Annexing Crimea 'Too Costly for Russia to Bear' (Gazeta, Russia)
"The inevitable sanctions will impact not only officials
but ordinary Russians. This will result in the inexorable deterioration of the
lives of Russian citizens and the final transformation of Russia into a country
that cannot be a mediator for resolving international or local conflicts. It will
simply no longer be trusted. ... Russia is moving along the path that led to
the collapse of USSR, when an economic crash made it impossible for it to maintain
its sphere of influence as the central authority over such a gigantic territory.
... Permitting Crimea to live fundamentally better than it would have as a part
of Ukraine is something we simply cannot afford."
Crimea
may not turn out as a "triumph of historical justice and Russian
neo-imperialism," as has been said in the State Duma.
A delegation from the Crimean Parliament may have been greeted with ovations on
Friday, but the question may well come down to how many geopolitical points
Russia loses. In a sense, Russia hasn't annexed Crimea, but Crimea - Russia.
Of
the three main options for deciding the fate of the peninsula - annexation by
Russia; becoming a quasi-independent state like South Ossetia, or remaining
part of Ukraine under the terms of the 1992 Confederation Constitution - only
the last would be relatively advantageous to Russia.
In
all cases, Crimea would be backed by the Russian taxpayer. A measure of
political responsibility for Russia is one thing, and becoming ensconced in
profound political consequences another.
On
March 6, the Crimean Parliament voted to become an autonomous part of Russia,
and has submitted a request to Russian leaders. At the same time, the lawmakers
rescheduled a referendum on the peninsula's status. A plebiscite was first planned
to coincide with early presidential elections on May 25, then on March 30, and now
on March 16.
The
referendum will ask the two following questions: 1) Are you in favor of Crimea
becoming a constituent territory of the Russian Federation? 2) Are you in favor
of restoring Crimea’s 1992 constitution and for keeping its status as part of
Ukraine?
Vladimir
Putin immediately held a Security Council meeting on the situation in Crimea,
but didn't respond to the Crimean parliament's decision. Russian and Crimean
authorities later gave differing accounts of the sequence of events.
Speaker
Vladimir Konstantinov said that the Crimean Parliament
had decided to become an autonomous territory of Russia, with the expectation
that Russia would follow through on the relevant procedures. "If they want
to begin the process, then we will include the question in the referendum,"
Konstantinov said.
In
other words, before seeking the views of Crimeans
themselves and in order to give the first question on the referendum more significance,
the Crimean Parliament decided to first sound out Moscow. However, the Russian government
seems to have decided to follow formal procedure and leave itself room for
diplomatic maneuver. According to Leonid Slutsky, chairman of the State Duma
Committee on the Commonwealth
of Independent States, after the referendum in Ukraine on the status of
Crimea, the Duma will consider shortening the procedure
under which new territories can become part of Russia.
Before
the war with Georgia,
South Ossetia begged for inclusion into Russia, but it was ultimately rejected.
Nor did Russia annex South Ossetia after the war, only recognizing it as an
independent state. At the same time, in terms of funding, the situation hasn't
changed: as Russia has said, it will continue to maintain South Ossetia as part
of its sphere of influence with no chance of it developing independently.
Of
course, the Crimea Parliament is trying to “strike while the iron is hot,” but this
has given Putin a very unpleasant choice. If Crimea votes in favor of
annexation by the Russian Federation on March 16, and Russia agrees, we will be
facing a fully-fledged Cold War.
Ukraine
and Georgia will more likely find themselves in NATO. That would bring to an
end the entire project of integrating the Commonwealth of Independent States,
as Russia, for the first time in post-Soviet history, takes someone else's
territory - since Crimea didn't intend to become part of Russia until Russian
troops entered. Now no former Soviet republic will feel secure in relation to
Moscow, and will be on the lookout for allies that can more reliably ensure their
sovereignty.
These
enormous new financial obligations will be hard for the already-strapped
Russian economy to bear. The inevitable sanctions will impact not only
officials but ordinary Russians. This will result in the inexorable deterioration
of the lives of Russian citizens, and the final transformation of Russia into a
country that cannot be a mediator for resolving international or local conflicts.
It will simply no longer be trusted.
Russia
could have more persistently advised Crimea to vote for greater autonomy within
Ukraine (ideally, all it had to do was wait for the election of Ukrainian
authorities and make sure that the legitimate government returned the right to
broad autonomy to Crimea).
However,
Putin might have perceived that as a weakness. After all, the only meaning of
war with Ukraine in the minds of Russians who support it, is precisely the
return of Crimea.
Then
there is the third option, remaining part of Ukraine under the terms of the 1992
Confederation Constitution, which means the actual departure of Crimea from
obedience to Kiev, and formal independence for Ukraine as an independent state.
For Russia, this hardly differs from Crimean annexation. Everyone on earth,
except for Russia and two or three other countries,
already recognize this.
From
now on, Crimea will be Russian anyway - and the Crimean authorities have
already expressed their complete willingness to do so stand on our shoulders.
RustamTemirgaliev, Deputy
Chairman of Crimea's Council of Ministers, says Crimea is ready to make the ruble
its national currency under plans for annexation by the Russian Federation. He
also said that "all Ukrainian state-owned enterprises will be nationalized
and become the property of an autonomous Crimea." Hardly anyone except
Russia would do business with these confiscated enterprises.
Posted By
Worldmeets.US
Tactically,
Russian society can take this as a great victory for Russia, and for President
Putin personally. However, given the trends in the Russian economy and the political
consequences of such decisions, we will very quickly and inevitably feel like
citizens diminished by costly imperial ambitions and deprived of subsequent
economic opportunities.
In
fact, Russia is moving along the path that led to the collapse of USSR, when an
economic crash made it impossible for it to maintain its sphere of influence as
the central authority over such a gigantic territory.
Instead
of working with Western countries to establish new mechanisms for world order,
Russia may end up a pariah with hopeless economic prospects (without a radical
change in foreign and domestic policy). Permitting Crimea to live fundamentally
better than it would have as a part of Ukraine is something we simply cannot
afford.
