 |
March 02, 2014, 08:07:26 PM |
|
First, let get the facts straight. Crimea was controlled by the Crimean Khanate until 1783, when Russia annexed it. It was then part of Russia for 138 years until 1921. Then it was part of the Russian SFSR from 1921-1954, when it was transferred to the Ukrainian SSR. So, it has been part of Russia for 171 years and after that Ukraine for 60 years.
Let's not forget the time before Russian annexation. The Crimean Khanate existed between 1441-1783 and even during most of the period of Russian control the majority of the population consisted of Crimean Tatars. It was due to Soviet policies that the Crimean Tatars either perished in famine or were deported to remote areas of the Soviet Union, thus opening up for Russian immigration. After the break-up of the Soviet Union, the Crimean Tatars were allowed to move back to their motherland, but they're still a minority.
So, yes, the majority in the Crimea are Russians, but they certainly cannot claim centuries' old right to it. That only the Crimean Tatars can do, who were robbed of their homeland by the bolsheviks. However, they want their homeland to stay part of Ukraine, as they have been oppressed by Czar Russia and then Soviet Union for a very long time.
About the claims of Nazis now controlling Kyiv. Well, yes, there are neo-Nazis in Kyiv. There are also neo-Nazis in Moscow... and in Berlin for that matter. In neither city they are in control. The Nazis committed horrible crimes in most countries of Europe and people remember that. Claiming that Nazis are now controlling any country is ridiculous, to be honest. If you believe that, you are falling for propaganda. I myself was once very close to get beaten up by skinheads in Moscow (in Izmaylovskiy Park) a couple of years ago (I had long hair and apparently Russian skinheads don't like people with long hair, I learnt afterwards), but I don't go around saying that Nazis are controlling Moscow... I'm sure you can film some neo-Nazis in either Kyiv or Moscow. The question is what you do with it. If it's only the neo-Nazis you're showing in media and not much else, then it's propaganda...
Now, my take on the situation; Janukovich is a corrupt politician who has stolen millions, if not billions, of hryvnias from the Ukrainian people. They were fed up with him and got rid of him. Probably the new leaders are also corrupt, but that's another story. Yes, the revolution was led by people from Western Ukraine and they are more friendly towards the EU than towards Russia, but that doesn't mean they will start oppressing Russian-speaking people. I was actually hoping that the new Ukrainian government would be more inclusive than Janukovich and be the government for all Ukrainian citizens, not just one part. Anway, my impression is that Putin ceased this opportunity to spread propaganda, which created fear in the Russians on the Crimea. Thus Putin could use the protection of his countrymen abroad as an excuse to take control of the Crimea. This is a very useful excuse and has been used many times before. By the Americans in 1846 (Texas) and by the Germans 1938 (Sudetenland), for example.
"Peace in our time"
|
