OFF TOPIC > Russia/Ukraine/Nato

Does Ukraine have a legitimate claim to Crimea? Can anyone spell it out?

(1/13) > >>

gringo:
     A few facts about Crimea, which is obviously a central part(the main prize even) of the whole conflict. It is difficult to articulate a coherent case for Crimea to "return" to Ukraine. In truth it has never been part of Ukraine. Since 1783, Crimea has had a Russian port at Sevastopol. Its language, history and culture is Russian. At no time have Crimeans identified as being Ukrainian.
     In 1954 Crimea as part of Russia and the Soviet Union was transferred by then leader, Nikita Krushchev. The whys and wherefores of this question are much discussed in Russia/Crimea and subject of some interesting theories. Until the break up of the Soviet Union, this bureaucratic move of Crimea to Ukraine was of little to no significance.
     Before the dissolution of the USSR, a referendum was held on the question of preserving the Union- the "All Union Referendum";
 https://interfax.com/newsroom/top-stories/71359/.
https://www.rbth.com/articles/2011/03/17/the_first_and_only_national_referendum_in_soviet_history_12297

     The result of the Crimean Republic vote was overwhelming, over 95%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Soviet_Union_referendum#:~:text=The%20referendum's%20question%20was%20approved,Union%20Treaty%20a%20day%20later.

    Two months prior to the referendum the Crimean authorities held their own referendum to re-establish the, "Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic" of Crimea. Over 94% on an 81% turnout voted for autonomy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Crimean_sovereignty_referendum

    In 1994 a further referendum was held;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Crimean_referendum

"A three-part referendum was held in Crimea on 27 March 1994 alongside regional and national elections. Voters were asked whether they were in favour of greater autonomy within Ukraine, whether residents should have dual Russian and Ukrainian citizenship, and whether presidential decrees should have the status of laws. All three proposals were approved."

    After the Maidan coup most of the Ukrainian military that was based in Crimea defected to serve the Republic of Crimea;

"MOSCOW, March 4 (RIA Novosti) – More than 5,500 soldiers have defected from Ukraine’s military to serve the autonomous republic of Crimea, the region’s newly appointed leader said.

Sergei Aksyonov, named prime minister last week in a local parliamentary vote, said Tuesday that talks with unit commanders led to the defections of soldiers to join an independent Crimean military.

“Of the 34 Ukrainian military units stationed in Crimea, 23 have defected,” a local government representative told RIA Novosti on Tuesday."

    Full article here;

https://sputnikglobe.com/20140304/5500-Ukrainian-Soldiers-Defect-to-Serve-an-Independent-Crimea-188085607.html

     History, language, culture, ethnicity, the will of the people all point to Crimea being Russian and part of Russia in every way. Since 1991 there have been four referenda, all expressing the same desire.
     Bizarrely the case for Ukrainian sovereignty, unless anyone can add anything, rests entirely on the signature of a "Soviet Dictator"(Krushchev) in 1954 transferring Crimea to Ukraine. Surely the "self appointed" defenders of "democracy" have a better case than that?  ???

   

nugnug:
it bbelonged to the tarter orginal so really neather side hs a cliam to it though russia is better than ukrianes

gringo:

--- Quote from: nugnug on July 24, 2023, 10:43:PM ---it bbelonged to the tarter orginal so really neather side hs a cliam to it though russia is better than ukrianes

--- End quote ---
   Russia's claim goes back to 1783. Their is no serious Tatar claim to Crimea. The Crimean population want to be part of Russia. Anyone who believes in self-determination cannot deny the Russian claim. There is no expressed desire to start a "Tatar Republic".
     Are you suggesting it is returned to the Turkic Khaganate? the Ottoman Empire?
     Of course Russia has a claim to Crimea. It is the only legitimate claim that I have come across. I have laid it out and asked for anyone to lay out a comprehensive and coherent claim to Crimea of Ukraine, the Tatars, anyone?
     

nugnug:

--- Quote from: gringo on July 24, 2023, 11:00:PM ---   Russia's claim goes back to 1783. Their is no serious Tatar claim to Crimea. The Crimean population want to be part of Russia. Anyone who believes in self-determination cannot deny the Russian claim. There is no expressed desire to start a "Tatar Republic".
     Are you suggesting it is returned to the Turkic Khaganate? the Ottoman Empire?
     Of course Russia has a claim to Crimea. It is the only legitimate claim that I have come across. I have laid it out and asked for anyone to lay out a comprehensive and coherent claim to Crimea of Ukraine, the Tatars, anyone?
   

--- End quote ---

the tarters were there  until secound world war when they were expelled by stalin it was majority untill then

in 1763 russia annaxedd it before that the tarters had been there about  700  years and they were still the majority up untill the 1940s

if thats not a  cliam i dont know what is

gringo:

--- Quote from: nugnug on July 25, 2023, 01:03:AM ---the tarters were there  until secound world war when they were expelled by stalin it was majority untill then

in 1763 russia annaxedd it before that the tarters had been there about  700  years and they were still the majority up untill the 1940s

if thats not a  cliam i dont know what is

--- End quote ---
   It isn't a claim in any real sense, nugs. Tatars make up around 15% of the population of Crimea today and are able to speak for themselves. They are part of the population who as a whole have chosen to align with Russia.  How does this "return" of Crimea to the Tatars work?  You would also have to argue for the return of the USA to various indigenous tribes, then Canada. Australia will also have to be returned to the Aborigines. They all have better claims than the Tatars to Crimea. The Tatars themselves were invaders and are by no stretch the original indigenous inhabitants. Why not also argue for the "return" of Gibraltar to Spain?
     Russia have a near 250 year old claim. There is zero doubt that the Crimeans themselves want to be part of Russia. There is also zero doubt that the Ukrainian regime plan to ethnically cleanse and genocide the current population. The Ukrainian regime know that they are not wanted by the population and they would have to subdue them in order to rule.
     Quite how this hypothetical Tatar government gain power is left to the imagination.
     Ukraine's plans have been spelt out by many Official representatives of the Regime. Such as Kyrylo Budanov the Intelligence Chief who recently made the statement below. No secret is made of this intention. The self determination of the Crimeans is what Russia offer. Ukraine openly offer ethnic cleansing and genocide;   

“The majority of the radical pro-Russian population, upon the arrival of Ukrainian units in Crimea through any form of advancement, be it offensive or otherwise, will promptly depart for the Russian Federation via the ferry crossing,” Budanov believes.
    “No one will remain here. They will vacate this territory — they are not suicidal, believe me,” he said.

     It is not open to any other interpretation, Budanov is openly threatening genocide of "pro Russian Crimeans". To be "pro Russian" in A Ukrainian controlled Crimea would be "suicidal". This would also apply to "pro Russian" Tatars, by the way.

   
   
 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version