Politics Should Crimea be an independent country? (Russian-Ukrainian conflict)

[LeBrok]

Due to recent protests in Ukraine and escape of president Yankovich, short of domestic war, the problem of Crimea is coming to the front. If Ukraine has dual personality (pro European/pro Russian), the Crimea has multiple personality disorder. It belongs to Ukraine but has fairly independent province status, majority of population is Russian. It has a long history belonging to Tatars, so perhaps they deserve their first official country? If Greeks were rich perhaps Crimeans would like to join Greece again? After all Greece is an existing state who own Crimea and build its first cities.
Please vote to show us your vision for Crimea.



Here is short history of it:
Crimea (/kraɪˈmiːə/) is a peninsula of Ukraine located on the northern coast of the Black Sea with the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (Ukrainian: Автономна Республіка Крим, Avtonomna Respublika Krym; Russian: Автономная Республика Крым, Avtonomnaya Respublika Krym; Crimean Tatar: Qırım Muhtar Cumhuriyeti, Къырым Мухтар Джумхуриети) occupying most of the peninsula.^[6][7][8] It was often referred to with the definite article, as the Crimea, until well into the 20th century.
The territory of Crimea was conquered and controlled many times throughout its history. The Cimmerians, Greeks, Scythians, Goths, Huns, Bulgars, Khazars, the state ofKievan Rus', Byzantine Greeks, Kipchaks, Ottoman Turks, Golden Horde Tatars and the Mongols all controlled Crimea in its earlier history. In the 13th century, it was partly controlled by the Venetians and by the Genovese; they were followed by the Crimean Khanate and the Ottoman Empire in the 15th to 18th centuries, the Russian Empire in the 18th to 20th centuries, Germany during World War II and the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and later the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, within theSoviet Union during the rest of the 20th century.
Crimea is now an autonomous parliamentary republic, within Ukraine,^[6] which is governed by the Constitution of Crimea in accordance with the laws of Ukraine. The capital and administrative seat of the republic's government is the city of Simferopol, located in the center of the peninsula. Crimea's area is 26,200 square kilometres (10,100 sq mi) and its population was 1,973,185 as of 2007. These figures do not include the area and population of the City of Sevastopol (2007 population: 379,200), which is administratively separate from the autonomous republic. The peninsula thus has 2,352,385 people (2007 estimate).
Crimean Tatars, an ethnic minority who in 2001 made up 12.1% of the population,^[9] formed in Crimea in the late Middle Ages, after the Crimean Khanate had come into existence. The Crimean Tatars were forcibly expelled to Central Asia by Joseph Stalin's government. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Crimean Tatars began to return to the region.^[10] According to the 2001 Ukrainian population census 58.5% of the population of Crimea were ethnic Russians and 24.4% were ethnic Ukrainians.^{[9]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea}


The first poll option means " An independant country of multicultural character. In legal aspect not dominated by any ethnicity, fully democratic, independent with equal rights to all citizens.

Tatar state option would mean an independent country with Tatar culture setting tone for official language and culture in general. It might mean not equal rights for all ethnicities, even deportation of Russians and Ukrainians to create predominantly Tatar state.

 

[Sile]

If you can keep Crimea from joining Russia then I am all for a independent crimea

 

[Aberdeen]

It isn't just Crimea but most of the southern and eastern part of the Ukraine that has a Russian linguistic majority. Crimea and the rest of the southern and eastern part of modern Ukraine was transferred to the Ukraine by Krushchev in 1954 and the Russians want that territory back. But the Ukrainians seem quite convinced that it should remain part of the Ukraine, and there is a minority of Ukrainian speakers throughout the area. I don't know whether the Russian speakers in that part of the Ukraine want to join Russia or become a separate country with economic ties to Russia, but they don't seem to want to remain part of the Ukraine. I think other countries should be wary of getting too involved in the argument, because things probably won't turn out well for the people living there, at least in the short run. The Ukrainians are saying "The Russian speakers are a minority and they should just shut up." But the Russian speakers are saying "We make up nearly half of the population of the Ukraine and are a majority in the southern and eastern part, so we want to be semi-autonomous if the Ukrainians want us to stay part of the Ukraine." I don't think compromise is likely. And if the Russians get directly involved, is the EU really ready to fight a war over Crimea and other parts of the Ukraine? Perhaps Russia and the EU can agree to a compromise that forces a separation on the area - it's likely to remain ungovernable until that happens, I think. But if the Russian speakers in the Ukraine don't want their area to be completely absorbed by Russia, they may want guarantees that they can remain separate while being part of the Russian economic zone. And of course the idea of Russia regaining any territory will make the EU nervous - it sets a dangerous precedent.

 

[Alan]

Honestly I can't hide it but as long as Turks still don't recognize even Kurdish autonomy and even do everything in their power to interrupt Kurdish gains outside Turkeys borders, I simply can't say with honest heart that I am for a Tatar state because I know Turkey will try to influence them, not only because of just some ethnic relation but also religious (Tatars are majority Muslim). The last thing what I want to see is Turkey gaining more influence over territory which doesn't belongs to them even after they still can't even accept autonomy inside their own borders.

 

[Aberdeen]

Honestly I can't hide it but as long as Turks still don't recognize even Kurdish autonomy and even do everything in their power to interrupt Kurdish gains outside Turkeys borders, I simply can't say with honest heart that I am for a Tatar state because I know Turkey will try to influence them, not only because of just some ethnic relation but also religious (Tatars are majority Muslim). The last thing what I want to see is Turkey gaining more influence over territory which doesn't belongs to them even after they still can't even accept autonomy inside their own borders.

I don't think there's much chance that Crimea will become a Tatar state, since they're a minority there. And Russia would never let that happen anyway - they need the Crimea for their Black Sea fleet.

 

[bicicleur 2]

I don't think there is much of a problem in the Crimea, but some people or some nations want to create a problem by stirring up emotions.
These people have their own secret intentions.

I do understand the Russians are worried about their naval base in the Crimea, but that problem should be discussed and solved on another level. The local population has little to do with that.

 

[Sile]

I don't understand this term.....Crimea belongs to Ukraine or Crimea belongs to Russia. What year does this belongs too take effect?
Crimea belongs to the people that live there and they should have the choice, if they are so stupid to unite with another nation, then it's their loss. Today's nations are too young to have anyone say they "belong" to them.

Do we have a Scotland belongs to England! ....should there be, NO......scots will decide

Do we have a Catalonia belongs to Spain......It might be under Spain now, it does not belong to Spain , it belongs to the Catalans and if they decide to break away and become independent, then the UN should support this 100%..........or is democracy only for a few!

 

[Aberdeen]

I don't understand this term.....Crimea belongs to Ukraine or Crimea belongs to Russia. What year does this belongs too take effect?
Crimea belongs to the people that live there and they should have the choice, if they are so stupid to unite with another nation, then it's their loss. Today's nations are too young to have anyone say they "belong" to them.

Do we have a Scotland belongs to England! ....should there be, NO......scots will decide

Do we have a Catalonia belongs to Spain......It might be under Spain now, it does not belong to Spain , it belongs to the Catalans and if they decide to break away and become independent, then the UN should support this 100%..........or is democracy only for a few!

It's not as if all the people in the Crimea want the same thing. I'm sure that most of the Ukrainian speakers want to remain part of the Ukraine, but most of the Tatars apparently want Crimea to be an independent Tatar nation. And most of the Russian speakers probably want to either be an independent nation that's part of the Russian economic zone or join with Russia. If the government of the Ukraine would allow a fair vote on the issue (which it won't), you might not get a clear majority. But if you did, it would probably be to unite with Russia either economically or politically, since it appears that about half of the people in the Ukraine are Russian speakers. So, what about the rights of the other half of the Crimean population? It's not an easy issue to resolve, I think.

However, since Crimea is already an autonomous part of the Ukraine, and there are Russian troops there to protect the Russian fleet, and since the Russian speakers are the largest group, Crimea will probably become either part of or formally affiliated with Russia. I think that NATO would be ill advised to make too many threats when that does happen. The question is what happens to the other parts of southern and eastern Ukraine where the majority of people speak Russian. The Russians will probably want those areas too, in order to have a contiguous stretch of land connecting the Crimea to Russia. Once Crimea becomes Russian, I think problems will start in other parts of southern and eastern Ukraine. Then we'll see whether NATO is willing to face down the Russian bear in order to help the Ukraine retain those territories. But I think that the Ukraine would be better off to make a deal with Russia - Russia can have the Crimea and the other areas of southern and eastern Ukraine where Russian is the most common language, in return for Russia making no objection about the Ukraine joining the EU and NATO. But I think that idea is too sensible for either side to accept.

 

[Alan]

I don't think there's much chance that Crimea will become a Tatar state, since they're a minority there. And Russia would never let that happen anyway - they need the Crimea for their Black Sea fleet.

I don't have a problem with Tatars getting a state. But lets be honest Turkey, just like in case with Xingjang, would be the first state to support this while at the same time doing everything they can to oppress the same rights for us in the Middle East.

 

[LeBrok]

I don't think there's much chance that Crimea will become a Tatar state, since they're a minority there. And Russia would never let that happen anyway - they need the Crimea for their Black Sea fleet.

I agree, most likely nothing is going to change and if changes Crimea will go to Russia.

I was really interested more in popular sentiment on this issue, or what people want, then what is truly going to happen.

I voted for Tatars, just because they deserve their own piece of land, if they desire.

 

[ebAmerican]

However, since Crimea is already an autonomous part of the Ukraine, and there are Russian troops there to protect the Russian fleet, and since the Russian speakers are the largest group, Crimea will probably become either part of or formally affiliated with Russia. I think that NATO would be ill advised to make too many threats when that does happen. The question is what happens to the other parts of southern and eastern Ukraine where the majority of people speak Russian. The Russians will probably want those areas too, in order to have a contiguous stretch of land connecting the Crimea to Russia. Once Crimea becomes Russian, I think problems will start in other parts of southern and eastern Ukraine. Then we'll see whether NATO is willing to face down the Russian bear in order to help the Ukraine retain those territories. But I think that the Ukraine would be better off to make a deal with Russia - Russia can have the Crimea and the other areas of southern and eastern Ukraine where Russian is the most common language, in return for Russia making no objection about the Ukraine joining the EU and NATO. But I think that idea is too sensible for either side to accept.

The issue is oil shale, agricultural land, Crimea Black Sea Naval stronghold, and the Ukrainian population of 50M people. Russia is nothing without Ukraine. It couldn't compete with the EU without a strong member with a lot of natural resources in it's Eurasian Union. If Ukraine falls to the EU so will Moldova and other eastern block countries. It's a sense of preservation for Russia. If they all join the EU or refuse membership in a weakened Eurasian Union Russia's political system collapses, and Putin gets the boot. Ukraine will never make concessions on any of it's controlled territory, and Putin will fight to the death. If Russia invades, which they don't have a choice because if they don't Russia is done, it will force a western intervention (WWIII). Go Ukraine, and everybody thought North Korea was going to end the world! Nope it was always the Russians. A little tongue and cheek, but I don't see this ending well.

 

[martiko]

I don't think there's much chance that Crimea will become a Tatar state, since they're a minority there. And Russia would never let that happen anyway - they need the Crimea for their Black Sea fleet.

Russian do not absolutely need the Crimea and Georgia managed to access the Black Sea.
Putin needs to control Crimea Ukraine because it is not that he wants to recover Crimea Ukraine but that he believed to be a Russian territory. Russian root Ukraine is the 'border' of Russia.
And for Ttars they are for the most recently and rarely born in Crimea income, on the other hand they had arrived there after Ukrainians, they were not particularly historical claim on the peninsula.

 

[Aberdeen]

The issue is oil shale, agricultural land, Crimea Black Sea Naval stronghold, and the Ukrainian population of 50M people. Russia is nothing without Ukraine. It couldn't compete with the EU without a strong member with a lot of natural resources in it's Eurasian Union. If Ukraine falls to the EU so will Moldova and other eastern block countries. It's a sense of preservation for Russia. If they all join the EU or refuse membership in a weakened Eurasian Union Russia's political system collapses, and Putin gets the boot. Ukraine will never make concessions on any of it's controlled territory, and Putin will fight to the death. If Russia invades, which they don't have a choice because if they don't Russia is done, it will force a western intervention (WWIII). Go Ukraine, and everybody thought North Korea was going to end the world! Nope it was always the Russians. A little tongue and cheek, but I don't see this ending well.

With all the resources Russia has within its own borders, I don't think it needs the Ukraine for economic reasons, although Russia probably would like to regain the coal fields in the eastern Ukraine. But it does need Crimea in order to protect its flank. The Ukrainians may try to crush the revolt because they think Russia wouldn't dare invade. At which point Russia will probably invade, on the assumption that NATO wouldn't dare counterattack. So I do agree that this isn't likely to end well. Some fans of Norse mythology were predicting that Ragnarok would occur last Saturday, and perhaps they were only off by a week or two. As the Havamal tells us, the world lasts long but in the end fire and ice will prevail. Perhaps nuclear fire followed by nuclear winter.

 

[Goga]

Crimea belongs to Russia and it will be always Russia! Russia invaded Georgia and nobody expected that. Georgia lost a lot land. If needed Russia will also invade Ukraine. Russia will also stop with supply Western Ukraine with gas & oil. The U.S. is trying to break Russia, like the western countries tried to break Russia during the WW2. They will fail big time. And if U.S. will not watch out it will creat WW3!!!

 

[LeBrok]

Russian do not absolutely need the Crimea and Georgia managed to access the Black Sea.
Putin needs to control Crimea Ukraine because it is not that he wants to recover Crimea Ukraine but that he believed to be a Russian territory. Russian root Ukraine is the 'border' of Russia.
And for Ttars they are for the most recently and rarely born in Crimea income, on the other hand they had arrived there after Ukrainians, they were not particularly historical claim on the peninsula.

Officially Greeks were there firs around 5th century BCE, then Romans till 3 century CE.

Then a long list:

Throughout the later centuries, Crimea was invaded or occupied successively by the Goths (AD 250), the Huns (376), the Bulgars (4th–8th century), the Khazars (8th century), the state of Kievan Rus' (10th–11th centuries), the Byzantine Empire (1016), the Kipchaks (the Kumans) (1050), and the Mongols (1237).In the mid-10th century, the eastern area of Crimea was conquered by Prince Sviatoslav I of Kiev and became part of the Kievan Rus' principality of Tmutarakan. In 988, PrinceVladimir I of Kiev also captured the Byzantine town of Chersonesos (presently part of Sevastopol) where he later converted to Christianity. An impressive Russian Orthodox cathedral marks the location of this historic event.

The Crimean Khanate in 1600​

​

In the 13th century, the Republic of Genoa seized the settlements which their rivals, the Venetians, had built along the Crimean coast and established themselves at Cembalo(now Balaklava), Soldaia (Sudak), Cherco (Kerch) and Caffa (Feodosiya), gaining control of the Crimean economy and the Black Sea commerce for two centuries

Then Crimean Khanate of Tatars. I think, under Ottoman Empire.

Then Russian from 1783.

And Ukrainian since 1954

Who used to live there:

• 1760s and 1770s — 454,700 (92.6% Crimean Tatars, 4% Greeks, 3.1% Armenians, 0.3% Krymchaks and Karaites)
• 1897 — 546,700 (35.6% Crimean Tatars, 33.1% Russians, 11.8% Ukrainians, 5.8% Germans, 4.4% Jews, 3.1% Greeks, 1.5% Armenians, 1.3% Bulgarians, 1.2% Poles, 0.3% Turks)
• 1989 — 2,430,500 (67.1% Russians, 25.8% Ukrainians, 1.6% Crimean Tatars, 0.7% Jews, 0.3% Poles, 0.1% Greeks)

• 2001 — 2,024,056 (58.3% Russians, 24.3% Ukrainians, 12.1% Crimean Tatars, 1.4% Belarusians, 0.5% Tatars, 0.4% Armenians, 0.2% each of Jews, Poles, Moldovans and Azeris, 0.1% each of Uzbeks, Koreans (Koryo-saram), Greeks, Germans, Mordvins, Chuvashes, Gypsies, Bulgarians, Georgians and Maris, as well as Karaites, Krymchaks, and others)

It looks like a beautiful piece of property and everybody wants it. :47:

 

[martiko]

It looks like a beautiful piece of property and everybody wants it. :47:

Especially the Russians want Crimea and all the banks around; because many Russians are convinced that the Black Sea is their private pool, an old complex legacy of the Tsars and Soviet

And when I say that many Russian think it is their own private pool and private beach, I am not exaggerating, it is the literal word carewhen, and they come from the depths of Siberia to visit during their break from tradition is their riviera

 

[Ike]

The issue is oil shale, agricultural land, Crimea Black Sea Naval stronghold, and the Ukrainian population of 50M people. Russia is nothing without Ukraine. It couldn't compete with the EU without a strong member with a lot of natural resources in it's Eurasian Union. If Ukraine falls to the EU so will Moldova and other eastern block countries. It's a sense of preservation for Russia. If they all join the EU or refuse membership in a weakened Eurasian Union Russia's political system collapses, and Putin gets the boot. Ukraine will never make concessions on any of it's controlled territory, and Putin will fight to the death. If Russia invades, which they don't have a choice because if they don't Russia is done, it will force a western intervention (WWIII). Go Ukraine, and everybody thought North Korea was going to end the world! Nope it was always the Russians. A little tongue and cheek, but I don't see this ending well.

Really? Have I seen an East interventing when US invaded Dominicana, Panama, Granada .... ?
Does it really force a Western intervention, or is Klitschko with his terrorist group just building an excuse for it?

 

[Sile]

Officially Greeks were there firs around 5th century BCE, then Romans till 3 century CE.

Then a long list:


Then Crimean Khanate of Tatars. I think, under Ottoman Empire.

Then Russian from 1783.

And Ukrainian since 1954

Who used to live there:

• 1760s and 1770s — 454,700 (92.6% Crimean Tatars, 4% Greeks, 3.1% Armenians, 0.3% Krymchaks and Karaites)
• 1897 — 546,700 (35.6% Crimean Tatars, 33.1% Russians, 11.8% Ukrainians, 5.8% Germans, 4.4% Jews, 3.1% Greeks, 1.5% Armenians, 1.3% Bulgarians, 1.2% Poles, 0.3% Turks)
• 1989 — 2,430,500 (67.1% Russians, 25.8% Ukrainians, 1.6% Crimean Tatars, 0.7% Jews, 0.3% Poles, 0.1% Greeks)

• 2001 — 2,024,056 (58.3% Russians, 24.3% Ukrainians, 12.1% Crimean Tatars, 1.4% Belarusians, 0.5% Tatars, 0.4% Armenians, 0.2% each of Jews, Poles, Moldovans and Azeris, 0.1% each of Uzbeks, Koreans (Koryo-saram), Greeks, Germans, Mordvins, Chuvashes, Gypsies, Bulgarians, Georgians and Maris, as well as Karaites, Krymchaks, and others)

It looks like a beautiful piece of property and everybody wants it. :47:

your numbers of tatars going from 92.6% to 0.5% only indicates that they took on the russian language..

It's like in 1860 when Italy formed..only 3% of 22 million people spoke Italian........now nearly all speak Italian ( as well as their regional languages). The 21plus million in 1860 who did not know Italian did not disappear.

to conclude, I think the majority of these 58.3% russians are tatars

 

[LeBrok]

your numbers of tatars going from 92.6% to 0.5% only indicates that they took on the russian language..

Speculating in face of available and known history is not the way to go.

In 1944 under the false pretext ^[2] of alleged mass collaboration of the Crimean Tatars with the Nazis during the Nazi occupation of the Crimea in 1941–1944. As a consequence, the Soviet government decided the total eviction of the Crimean Tatar people from the Crimea on orders of Joseph Stalin and Lavrentiy Beria.
The deportation began on 18 May 1944 in all Crimean inhabited localities.^[3] More than 32,000 NKVD troops participated in this action. The forced deportees were given only 30 minutes to gather personal belongings, after which they were loaded onto cattle trains and moved out of Crimea.^[4] 193,865 Crimean Tatars were deported, 151,136 of them to Uzbek SSR, 8,597 to Mari ASSR, 4,286 to Kazakh SSR, the rest 29,846 to the various oblasts of Russian SFSR. At the same moment, most of the Crimean Tatar men who were fighting in the ranks of the Red Army were demobilized and sent into forced labor camps in Siberia and in the Ural mountain region.^[4]
The results of this inquiry show that 109,956 (46.2%) Crimean Tatars of the 238,500 deportees died between July 1, 1944 and January 1, 1947.^[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tatars

Besides, these type of surveys report self designated or obvious ethnicity and not the spoken language. They all can speak Russian now, but look at 2001 survey.

Obviously there were many Tatars who were assimilated, but huge number was evicted from Crimea, and also Russians and Ukrainians moved in in big numbers.

 

[ElHorsto]

If 100% Crimea belongs to 12% Tatars, then 35% Canada belongs to 4.3% natives and 8% USA belongs to 0.9% natives. In Russia there are still 19% natives, so 100% goes to the natives. I couldn't find the figures for Australia.