurile and Sakhalin Islands to Japan. Oil and gas reserves, a
network of long-distance pipelines and the banking system – which has been the
basis of the government's aggressive economic policies could be given up to
international control.
It’s
possible that Russia will not end up going experiencing everything described above
if the overwhelming majority of Russian citizens, having survived the military
conflict and the resulting political, economic and demographic catastrophe, sincerely
supported the intention of the provisional government [or otherwise force it] to
quickly and quietly return the Crimean peninsula to its undisputed owner - brotherly
Ukraine - and restore normal diplomatic, economic and personal relationships.
This would be the first step to take in reviving Russian society after such a
monstrous disaster.
Of
course this is only one of a number of possible unpleasant scenarios for Russia
and her neighbors.
Much
more advantageous for Russia would be a conscious and voluntary return of
Crimea to Ukraine before these scenarios come to pass.
*Andrey Illarionov is a former economic policy
advisor to Russian President Vladimir Putin. He is now with The
CATO Institute in Washington.
