Republic of Crimea - subject Russian Federation, part of the Crimean Federal District, part of the Crimean Federal District.

It was formed in March 2014 on the basis of an agreement on the admission to Russia of the independent Republic of Crimea, proclaimed within the administrative borders of the former Ukrainian Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol.

The capital is the city of Simferopol.

On March 11, 2014, the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the Sevastopol City Council unilaterally adopted a declaration of independence of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol. The declaration proclaimed that if, as a result of the upcoming referendum, a decision was made on Crimea's entry into Russia, Crimea would be declared an independent and sovereign republic and it was in this status that it would turn to the Russian Federation with a proposal to join the Russian Federation as its new subject

On March 16, 2014, a Crimean referendum was held, during which the overwhelming majority of voters were in favor of joining Russia.

On March 18, 2014, an agreement was signed on the entry of the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol into the Russian Federation as subjects of the Russian Federation. The annexation of Crimea to Russia is not recognized by Ukraine, the United States and the countries of the European Union.

On March 21, 2014, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a federal constitutional law on the entry of Crimea into the Russian Federation and the formation of new entities in the country - the Republic of Crimea and the city federal significance Sevastopol.

On April 2, 2014, Vladimir Putin signed a decree according to which the Republic of Crimea was included in the Southern Military District.

The government of the republic is the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Crimea. The Chairman of the Council of Ministers (Prime Minister) of the Republic of Crimea is appointed State Council Republic of Crimea. The Council of Ministers is formed by the State Council of the Republic of Crimea for the term of its powers.

The Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was adopted at the second session of the Verkhovna Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea on October 21, 1998 and came into force on January 11, 1999. After the entry of the Republic of Crimea into Russia, the Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea of ​​1998 continues to be in force on its territory until the adoption of a new edition of the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea.

The northern border of the Republic of Crimea coincides with the former administrative border of the Ukrainian Autonomous Republic of Crimea. From the west, south and northeast, the peninsula is washed by the Black and Azov Seas; in the east, the Republic of Crimea has a maritime administrative border with the Krasnodar Territory. In the southwest of the peninsula there is an administrative border with the federal city of Sevastopol.

Settlements - 1020, including: urban - 72, rural - 948.

As of January 1, 2013, the territory of the Republic of Crimea is divided into the following administrative-territorial entities:

According to Ukrstat, as of January 1, 2014, the permanent population of the republic was 1958.5 thousand people (including 1218.7 thousand citizens, or 62.23%), the actual population - 1967.2 thousand people (in including 1233.5 thousand city residents, or 62.70%). According to Crimean Statistics, as of February 1, 2014, the permanent population of the republic was 1,958,046 people (including 1,218,313 townspeople, or 62.22%), the actual population was 1,966,801 people (including 1,233,119 townspeople , or 62.70%).

• Article 12.2. Application in the territories of the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol of the legislation of the Russian Federation on licensing of certain types of activities, the legislation of the Russian Federation on the notification procedure for starting business activities and the legislation of the Russian Federation on the protection of rights legal entities And individual entrepreneurs when exercising state control (supervision), municipal control

Federal constitutional law of March 21, 2014 N 6-FKZ
"On the admission of the Republic of Crimea to the Russian Federation and the formation of new entities within the Russian Federation - the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol"

With changes and additions from:

May 27, July 21, November 4, December 29, 31, 2014, December 29, 2015, June 23, December 19, 28, 2016, July 29, December 28, 2017, December 25, 2018

President of Russian Federation

The Federal Law on the entry of Crimea into Russia was adopted.

First of all, we note that it provides a rationale for the legality of the accession. For example, the following are named as grounds for accession: the results of the all-Crimean referendum (recall that it was held on March 16, 2014), the Declaration of Independence of the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, the Treaty between Russia and Crimea on the admission of the latter to our country (signed March 18, 2014), proposals of the Republic and the city of Sevastopol for acceptance.

Crimea is considered accepted into Russia from the date of signing the above-mentioned agreement between Russia and the Republic of Crimea.

Two new entities are being formed within Russia - the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol (their borders have been determined). 3 are introduced on their territory state languages- Russian, Ukrainian, Crimean Tatar.

All Ukrainians and stateless persons permanently residing in the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on the day of Crimea’s admission to Russia are granted Russian citizenship. You can refuse it by declaring your desire to retain your existing citizenship (remain stateless). Duration - 1 month. Russian passports must be issued within 3 months.

The monetary unit in the territories of the new subjects of the Federation is the ruble. At the same time, the circulation of the hryvnia is allowed until January 1, 2016. However, some transactions are immediately carried out (that is, from the moment Crimea was admitted to Russia) in rubles. We are talking about paying taxes, customs and other fees, payments to state extra-budgetary funds. Payments to employees of budgetary organizations and social benefits. Payments with legal entities registered in other subjects of the Federation (with the exception of payments made during banking transactions between credit institutions). Until January 1, 2015, hryvnias are exchanged for rubles at the official rate established by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

There is a transition period until January 1, 2015, during which the issues of integration of new subjects of the Federation into various systems(legal, economic, financial, credit, etc.). Only from January 1, 2015, Russian legislation on taxes and fees is applied in these regions.

It is determined how the bodies of the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, the prosecutor's office and local government, and the courts are formed. Established how banks function budgetary institutions, non-credit financial organizations, advocacy, notary. Attention is paid to social guarantees and issues of conscription and military service.

The FKZ comes into force on the date of entry into force of the Treaty between Russia and Crimea on the latter’s admission to Russia.

Federal Constitutional Law of March 21, 2014 N 6-FKZ "On the admission of the Republic of Crimea to the Russian Federation and the formation of new entities within the Russian Federation - the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol"

This Federal Constitutional Law comes into force on the date of entry into force of the Treaty between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Crimea on the admission of the Republic of Crimea to the Russian Federation and the formation of new entities within it

The text of the Federal Constitutional Law was published on the “Official Internet Portal of Legal Information” (www.pravo.gov.ru) on March 21, 2014, in the “Rossiyskaya Gazeta” dated March 24, 2014 N 66, in the Collection of Legislation of the Russian Federation dated 24 March 2014 N 12 art. 1201, in the "Parliamentary Newspaper" dated March 28 - April 3, 2014 N 11

This document is amended by the following documents:

Located on the Crimean Peninsula in the northern part of the Black Sea. The peninsula stretches for 207 kilometers from north to south (from the Perekop Isthmus to Cape Sarych), and from west to east (between capes Kara Mrun and Fonar) for 324 kilometers. Length… … Encyclopedia of Newsmakers

Crimea (Republic of Crimea)- CRIMEA (Republic of Crimea), part of Ukraine, on the territory of the Crimean Peninsula. Population 2596 thousand people, urban 69.2%. 15 districts, 16 cities, 56 urban-type settlements. The capital is Simferopol. Crimea is one of the oldest areas of settlement... ... Illustrated Encyclopedic Dictionary

This article is about administrative unit, perhaps you were looking for an article about the Crimean Peninsula or another meaning. Autonomous Republic of Crimea Autonomous Republic of Crimea Qırım Muhtar Cumhuriyeti ... Wikipedia

Autonomous Republic of Crimea- (ARC) is located on the Crimean Peninsula, in the southern part of Ukraine. Its area is 27 thousand square kilometers. According to the Main Department of Statistics in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the population is 1967.2 thousand people (as of January 2014... ... Encyclopedia of Newsmakers

AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA (ARC), administrative-territorial unit- Formed as part of Ukraine on February 12, 1991 within the borders of the Crimean region. Previously, from October 18, 1921 to October 30, 1954, Crimea was an autonomy within the USSR. In accordance with the Constitution of Ukraine, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea is the basic... ... Toponymic Dictionary of Sevastopol

Monument Mound of Glory ... Wikipedia

- ... Wikipedia

III.9.2.3. Republic of Crimea (capital Simferopol)- ⇑ III.9.2. Ukraine 1921 45 Crimean Tatar ASSR as part of the RSFSR. 1945 91 Crimean region as part of the RSFSR (since 1954 Ukrainian SSR). Chairmen Top Council. Nikolai Vasilievich Bagrov (06/17/1991 02/04/1994). Yuri Aleksandrovich Meshkov (pres. 02/04/1994... ... Rulers of the World

Crimean Peninsula, in the north of the Black Sea; Ukraine. The earliest name is Cimmeria, the country of the Cimmerians, known in the 2nd millennium BC. e., belonged to the steppe part of the peninsula, reaching in the east to the Sea of ​​Azov (cf. ancient name Kerch Strait… … Geographical encyclopedia

Crimean Republic, part of Ukraine, on the Crimean Peninsula. 27 thousand km2. Population 2205.6 thousand people (1996), urban 69.2%; Russians 1630 thousand people, Ukrainians 626 thousand people (1989, census), Crimean Tatars and others. 15 districts,... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

Books

• Russian Federation. Subjects of the Federation. Wall map
• Russian Federation. Subjects of the Federation. Infographics. Wall map, . The map reflects the political and administrative structure of the state, the boundaries of federal districts are given, the territories of the subjects are highlighted in color, settlements are displayed by type of settlement,...

Annexation of Crimea to Russia(2014) - inclusion into the Russian Federation of most of the territory of the Crimean Peninsula, which after the collapse of the USSR was part of independent Ukraine and was controlled by it until 2014, with the formation of two new subjects of the Federation - the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol.

This event was immediately preceded by months of anti-presidential and anti-government actions in Ukraine (“Euromaidan”), which ended in February 2014 with a forceful change of power. The very first actions of the opposition that came to power in Kyiv caused protests in Crimea by the local, mostly Russian-speaking, population, which was facilitated by the intensification of the actions of the Russians public organizations(“Russian Community of Crimea” and the “Russian Unity” party), who began mobilizing their supporters in mid-January 2014, due to the escalation of the confrontation in Kyiv and the unfolding campaign of seizure of administrative buildings in a number of regions of Ukraine.

On February 23-24, under pressure from pro-Russian activists, a change in the executive authorities of Sevastopol was carried out, and on February 27, after early in the morning the buildings of the authorities of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea were seized and blocked by several groups of armed people, deputies of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea gathered in the parliament building , dismissed the government of Anatoly Mogilev and decided to hold a pan-Crimean referendum on May 25 on expanding the autonomy of the peninsula within Ukraine. The new government of Crimea was headed by the leader of the Russian Unity party, Sergei Aksenov, who declared non-recognition of the new leadership of Ukraine and appealed to the Russian leadership for “assistance in ensuring peace and tranquility in the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.”

On March 1, the Federation Council of the Russian Federation approved President Vladimir Putin’s request for permission to use Russian troops on the territory of Ukraine. Detachments of volunteers and Russian military personnel blocked all objects and military units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces on the territory of the peninsula, the command of which refused to submit to the government of Crimea.

On March 6, the referendum question was changed. Bypassing the Ukrainian Constitution, the issue of annexing Crimea to Russia was put to a vote. On March 11, the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the Sevastopol City Council adopted the Declaration of Independence. On March 16, a referendum was held on the status of Crimea, based on the results of which it was unilaterally proclaimed independent republic Crimea, which signed an agreement with Russia on joining the Russian Federation.

The Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people took a special position, claiming to be the representative body of the Crimean Tatars. On February 21-23, he organized mass rallies in support of the new Ukrainian government, on February 26, he tried to organize the seizure of the Crimean parliament building and prevent the work of deputies, and on March 15, he announced the non-recognition of the referendum “held with the aim of changing the territorial affiliation of Crimea” as legitimate and in accordance with international law and the Constitution of Ukraine. The Mejlis stated that it “categorically rejects any attempts to determine the future of Crimea without the free will of the Crimean Tatar people - the indigenous people of Crimea” and that only Crimean Tatars belongs to the right to decide in which state to live the Crimean Tatar people. According to the Mejlis, “the restoration of the rights of the Crimean Tatar people and their exercise of the right to self-determination in their historical homeland must be carried out as part of a sovereign and independent Ukrainian state.”

The majority of UN member states do not recognize the Crimean referendum. The Western community (G7, NATO and EU member states) regarded Russia’s actions as aggression, annexation of part of Ukrainian territory, violation of its territorial integrity. The West's rejection of Russian actions in Crimea led to the refusal of Western leaders to cooperate with Russia in the G8 format and became one of the reasons for the introduction of Western sanctions against Russia. Russia, in turn, views the annexation of Crimea as the realization of the right to self-determination of the population of Crimea, which “revolted” against the forceful change of power in the country. Ukraine itself does not recognize the annexation of Crimea to Russia; On April 15, 2014, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a law declaring the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol territories occupied as a result of “armed aggression of the Russian Federation.”

On March 27, 2014, the UN General Assembly by a majority vote adopted a resolution on its commitment to the territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders, non-recognition of the Crimean referendum and changes in the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol based on it.

The problem of Crimea in Russian-Ukrainian relations (1992-2014)

Background

On October 18, 1921, a multinational Crimean ASSR. In 1939, the population of the Crimean ASSR was 1 million 126 thousand people (49.6% Russians, 19.4% Crimean Tatars, 13.7% Ukrainians, 5.8% Jews, 4.5% Germans).

After the deportation of the Crimean Tatars (1944-1946), the Crimean ASSR was abolished on June 25, 1946 and transformed into the Crimean region.

In April 1954, the Crimean region was transferred to the Ukrainian SSR with the following wording: “Taking into account the commonality of the economy, territorial proximity and close economic and cultural ties between the Crimean region and the Ukrainian SSR.” According to some Russian researchers and politicians, Sevastopol in 1954 was not formally transferred to the Ukrainian SSR as part of the Crimean region, since since 1948 it had been a city of republican subordination to the RSFSR. This position was also adhered to by the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation when, on July 9, 1993, it adopted Resolution No. 5359-1 “On the status of the city of Sevastopol” (see. Legal status Sevastopol). At the same time, however, in Article 77 of the Constitution of the Ukrainian SSR of 1978, Sevastopol, like Kyiv, was named a city of republican subordination, and there was no mention of Sevastopol in the Constitution of the RSFSR of 1978.

In 1989, the deportation of the Crimean Tatars was recognized by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR as illegal and criminal. Crimean Tatars were allowed to settle in Crimea. A massive return to the historical homeland of the Crimean Tatar people began, significantly aggravating social and ethnic contradictions on the peninsula.

In November 1990, the question of restoring the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was raised. On January 20, 1991, a referendum was held in the Crimean region on the restoration of Crimean autonomy. 81.37% of Crimeans included in the voting lists accepted the referendum. 93.26% of citizens who took part in the referendum supported the re-establishment of the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic.

On February 12, 1991, the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR adopted the Law “On the restoration of the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic.” Article 1 stated:

On June 19 of the same year, mention of the restored autonomous republic was included in the constitution of the Ukrainian SSR.

At the turn of the 1980s - 1990s, in Crimea, as in many other regions of the USSR, the activities of independent public organizations intensified, a number of which initially declared their goal to protect the national-cultural, historical and linguistic identity of the Russian population of the peninsula. In 1989, the organization “Democratic Taurida” began to operate in Crimea, putting forward, in particular, slogans for the creation of the Crimean Republic within the USSR and consolidation of the status of the Russian language as the state language on its territory. Later, with the participation of a number of prominent figures from the “Democratic Taurida”, a new structure was created - the “Republican Movement of Crimea” (RDC).

After the collapse of the USSR

1990s

On December 1, 1991, in an all-Ukrainian referendum, 54% of residents of Crimea and 57% of residents of Sevastopol supported the independence of Ukraine.

On February 26, 1992, by decision of the Supreme Council of Autonomy, the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was renamed the Republic of Crimea, and on May 6 of the same year, the Crimean Constitution was adopted, which confirmed this name and also established the entry of Crimea into Ukraine on a contractual basis, but the Supreme Council of Ukraine did not approved the name “Republic of Crimea”.

In 1992-1994, pro-Russian political forces made attempts to separate Crimea from Ukraine - for example, on May 5, 1992, the Supreme Council of Crimea adopted a resolution on holding a pan-Crimean referendum on the issue of independence and state independence of the Republic of Crimea, which was subsequently canceled thanks to the intervention of the Verkhovna Rada Ukraine.

On May 21, 1992, the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation adopted its own resolution, which recognized the decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR of February 5, 1954 “On the transfer of the Crimean region from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR” as “not legally valid from the moment of adoption” due to the fact that it was adopted “in violation of the Constitution (Basic Law) of the RSFSR and legislative procedure.” At the same time, the Russian parliament clarified that in connection with the constitution of the subsequent legislation of the RSFSR of the fact of the transfer of the Crimean region and the conclusion between Ukraine and Russia of the agreement of November 19, 1990, in which the parties renounced territorial claims, as well as in connection with the consolidation of this principle in agreements and agreements between the CIS states, he considers it necessary to resolve the issue of Crimea through interstate negotiations between Russia and Ukraine with the participation of Crimea and on the basis of the will of its population.

On July 9, 1993, the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation, chaired by Ruslan Khasbulatov, adopted a resolution “On the status of the city of Sevastopol,” which confirmed “the Russian federal status of the city of Sevastopol within the administrative-territorial boundaries of the city district as of December 1991.” Russian President Boris Yeltsin reacted negatively to the actions of the Supreme Council, saying: “I am ashamed of the parliament’s decision... Don’t start a war with Ukraine.” The statement by Russian parliamentarians came against the backdrop of an acute political crisis in Russia in 1992-1993, which resulted in a violent confrontation between the parliament and the president. In connection with the resolution of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation on the status of Sevastopol, Ukraine filed a complaint with the UN Security Council. The UN Security Council, including the representative of Russia, in its statement of July 20, 1993 (S/26118), reaffirmed its commitment to the principles of sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within internationally recognized borders. In 1994, the OSCE mission began working in Ukraine, the main task of which was to help stabilize the situation on the Crimean Peninsula. In 1999, in connection with the fulfillment of its mandate, the OSCE mission in Ukraine completed its work.

In 1993, the Republican Movement of Crimea (RMC) was transformed into a political organization - the Republican Party of Crimea (RPK). Its leaders put forward a number of slogans of a very radical nature - a course towards rapprochement between the Republic of Crimea and Russia, up to complete annexation, the conclusion of a military-political alliance with Russia, and the provision of Russian citizenship to the residents of Crimea.

At the beginning of 1994, the highest success of the Crimean pro-Russian movement at that time was recorded: in January, the famous public figure Yuri Meshkov was elected president of the Republic of Crimea, and the majority in the Supreme Council of the autonomy was won by the “Russia” bloc created with the support of the Republican Party of Crimea. However, after a convincing victory in the elections, the new leadership of Crimea was faced with the lack of a financial, economic, and managerial basis to ensure real autonomy, as well as the lack of support from Russia itself, whose leadership at that time was trying to get closer to the West and therefore considered the activity of pro-Russian figures abroad as an unpleasant obstacle that could revive suspicions in the West regarding Russia’s “unlived imperial ambitions.”

In September 1994, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine renamed the Crimean ASSR (Republic of Crimea) into the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, and in March 1995, it unilaterally abolished the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Crimea and, accordingly, abolished the post of president of the republic. Deprived of his position, Yuri Meshkov left for Russia (and was able to return only in March 2014). A number of Crimean parties were dissolved (in particular, parties that were part of the Russia bloc).

In 1998, pro-Russian political forces in Crimea, weakened by the political crisis, were defeated in the elections to the Supreme Council of Crimea. On October 21, 1998, the new Crimean parliament adopted a new constitution, brought into line with the constitution of Ukraine.

For a certain time, in the activities of pro-Russian organizations, the political component itself faded into the background, while issues of the Russian language, religion, culture, historical identity, and maintaining ties with the historical Motherland began to play a more important role. From 1995-1996, the “Russian Community of Crimea” came to the fore, created back in October 1993 by decision of the leaders of the RDK/RPK as a public organization focused in its activities on protecting the interests and rights of the Russians of Crimea and all Crimeans who consider the Russian language and Russian culture by relatives.

Black Sea Fleet

After the breakup Soviet Union A special problem in Ukrainian-Russian relations was the fate of the Black Sea Fleet of the USSR Navy, which was divided between the countries in 1994. During the division of the Soviet fleet in the first half of the 1990s, relations between military personnel of the Ukrainian and Russian fleets, as sources note, remained at times very tense, sometimes reaching the point of physical confrontation between them. The situation on the peninsula in 1993-1994 was on the brink armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Between 1994 and 1997 The presidents of Russia and Ukraine signed a number of bilateral agreements designed to resolve the situation with the Black Sea Fleet. As a result of negotiations on the division of the fleet, the Ukrainian side received 30 warships and boats, one submarine, 6 special-purpose ships, as well as 28 support vessels (67 units in total), 90 combat aircraft. Russia received 338 ships and vessels, as well as 106 airplanes and helicopters.

According to the Agreement on the status and conditions of the presence of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine, the following were transferred to Russia on a 20-year lease: the main bay of the city - Sevastopol with berths for parking more than 30 warships, Karantinnaya Bay with a brigade of missile boats of the Black Sea Fleet and a diving range , Cossack Bay, where the brigade was stationed Marine Corps, South Bay. Ships of the Russian and Ukrainian fleets were jointly based in Streletskaya Bay. Russia also leased the main arsenal of ammunition, a missile base for the Black Sea Fleet, an landing range and two airfields: Gvardeiskoye near Simferopol and Sevastopol (Kacha). Ukraine agreed to the use by the Black Sea Fleet in Crimea, outside of Sevastopol, of Russian naval facilities: the 31st test center in Feodosia, HF communication points in Yalta and Sudak, and the Crimean military sanatorium. According to the agreements, Russia could have in Ukraine no more than 25 thousand personnel, 24 artillery systems with a caliber of more than 100 mm, 132 armored vehicles, 22 ground-based naval combat aircraft, and the number Russian ships and the number of ships should not exceed 388 units. The leased airfields in Gvardeyskoye and Sevastopol (Kach) could accommodate 161 aircraft. The Russian side pledged not to have nuclear weapons as part of the Russian Black Sea Fleet on the territory of Ukraine.

2000s

Revival political activity pro-Russian organizations began to emerge in 2002, when the organization “Russian Community of Crimea” and the party “Russian Bloc”, created with the participation of the RDK/RPK, were able to get their deputies into the Supreme Council of Crimea, and in 2006 they expanded their representation following the results of the next elections. In 2003, the “Russian Community of Crimea” was headed by Sergei Tsekov.

The activation of pro-Russian public organizations was facilitated by the “Orange Revolution” (2004), many of whose slogans were perceived with sharp hostility by a significant part of the population of the peninsula. In 2004-2005, the “Russian Community of Crimea” acted as one of the basic socio-political forces in Crimea that offered political resistance to the “Orange Revolution”. Declaring the illegitimacy of the re-vote in the second round of the presidential election, the “Russian Community of Crimea” organized thousands of rallies in Simferopol against the political and legal lawlessness in the country and the illegal rise to power of Viktor Yushchenko. In 2006, the “Russian Community of Crimea” took part in the formation of the electoral bloc “For Yanukovych!” in local elections in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Thanks to this, it was possible to ensure solid representation of Community activists in the Crimean parliament and in local councils of the autonomy. Chairman of the “Russian Community of Crimea” Sergei Tsekov was elected first deputy chairman of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.

In December 2009, the Russian community of Crimea, together with the Civil Activists of Crimea, initiated the creation of the All-Crimean movement “Russian Unity”. This initiative was supported by many other Russian public organizations. Sergei Tsekov and Sergei Aksyonov were elected co-chairs of the Russian Unity movement.

In 2010, Russian organizations that participated in the creation of the All-Crimean movement “Russian Unity” came to the conclusion that it was necessary to form a Russian party in Ukraine. This party, which, like the movement of the same name, was called “Russian Unity”, was created and officially registered in September 2010. The leader of the Russian Unity party was Sergei Aksyonov, by that time the first deputy chairman of the Russian Community of Crimea.

The possibility of a new conflict in Crimea in connection with a new redivision of the world was considered high already in the early 2000s.

In the fall of 2003, a conflict broke out between Russia and Ukraine over the island of Tuzla in the Kerch Strait, caused by the lack of progress in resolving the status of the Kerch Strait and the Sea of ​​Azov. After the collapse of the USSR, the navigable part of the strait (between the Tuzla Spit and the Crimean Peninsula) ended up entirely in the territorial waters of Ukraine. The Russian part of the Kerch Strait was shallow and suitable only for small fishing boats. On September 29, 2003, the authorities of the Krasnodar region, without warning the Ukrainian side, began construction of a dam from the Taman Peninsula towards the border island of Tuzla Spit, citing the need to prevent erosion of the coastline of the Taman Peninsula and spit, restore the ecological balance in the region, preserve and restore fish stocks and other biological resources. Kyiv regarded the construction as “an encroachment on the territorial integrity of the country.” In response, the Ukrainian side transferred several hundred border guards to the island and sent artillery boats to the Kerch Strait. Soon, both sides began to increase their military presence in the region. On October 23, the construction of the dam was stopped 102 m from the state border line (unilaterally declared by Ukraine) after the meeting of Presidents Putin and Kuchma, who signed the “Agreement on Cooperation in the Use of the Sea of ​​Azov and the Kerch Strait” in December 2003, but the status of Tuzla as and the status of the Kerch Strait was never finally settled by the parties.

Yushchenko presidency

After Viktor Yushchenko came to power in Ukraine in 2005, Russian-Ukrainian relations deteriorated sharply. Moscow negatively assessed both the Orange Revolution itself and the policy of the new Ukrainian president towards language issue, interpretations of the history of the Holodomor and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, his course towards NATO membership. Yushchenko's policy did not find support among the majority of residents of the Crimean peninsula.

In 2006, Viktor Yushchenko stated that Ukraine would adhere to the provisions of the agreement on the status and conditions of the presence of the Russian Black Sea Fleet on Ukrainian territory only until 2017. Yushchenko said that the Constitution of Ukraine does not provide for the possibility of foreign states having military bases on Ukrainian territory, and therefore the Ukrainian president ordered preparations to begin for the withdrawal of the Russian fleet after 2017.

One more controversial issue Between the Russian Federation and Ukraine there was a conflict over the Crimean lighthouses, which began at the end of 2005. Then Ukraine announced the need to conduct an inventory of all facilities used by the Russian fleet. However, any attempts to verify the use of facilities were suppressed by the Russian side. Kyiv sought the transfer of navigation and hydrographic objects under its jurisdiction. The Ukrainian side argued that the 1997 Treaty defined a list of objects and areas that were transferred to the Black Sea Fleet for temporary use for 20 years; other objects, including lighthouses, were to be returned to Ukraine. However, in 1997, the parties also agreed to develop an additional agreement on navigational and hydrographic support facilities, which was not done. The decisions of the Ukrainian courts ordered the seizure of navigational and hydrographic objects to the Russian Black Sea Fleet and transfer them to the Ukrainian side. The Russian Navy High Command insisted that the dispute regarding the ownership of the lighthouses between the two countries would be resolved through negotiations between the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and Russia. After attempts by Ukrainian representatives of the public organization “Student Brotherhood” to penetrate the territory of navigation and hydrographic structures controlled by the Russian fleet, the Russian side is strengthening military security of these facilities. In response, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry called on Russia not to violate the provisions of the agreement on the status and conditions of the presence of the Russian Black Sea Fleet on the territory of Ukraine.

In 2006, the Crimean peninsula was swept by a wave of protests against Ukraine's accession to NATO. In the spring, protests by many thousands took place against NATO exercises in Feodosia, during which protesters blocked the unloading of an American cargo ship at the commercial port, which was carrying cargo for the planned Sea Breeze 2006 exercises. Protests were also held at the airport of Simferopol, where the Alliance plane landed, and Alushta , where 140 American specialists were blocked in the Druzhba sanatorium. On June 6, 2006, the Supreme Council of Crimea decided to declare the peninsula a “territory without NATO.” 61 out of 78 deputies of the local parliament voted for this statement. The presidential representative in Crimea, Gennady Moskal, called the decision contrary to the Constitution. Against the backdrop of the conflict, one of the leaders of the Party of Regions at that time, Taras Chernovol, said: “The Verkhovna Rada did not give consent to the arrival of the American military in Ukraine. The arrival of NATO troops in Feodosia, according to international law, can be qualified either as aggression, or, if agreed by the Ukrainian government, military and border guards, as high treason.” On June 11-12, 2006, the US military left Crimea without taking part in the exercises on the peninsula.

In August 2008, after the outbreak of the armed conflict in South Ossetia, Ukraine became the only CIS country that openly sided with Georgia and demanded that Russia immediately withdraw troops from its territory. On August 10, Ukraine warned the Russian side against the participation of its Black Sea Fleet ships in the conflict, otherwise threatening to prevent the ships from returning to Crimea. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko said that because of the Black Sea Fleet ships, Ukraine is being drawn into a military conflict without wanting it. On August 13, the President of Ukraine established a new procedure for crossing the Ukrainian border by ships of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, according to which Black Sea Fleet forces could cross the border of the republic only after notifying the headquarters of the Ukrainian Navy of their actions at least 72 hours in advance. The Russian Foreign Ministry assessed Yushchenko's decree on the Black Sea Fleet as a new anti-Russian step. On September 5, Yushchenko called the Russian Black Sea Fleet a threat to the security of Ukraine. In Crimea, however, the majority of the population supported Russia's position in the conflict. On September 17, the leader of the “Russian Community of Crimea” Sergei Tsekov initiated an appeal from the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine with an appeal to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The appeal was supported by representatives of the Crimean republican branches of the Party of Regions, the Russian Bloc Party, Communist Party Ukraine, Progressive socialist party Ukraine, a number of city councils, republican national-cultural societies. “We, Crimeans, stand in solidarity with the fraternal Ossetian people and wish them unity, freedom, success in restoring the destroyed economy caused by aggression,” said the appeal sent in June 2009 by the Russian community of Crimea to the participants of the VII World Congress of the Ossetian People.

Against this background, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Vladimir Ogryzko even accused the Russian authorities of “secretly distributing Russian passports to residents of Crimea.” Russia rejected these accusations.

The intensification of the policy of the Yushchenko administration, which followed the events of 2008, was perceived by organizations of the Russian population of Crimea as a set of hostile measures, which in many cases caused a sharp reaction. Thus, the Charter of Strategic Partnership signed in December 2008 by the heads of the foreign ministries of Ukraine and the United States, which envisaged, in particular, the opening of a US diplomatic mission in Simferopol with an unclear status and functions, received a clearly negative assessment. Meeting with the American Ambassador to Ukraine W. Taylor in January 2009, the leader of the Russian Community, Sergei Tsekov, said that the opening of a US “presence post” in Crimea would lead to constant conflicts and tension. A significant part of the population of Crimea, Tsekov emphasized, does not trust the United States because of its policy towards Russia and its course towards unconditional support for Yushchenko. “60 percent of Russians live in Crimea by nationality, 80 percent by language - you must take these realities into account! – the leader of the “Russian Community” told the ambassador. – Russia is our Motherland, and we will not betray it, and you should know this. This is a reality that must be reckoned with."

After the 2008 war in Georgia, a number of experts suggested that the next conflict in Europe would be the confrontation in Crimea between Russia and Ukraine.

The Russian-speaking majority of the population and the policies of the Ukrainian elites allowed some researchers to suggest already in 2010 that the political split in Ukraine could lead to a referendum on joining Russia in Crimea.

Presidency of Yanukovych

With the election of Viktor Yanukovych to the post of President of Ukraine, Russian-Ukrainian relations have changed significantly. By the time he took office as head of state, Yanukovych looked like a pro-Russian politician who opposed Ukraine’s rapprochement with NATO, for Russian as the second state language in the country, and held different views on the Holodomor and the OUN-UPA than his predecessor Yushchenko.

On April 21, 2010, the presidents of Russia Dmitry Medvedev and Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych signed agreements in Kharkov, according to which Ukraine received a discount on gas in the amount of $100 for every thousand cubic meters, and the Russian Black Sea Fleet remained in Crimea until 2042. The agreement was received extremely ambiguously in Ukrainian society, the opposition accused Yanukovych of betraying national interests, even to the point of surrendering sovereignty over the Crimean peninsula to Russia, and the ratification of the agreements in the Verkhovna Rada was accompanied by large-scale clashes between parliament members.

At the same time, several key issues regarding the presence of the fleet on Ukrainian territory remained unresolved. First of all, there remained the problem of modernizing the weapons and equipment of the units stationed in Crimea. For Moscow, this was one of the key issues, since the physical and moral obsolescence of equipment threatened the loss of combat capability of the fleet in the near future. The Ukrainian authorities were ready to agree to the appearance of modern Russian Navy ships in Crimea, but insisted that the renewal agreement military equipment a clause was fixed on the mandatory agreement with Ukraine on the replacement of ships and aircraft, which was categorically unacceptable for the Russian leadership. Another controversial issue was the intention of the Ukrainian side to collect customs duties on all goods imported for the needs of the Russian fleet. Moscow absolutely disagreed with this; moreover, the Russian side tried to achieve the abolition of all existing taxes that were in force for cargo imported to ensure the functionality of the Russian fleet. The problem of lighthouses used by the Russian Black Sea Fleet also remains unresolved. In 2011, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense demanded that the Russian side return the lighthouses. At the same time, the representative of the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Oleg Voloshin said: “We do not want to turn the issue of lighthouses into conflict situation", adding that the search for a compromise will continue at a meeting of the Ukrainian-Russian working group.

On July 2, 2011, a massive clash between activists of Russian Cossack organizations and Ukrainian police took place in Feodosia. The conflict flared up after the court banned the Cossacks from erecting a worship cross at the entrance to the city, as it displeased the Crimean Tatar Mejlis. The Cossacks, ignoring the court's decision, arbitrarily erected a cross, which was soon dismantled by local authorities. When trying to restore the cross, on the site of the dismantled monument, the Cossacks were met by a police detachment. Trying to pass through the police cordon, the Cossacks provoked a clash with law enforcement officers. 10 activists were detained, about 15 Cossacks were seriously injured.

In July 2011 he returned to Crimea ex-president Crimean Republic Yuri Meshkov after 16 years of absence from the peninsula. However, on July 13, the District Administrative Court of Crimea supported the SBU’s proposal to expel the ex-president of Crimea from the territory of Ukraine with a restriction of entry for a period of five years, after Meshkov’s calls for the “restoration of the sovereignty of Crimea” upon his return to the peninsula. Verkhovna Rada deputy from the Party of Regions, head of the “Coordination Council of Organizations of Russian Compatriots of Ukraine” Vadim Kolesnichenko then said that “Meshkov is a man who caused colossal harm to Crimea, Crimean statehood, and Crimean people. Therefore it is correct."

After Viktor Yanukovych declared a course towards signing an Association with the EU, he began to rapidly lose support among the electorate of the South and East of Ukraine. If in the second round of the presidential elections in February 2010 in the eastern regions, Yanukovych received from 71% to 90% of the votes, in the southern regions - from 60% to 78%, then in May 2013, according to a survey by the Kiev International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), 26% of Ukrainians in the east of the country and 21% in the south were ready to vote for the current president. Experts noted that during the three years of his presidency, Yanukovych spoiled relations with Russia, did not make Russian the second state language and did not agree on a lower gas price, which undermined the president’s support among the pro-Russian electorate. However, the main problems in the country remained the high level of corruption and social vulnerability of the population.

Aggravation of the political situation in Crimea at the end of 2013 - beginning of 2014

During the political crisis in Ukraine that began in November 2013, the leadership of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea supported the position of President Yanukovych and the Azarov government and criticized the actions of the opposition as threatening, in the opinion of the parliament, the political and economic stability of the country. The Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea supported the Prime Minister’s decision to suspend the European integration process and called on Crimeans to “ strengthen friendly ties with regions of the Russian Federation».

Of great importance in the current situation was the position of the Crimean Tatar community, the third largest in Crimea, which was largely determined by the attitude of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people - a public organization (representative body) of the Crimean Tatars. During the Euromaidan period, the Mejlis came out in support of European integration and against “ establishment of an authoritarian regime"in Ukraine, that is, from positions directly opposite to the opinion of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. After the violent dispersal of Euromaidan on the night of November 30, 2013, the Presidium of the Mejlis officially condemned the actions of the authorities, declared its solidarity with the demands for the immediate resignation of the Azarov government and the holding of early elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, and also sharply criticized the position of the Supreme Council of Crimea. The Mejlis regularly sent organized groups of Crimean Tatars to Kyiv to participate in Euromaidan.

On December 1, the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea stated that the opposition protests in Kyiv “ threaten political and economic stability in Ukraine" And " a bunch of politicians are trying to seize power in the country under the guise of fighting for the European vector of development».

On December 2, after mass demonstrations and clashes with police in the center of Kyiv, the Crimean parliament appealed to Viktor Yanukovych “ restore order in the country without stopping before introducing a state of emergency».

On December 3, the Presidium of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea proposed to the President and the Cabinet of Ministers to consider the possibility of Ukraine joining the Customs EurAsEC Union, which Euromaidan supporters categorically opposed, and on December 11 called on the population of Crimea “ be prepared to defend autonomy».

On December 13, 2013, people's deputy of Ukraine from the party VO Svoboda, member of the parliamentary committee on national security and defense, Yuriy Sirotyuk said that “if the Ukrainian authorities do not strangle Euromaidan, and Yanukovych’s position does not suit the Russian side, then the situation in the autonomy may try to take control of the Black Sea Fleet” of the Russian Federation. According to his information, in the premises of the Russian Consulate in Simferopol, with the participation of the Russian Consul Vyacheslav Svetlichny, a meeting was held between the head of the Russian Bloc party Gennady Basov, the head of the Russian Unity party Sergei Aksenov and some people’s deputies from the Party of Regions, during which the possibility of holding a in Crimea, by the Party of Regions and pro-Russian forces, a large Anti-Maidan rally, the key demand of which will be the holding of a referendum regarding the state independence of Crimea. He also reported on the available information about military exercises planned by the Russian Black Sea Fleet, the legend of which provides, in particular, for the seizure of administrative buildings.

In mid-January 2014, due to the escalation of the confrontation in Kiev and the unfolding campaign of seizure of administrative buildings in a number of regions of Ukraine, the Russian Community of Crimea and the Russian Unity party, together with representatives of the Cossacks and organizations of Afghan veterans, took the initiative in the formation of people's self-defense squads, popular resistance forces in the event of attempts by extremists and neo-Nazis to penetrate Crimea.

On January 22, the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea adopted a statement stating that if “ criminal scenario» « color revolution” will be implemented, then Crimea will face the threat of losing “all the gains of autonomy and its status.” Parliament said it would not give up Crimea " extremists and neo-Nazis", striving " seize power"in the country and " Crimeans will never participate in illegitimate elections<…>and will not live in “Bandera’s” Ukraine»

On January 24, the Presidium of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea called on Yanukovych to introduce a state of emergency and stop funding from the state budget. regions that have declared themselves outlawed, where power has been removed by force, until constitutional order is restored in them“, and three days later he banned the activities of the nationalist party “Svoboda”, which takes an active part in protests, in the region, but later, at the request of the prosecutor’s office, he lifted this ban.

On January 24, 2014, the Russian Bloc party announced recruitment into self-defense units " to fight the Bandera bastard" City mayor Vladimir Yatsuba called on local residents to be ready to defend the city. At the same time, over ten public organizations prepared an appeal to the townspeople, which stated that in the event of a coup d’etat “ Sevastopol, using its right to self-determination, will leave the legal field of Ukraine" The initiator of the appeal was the Sevastopol Coordination Council.

On January 27, at a meeting of the Association of Local Governments of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol, chaired by the Speaker of the Crimean Parliament Vladimir Konstantinov, a decision was made to create Crimean voluntary squads in order to assist law enforcement agencies in protecting public order. The Crimean Tatar Mejlis made sharp protests against the creation of voluntary squads, which regarded this decision as a manifestation of separatism in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.

On February 4, 2014, a meeting of the Presidium of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was held, at which the chairman of the commission for interaction with local government bodies, Vladimir Klychnikov, proposed to initiate a general Crimean survey on the status of Crimea and appeal to the President and Parliament of the Russian Federation to act as guarantors of the inviolability of the status of the autonomy of Crimea. In this regard, the SBU opened criminal proceedings on the fact of preparation for an attack on the territorial integrity of Ukraine. In turn, some representatives of the Ukrainian parliamentary opposition sharply criticized these statements and called for the Crimean parliament to be held accountable on suspicion of violating the Constitution and laws of Ukraine. Nikolai Tomenko, a member of the Verkhovna Rada from the opposition Batkivshchyna party, called for the dissolution of this legislative body, and Alexander Shevchenko, a deputy from the Svoboda party, demanded that Crimean parliamentarians be brought to criminal liability.

On February 18, in connection with another escalation of the situation in Kyiv, the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea sent an appeal to the President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych, publishing it on its official website: “ Today we demand that you, as the head of state, take decisive action and take emergency measures. Hundreds of thousands of Crimeans who voted for you in the presidential elections in the hope of stability in the country are also waiting for this." The Presidium stated that in the event of “ further escalation of civil strife» Supreme Council of the ARC « reserves the right to call on residents of the autonomy to defend civil peace and tranquility on the peninsula».

On February 20, the speaker of the Crimean parliament, Vladimir Konstantinov, while in Moscow, where he held meetings with the leaders of parliamentary factions of the State Duma, said in an interview with Interfax that he does not rule out the separation of Crimea from Ukraine if the situation in the country worsens. Answering the question whether, given the unfavorable development of the situation in Ukraine, it is necessary to hold a referendum on the secession of Crimea, he said that he prefers “ don't chew"this topic, since Crimea is one of the pillars of the central government and " if we start doing this, we will simply destroy this central power" At the same time, Vladimir Konstantinov added that the fight is not for Crimea, but for Kyiv. However, if this central power is nevertheless broken under pressure, the Supreme Council of Crimea will recognize only its decisions as legitimate for the autonomy. " And then we will have the only way - this is the denunciation of the decision of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee of 1954... From now on we will recognize those decisions that we consider necessary».

February - March 2014

On February 21, under pressure from Western countries, President Yanukovych signed an agreement with the opposition to resolve the crisis in Ukraine. On the same day, Yanukovych left Kyiv.

The next day, a video recording of an interview with Yanukovych was aired, where he stated that he did not intend to resign or sign the decisions of the Verkhovna Rada, which he considered illegal, and he qualified what was happening in the country as “vandalism, banditry and a coup d’etat.” A few hours later, the Verkhovna Rada adopted a resolution stating that Yanukovych “unconstitutionally withdrew himself from the exercise of constitutional powers” ​​and was not fulfilling his duties, and also appointed early presidential elections as of May 25, 2014.

The change of power in Ukraine and a series of subsequent actions by the former opposition that came to power caused a sharp surge in protest activity by pro-Russian forces in Crimea. Unlike 1992-1994, these performances were actively supported by the Russian Federation.

As it became known from the publication in March 2015 documentary film"Crimea. Path to the Motherland,” on the night of February 22-23, by order of Russian President Vladimir Putin, a special operation was carried out to evacuate Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and members of his family to safe place on the territory of Crimea. At seven o’clock in the morning on February 23, closing a meeting with the heads of the involved special services, Vladimir Putin, according to him, said: “ The situation has developed in such a way in Ukraine that we are forced to begin work on returning Crimea to Russia, because we cannot abandon this territory and the people who live there to the mercy of fate under the nationalist skating rink" He said that " at the same time he set certain tasks, said what and how we should do, but immediately emphasized that we will do this only if we are absolutely convinced that this is what the people who live in Crimea want».

On February 23, during an action in front of the building of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Simferopol, dedicated to Defender of the Fatherland Day, the Russian Unity party and the Russian Community of Crimea announced the mobilization of Crimeans into people's squads to protect peace and tranquility in Crimea. According to the press service of the Russian Unity party, more than two thousand men signed up for the people's squads. A medical aid squad was formed from among the women who came to the event.

On February 23-24, under pressure from pro-Russian activists, the executive authorities of Sevastopol were changed; the de facto head of the city became businessman and Russian citizen Alexey Chaly, appointed head of the Sevastopol city administration for ensuring the city's vital functions and chairman of the coordination council under it. During the rally, the creation of self-defense units from among volunteers was announced.

On February 24, the Presidium of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea adopted a statement on the situation in the country, in which it noted that in Crimea they expect a speedy resolution of the crisis “undermining the economic security of the state.” Recognizing the importance of the transition of the political process “from the streets and squares to the walls of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine,” the Presidium stated that “it is equally important that parliamentarians act strictly within the existing legal framework, without crossing the line beyond which the legitimacy of the decisions they make can be compromised.” doubt”, which, according to the Presidium of the ARC Armed Forces, “so far they have not been fully successful.”

Late in the evening of February 24, a group of deputies of the Russian State Duma, led by the chairman of the Committee on CIS Affairs, arrived in Simferopol. Eurasian integration and connections with compatriots Leonid Slutsky. Russian deputies stated that they intend to hold a series of meetings with representatives of the Crimean authorities on the political situation on the peninsula. The Chairman of the Crimean government, Anatoly Mogilev, reacted negatively to the past negotiations between Russian and Crimean deputies, saying that any contacts with foreign diplomats and citizens at the official level are, according to current legislation, the prerogative of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry. According to the Center for Investigative Journalism, Leonid Slutsky told his interlocutors in Crimea that the State Duma was ready to think about annexing Crimea to Russia, and announced the start of issuing Russian passports under a simplified procedure.

On the morning of February 25, a group of Crimean intelligentsia signed the “Letter of Fifteen” compiled the day before, which spoke of the need for an early referendum on the status of Crimea. The letter was read out to the townspeople who had gathered at the building of the ARC Supreme Council and handed over to the Chairman of the ARC Supreme Council, Vladimir Konstantinov.

On February 25, the leader of the “Russian Community of Crimea” Sergei Tsekov, at a meeting of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, acted as one of the initiators of the resignation of the Crimean government led by Anatoly Mogilev, who declared his readiness to carry out the instructions of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. For the post of Prime Minister, he proposed the candidacy of Sergei Aksenov, leader of the Russian Unity party.

On the night of February 26-27, several groups of armed people occupied the buildings of the Supreme Council and the Council of Ministers of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in Simferopol. Russian flags were raised above the buildings, and barricades were erected in front of the buildings. Also, in the early morning of February 27, checkpoints were set up on the Perekop Isthmus and the Chongar Peninsula, through which land communications between Crimea and mainland Ukraine are carried out. This day marked the beginning of active and decisive actions by pro-Russian forces, which ended with the annexation of Crimea to Russia.

On February 27, by decision of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the leader of the Russian Unity party, Sergei Aksyonov, was appointed to the post of chairman of the government of the autonomy. This decision, which, according to the Constitution of Ukraine and the Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, required approval from the President of Ukraine, was not recognized by the new Ukrainian authorities. According to official statements by the Crimean authorities, Aksyonov’s appointment as prime minister was agreed upon with Viktor Yanukovych, whom the Crimean authorities continued to consider as the de jure president of Ukraine and through whom they managed to negotiate Russian assistance. The Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea announced the holding of a Crimean referendum on the status of autonomy and the expansion of its powers. The Presidium of the Supreme Council made a corresponding appeal to the citizens of Crimea. According to the resolution adopted by the Crimean parliament, the question was supposed to be put to a referendum: “The Autonomous Republic of Crimea has state independence and is part of Ukraine on the basis of treaties and agreements (yes or no).” The vote was scheduled for May 25, 2014. The newspaper of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea “Crimean News” dated February 28 stated that in the referendum issue there are no provisions on the separation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea from Ukraine, and the purpose of the vote is “to improve the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea so that the rights of autonomy are guaranteed in case of any changes in the central government or the Constitution of Ukraine. All steps taken are aimed at ensuring that autonomy is taken into account, discussed and coordinated with the decisions of the central authorities.” With the publication of the document, the resolution of the Crimean parliament to hold a referendum on May 25 came into force.

On March 1, Sergei Aksyonov reassigned all power structures of the republic to himself and officially appealed to to the Russian President Vladimir Putin with a request “to provide assistance in ensuring peace and tranquility in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.” On the same day, Putin submitted an appeal to the Federation Council on the use of the Russian Armed Forces on the territory of Ukraine “until the socio-political situation in this country normalizes.” The Federation Council gave its consent to the use of Russian troops in Ukraine.

At the beginning of March, Russian military personnel and Crimean self-defense units blocked all military installations of the Ukrainian armed forces in Crimea. An ultimatum was given to the Ukrainian military: “either go over to the side of the Crimean authorities, or lay down arms, or leave” from the territory of the peninsula, otherwise they were promised an assault on military units. In the absence of clear orders from Kyiv, Ukrainian military personnel did not offer armed resistance to Russian troops, which allowed the latter to capture Ukrainian military bases and garrisons on the peninsula without a fight. However, the Russian leadership for a long time denied the involvement of Russian military personnel in the events in Crimea, recognizing its military intervention only after the annexation of Crimea to the Russian Federation.

On March 4, Vladimir Putin said that Russia is not considering the option of annexing Crimea to Russia, “only citizens themselves, in conditions of freedom of expression in conditions of security, can and should determine their future.” In early March, as Putin admitted on April 10, secret opinion polls were conducted in Crimea to determine the mood of people, during which it was found that the vast majority of residents were in favor of joining Russia. After receiving the results of secret polls, Putin made final decisions on the annexation of Crimea.

On March 6, the authorities of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol announced a change in the wording of the referendum question and the postponement of the vote itself to March 16, 2014. Two questions were put to the referendum: the annexation of Crimea to Russia as a subject of the federation or the restoration of the 1992 Constitution while maintaining Crimea as part of Ukraine. The organizers of the referendum did not provide for the possibility of answering both questions negatively and maintaining the status quo (the 1998 Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea). The question that received the majority of votes is considered to express the direct will of the population of Crimea.

On March 7, 2014, the Federation Council stated that it was ready to support Crimea’s decision to join the Russian Federation. This information was announced by Speaker Valentina Matvienko at a meeting with the Crimean delegation.

On the same day, Acting President of Ukraine Alexander Turchynov, referring to the relevant articles of the Constitution of Ukraine and the Constitution of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, issued a decree suspending the decision of the Supreme Court of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea on holding a referendum.

On March 11, 2014, the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the Sevastopol City Council adopted a declaration of independence of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol. In accordance with the declaration, if a decision is made at a referendum to join Russia, Crimea will be declared a sovereign republic and it is in this status that it will turn to the Russian Federation with a proposal to be admitted into the Russian Federation on the basis of an appropriate interstate treaty as a new subject of the Russian Federation.

On March 14, Alexander Turchynov issued a decree suspending the Declaration of Independence of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on the same day declared the decision to hold a general Crimean referendum unconstitutional. On March 15, 2014, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine decided to early terminate the powers of the Supreme Council of the ARC, referring to the relevant articles of the Constitution of Ukraine and the Constitution of the ARC, as well as said decision Constitutional Court of Ukraine.

The referendum was held on the appointed day, despite the opposition of the Ukrainian authorities. According to officially published data, on the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, 96.77% of voters were in favor of annexing Crimea to Russia, in Sevastopol - 95.6%. March 17 official results The referendum was approved by the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the City Council of Sevastopol. There have been repeated accusations of falsification of voting results, according to the report “ Problems of Crimean residents”, published by the Human Rights Council under the President of the Russian Federation, “from 50 to 60% of voters voted for the entry of Crimea into the Russian Federation, with a turnout of 30-50%.”

On March 17, 2014, based on the results of the referendum, the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea declared Crimea independent sovereign state- The Republic of Crimea, in which Sevastopol has a special status, - and turned to the Russian Federation with a proposal to accept the Republic of Crimea into the Russian Federation as a new subject of the Russian Federation with the status of a republic. The Sevastopol City Council made a similar appeal, proposing that Russia accept Sevastopol into the Russian Federation as a city of federal significance.

On the same day, President Putin signed a decree recognizing the independence of the Republic of Crimea and approved a draft agreement on the admission of the Republic of Crimea to the Russian Federation. On March 18, the agreement was signed, in accordance with it, new entities are formed within the Russian Federation - the Republic of Crimea and the federal city of Sevastopol. The Treaty came into force on the date of ratification by the Federal Assembly on March 21, but was provisionally applied from the date of signature. A transition period was introduced in Crimea until January 1, 2015, during which, in accordance with the Treaty on the Admission of the Republic of Crimea to the Russian Federation, it was necessary to resolve issues of integration of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol into Russia.

On March 20, the treaty was ratified by the State Duma, and on March 21 by the Federation Council. A federal constitutional law on the annexation of Crimea to Russia was also adopted, providing, in particular, for corresponding changes to the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

On March 21, Vladimir Putin signed the law on the ratification of the treaty on the admission of the Republic of Crimea to the Russian Federation and the federal constitutional law on the annexation of Crimea to Russia and the transition period for the integration of new subjects of the Federation. On the same day, the Crimean Federal District (KFD) was formed. Oleg Belaventsev was appointed plenipotentiary representative of the President of the Russian Federation in Crimea.

After the annexation of Crimea to the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation established the medal “For the Return of Crimea” on March 21, 2014. The first medals were awarded on March 24, 2014.

Legal side of the issue

Within the framework of the legislation of the Russian Federation

According to the current Constitution of the Russian Federation (Article 65, part 2), “the admission into the Russian Federation and the formation of a new subject within it are carried out in the manner established by the federal constitutional law,” according to which the admission into the Russian Federation as a new subject of “a foreign state or part of it” » is carried out exclusively by mutual consent of Russia and the other interested state. The initiative to admit into Russia a new federal subject formed on the territory of a “foreign state” must come from the territory that wants to become part of the Russian Federation, and from this state, and not from the breakaway part. This provision of the law was confirmed in 2004 by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in connection with the request of the unrecognized republic South Ossetia join the Russian Federation.

February 28, 2014 MP State Duma Sergei Mironov of the Russian Federation introduced amendments to the current legislation allowing for the admission into the Russian Federation of a part of a foreign state (on the initiative of local authorities or the results of a local referendum) in the absence of “effective sovereign” power in this state and the impossibility of its authorities ensuring civil rights. According to one of the authors of the Russian constitution and former State Duma deputy Viktor Sheinis, if Mironov’s amendments were approved, the admission of Crimea to the Russian Federation would not violate the norms Russian law, however, would be a serious violation of international law, “which is not required by any to the Russian state, nor to Russian society." On March 21, the Venice Commission gave its opinion on the bill, which came to the conclusion that the bill also does not comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation. By that time, due to the adoption of the Declaration of Independence of Crimea on March 11, there was no longer any need to adopt amendments. On March 17 they were recalled from the State Duma.

The law on the admission of new subjects to the Russian Federation provides that if a territory is admitted to the Russian Federation, it must be granted the status of a republic, territory, region, autonomous region or Autonomous Okrug(however, not cities of federal significance, as happened with Sevastopol). The Constitutional Court of Russia, citing Article 5 of the Constitution, considered it permissible to accept Sevastopol into Russia as a city of federal significance, but did not directly declare whether the restriction established by law remains in force in principle or whether it was repealed as unconstitutional.

Russian lawyer, member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation Elena Lukyanova, speaking about the assessment of the actions of the Constitutional Court provided for by law when accepting part of a foreign state into its composition - checking for compliance of an international treaty that has not entered into force with the Constitution, named eight cases of violation by the court of its own procedures. In response, the head of the Constitutional Court of Russia, Valery Zorkin, referred to the fact that “for centuries and even millennia, Russia was held together by the highest spiritual bonds, called differently in different times. Being held together by these bonds, she could treat legal bonds with greater or lesser disdain.” In his opinion, “when the “armed Maidan landing” from Kyiv was ready to go to Crimea, there was no time for “strict legal chicanery.”

Within the framework of international law

The Russian leadership, justifying the annexation of Crimea, refers to the UN Charter and the 1970 Declaration of Principles of International Law, which enshrines the right to self-determination, including “free accession to or association with an independent state,” which, according to the Russian Federation, was implemented “in extreme conditions of the impossibility of realizing (by the population of Crimea) the right to self-determination within Ukraine, aggravated by the rise to power of illegal authorities who do not represent the entire Ukrainian people,” as well as the precedent of recognition of the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo. In addition, Russia says it did not exceed or “violate” the troop limits in Crimea set out in the Black Sea Fleet agreements.

The Ukrainian leadership, for its part, views Russia’s actions to annex Crimea as a direct violation of the Budapest Memorandum, by which Russia, Great Britain and the United States confirmed to Ukraine their obligation, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the independence, sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine, the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation and partnership, by which the Russian Federation and Ukraine pledged to respect each other’s integrity and recognized the existing borders between them, and the Treaty on the Russian-Ukrainian State Border, according to which Crimea is recognized as an integral part of Ukraine.

The Venice Commission, which is an advisory body of the Council of Europe on constitutional law, recognized the referendum in Crimea as illegitimate, concluding that it violated, in addition to the Constitution of Ukraine, also basic international principles regarding the territorial integrity and sovereignty of subjects of international law.

The opinion that there were no signs of annexation in the international legal sense in the annexation of Crimea to Russia, which had already taken place by that time, was subsequently defended in the Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper by Doctor of Law, Professor of the University of Hamburg Reinard Merkel, who, nevertheless, qualified Russia’s actions in Crimea as a military attack to Ukraine.

German law professor Otto Luchterhandt believes that from the point of view of international law, the autonomous status of the Republic of Crimea with its special powers actually already “exhausts” the right to self-determination. The German lawyer also noted that Russia could not include Crimea without violating its commitments international obligations and the norms of their own legislation. Luchterhandt referred to paragraph 4 of Article 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which states that “the generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system. If an international treaty of the Russian Federation establishes rules other than those provided for by law, then the rules of the international treaty apply.”

The President of the Institute of International Law and the School of Law of Tallinn University, Rein Mullerson, called the main prerequisite for the “Ukrainian tragedy” the degradation of the system of international law that occurred during recent years due to fault Western countries and manifested itself, in particular, in their intervention in the Ukrainian political crisis, and the main people responsible for the events in Ukraine were all Ukrainian authorities, starting in 1991, who never “built bridges in a divided country.” Nevertheless, Muellerson regarded what happened in Crimea as an act of aggression, since the actions of Russian troops in Crimea violated Russian-Ukrainian agreements on the Black Sea Fleet. In his assessment, the March 16 referendum was contrary to international law precisely because of Russia’s violation of the principle of the non-use of force or threat of force against a foreign state, and not because of a violation of the Constitution of Ukraine or “the lesser applicability of the principle of self-determination of peoples to Crimea than to Scotland or Quebec,” and even “the sincere desire of the Crimeans to join Russia, expressed, among other things, in the referendum on March 16, does not make it legal. At best, it can be assessed as legitimate."

According to the head of the Department of History of State and Law, Faculty of Law, Moscow state university, Doctor of Law Vladimir Tomsinov, the separation of Crimea from Ukraine and its support by Russian troops was legitimate, since the “coup d’etat in Ukraine” created, in his opinion, the threat of “eradication of Russian culture, Russian language, historical memory of the Russian and Ukrainian people” by the new authorities (due to which the population of Crimea “cannot exercise the right to self-determination without leaving the state in which they live”), and Russian troops, in this situation, were called upon to “deliver the people of Crimea from violent actions on the part of the Ukrainian authorities or radical nationalists, depriving citizens of the opportunity to hold a referendum.”

Economic consequences

Being part of Ukraine, Crimea was a “deeply subsidized region”, the budget of which was replenished by more than half from the state budget of Ukraine. On April 17, 2014, Vladimir Putin reported that “his Ukrainian colleagues admitted to him” that Crimea was artificially made a subsidized region: “More money was taken from it than from other territories and redistributed to other places.”

The socio-economic indicators of Crimea are several times lower than in Russia. As of May 2014, 95% of the region’s budget was financed by the Russian Federation. In accordance with the bill on the Crimean budget, in 2015 47 billion rubles from the Russian federal budget will be spent on its replenishment.

In total, about 100 billion rubles will be spent on Crimea in 2015, and 373 billion rubles in 2015-2017. According to the federal target program for the development of Crimea and Sevastopol until 2020, federal budget expenditures will amount to 733.5 billion rubles.

As of May 2014, federal budget expenditures on Crimea exceeded 100 billion rubles. This money was allocated from the government's anti-crisis fund, which was replenished, among other things, from the funded part of Russians' pensions. As of July 2014, transfers to Crimea from the federal budget exceeded 130 billion rubles.

As stated by the General Director of the Economic Expert Group, Alexander Andryakov, “the expenses for Crimea are unprecedented - even the North Caucasus republics do not receive so much from the federal center.” According to Standard & Poor’s, Crimea will be among the most subsidized regions of Russia.

Sanctions in connection with the annexation of Crimea to Russia

Due to the non-recognition of the legality of the annexation of Crimea to Russia by a number of countries and international organizations Economic sanctions were introduced against the Russian Federation.

March 17, 2014 European Union and the United States of America announced the introduction of sanctions in response to the referendum on joining Russia that took place in Crimea, which they consider illegitimate. They imposed sanctions on two dozen Russian and Crimean officials, who were banned from entering the States and Europe, and their accounts in American and European banks were frozen. Canada and Japan also announced the introduction of sanctions against Russia in connection with the situation in Ukraine.

Ukraine's reaction

On March 18, 2014, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine presented the Charge d'Affaires of the Russian Federation in Ukraine A. Vorobyov with a note of protest against Russia's recognition of the Republic of Crimea and the signing of the Treaty on the admission of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol to the Russian Federation.

On April 15, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted the law “On ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens and the legal regime in the temporarily occupied territory of Ukraine.” The law declares the territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, as well as the airspace above them, internal and territorial waters of Ukraine, including underwater space, their bottom and subsoil, territories temporarily occupied by the Russian Federation, and establishes a special legal regime in this territory. According to the law, the Crimean Peninsula is declared an integral part of the territory of Ukraine, which is subject to Ukrainian legislation. On January 27, 2015, the Ukrainian parliament adopted a resolution according to which Russia’s policy towards Ukraine is regarded as aggression, which began with the use of Russian troops in Crimea at the end of February 2014, and which continued during the war in Donbass.

According to an October 2014 Gallup poll, Ukrainians strongly disapprove of the annexation of Crimea to Russia, with only 4% approving, while ordinary residents do not believe that the region should be returned immediately, with only 16% of citizens in favor of it. According to the survey, 34% of the country's residents believe that Crimea should not be returned.

International reaction to accession

The annexation of Crimea to Russia caused a predominantly negative international reaction. The Western community (G7, NATO and EU member states) regarded Russia’s actions as aggression, annexation of Ukrainian territory, and undermining its territorial integrity. Russia, in turn, views the annexation of Crimea as the realization of the right of the local population to self-determination.

March 27, 2014 UN General Assembly adopted a resolution of a recommendatory nature in support of the territorial integrity of Ukraine, the text of which declares the all-Crimean referendum on March 16, 2014 invalid. Of the 193 UN member states, 100 states voted “for” the adoption of the resolution, 11 “against” (Armenia, Belarus, Bolivia, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Nicaragua, Russia, Syria, Sudan), 58 abstained, did not vote - 24.

A lot of changes happened in the world in 2014. For some they passed unnoticed, others simply began to read the news more often, for others the world became war.

A lot has changed for this year. “The Crimean Peninsula and the city of Sevastopol became part of the Russian Federation,” - this is how the result of the 2014 referendum will sound for many descendants. This will be in 20, 30, maybe 40 years. And now some will say: “Crimea has returned home,” others will argue: “Russia has occupied Crimea.”

Before taking a closer look at the events of early 2014 and understanding what Crimeans are breathing after a year of Crimea’s annexation to Russia, it’s worth taking a short excursion into the past and finding out how the history of the peninsula and Russia is connected.

The transition of Crimea to the rule of the Russian Empire

In July 1774, the war between Russia and Ottoman Empire. As a result, a number of Black Sea cities went to the winners, and they received the right to have merchant and military ships in the Black Sea. An independent state emerged on the Crimean peninsula.

Already in 1774, it became clear that the annexation of Crimea to Russia was, as they say, a matter of time. But it was resolved not by military means, but by political means.

With the help of Russia, Khan Shagin-Girey came to power in Crimea, and the previous ruler and his supporters were forced to flee to Turkey. The annexation of Crimea to Russia in 1783 was confirmed by the manifesto of Empress Catherine II on April 8. Since then, the history of the peninsula has been inextricably linked with Russia.

Brief history of Crimea from 1921 to 1954

After joining Russia in 1783, Crimea began to change dramatically, infrastructure and production developed, and National composition population.

When the Bolsheviks came to power and ended Civil War, the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was created. At the beginning of the 20th century, the following people lived on the peninsula: Russians, who made up almost half of the population (49.6%), Crimean Tatars (19.4%), Ukrainians (13.7%), Jews (5.8%), Germans (4 .5%) and other nationalities (7%).

During the Great Patriotic War There were fierce battles in Crimea; the long occupation changed the appearance of the peninsula and the character of its inhabitants beyond recognition. In the spring of 1944, the operation to liberate Crimea from the invaders began.

In 1944-1946, the Crimean Tatars were deported from the peninsula for supporting Nazi Germany, and the Crimean region was formed as part of Russia.

Crimea and Ukraine

In 1954, Crimea was included in this. This was logical and dictated by close economic and cultural ties, as well as the unity of the territories. Many communications, railways and roads were connected to the mainland of Ukraine.

In 1989, the attitude of the Union government towards the Crimean Tatars changed and their return migration to the peninsula began.

At the beginning of 1991, the first referendum was held, as a result of which Crimea again received autonomy rights within the Ukrainian SSR. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Crimea remained part of the now independent state of Ukraine. From 1994 to 2014, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea existed. At the beginning of 2014, Crimea was re-annexed to Russia.

Where it all started

In November 2013, protests began. The country's President V. Yanukovych postponed the signing of an association agreement with the European Union. This was the reason for people to take to the streets.

The action that began with a student rally grew into a powerful movement. Tens of thousands of people organized a tent city in the center of Kyiv, began to occupy administrative buildings, and burn tires.

Gradually, the peaceful rally turned into a violent confrontation between demonstrators and the police. The first victims appeared on both sides. At the same time, actions against the existing government began in the western regions of Ukraine, their own heads of city and regional councils were appointed, and monuments to the Soviet regime were destroyed.

Coup d'etat in Ukraine

In February 2014, the action in Kyiv, which became known as Euromaidan, reached its peak. Dozens of protesters and law enforcement officers were killed by unknown snipers. The opposition and leaders of the protest movement carried out a coup, President Yanukovych and his family fled the country.

Pro-Western leaders came to power, aggressively opposed to Russians, Russia, and the Soviet Union. Illegal armed groups began to move from Kyiv to the regions. Retaliatory mass actions against the new regime began.

Crimea: from demonstrations to referendum

The crisis of the Ukrainian government in February 2014 led Crimea to the need to determine its future fate. The adoption of a new government in Ukraine meant a break in the historical, cultural, and social connection of the peninsula with Russia. The forces that carried out the coup in Kyiv clearly spoke hostilely and aggressively about Russians, including those living in Crimea.

In Kerch and other cities, protests began against the new government in Kyiv, the oppression of the Russian language, the imposition of their history, the arrival of armed aggressive supporters of Euromaidan, and the destruction of monuments from the Soviet era. It must be said, however, that part of the population of Crimea supported the leaders who came to power and, in general, the action in the center of the capital of Ukraine. Basically, the Crimean Tatars expressed agreement with the new government.

Defending their values, culture, everyday life and security, the residents of Crimea announced their desire to hold a referendum to determine the will of the majority of citizens of the peninsula: to remain under the rule of Ukraine or to join Russia.

Preparation, implementation and results of the 2014 referendum

The date for the referendum on the fate of Crimea was set for May 25. While active preparations were being carried out on the peninsula, the issue of the illegality of such a referendum was discussed in Ukraine, the USA and European countries, and they talked in advance about non-recognition of its results.

Later, against the backdrop of growing tensions, the voting date was postponed to March 16. The people in Crimea demonstrated great activity and turnout, exceeding 80% of the population. Crimeans realized the fate of the referendum. This was not yet the date of Crimea’s annexation to Russia, but now it is proposed to make March 16 a holiday on the peninsula.

Already on March 17, the results were summed up. The population of Crimea voted for unification with Russia. And a law was approved and signed, according to which Crimea and Sevastopol were officially annexed to Russia.

Russian military in Crimea

At the end of winter 2014, active movements of people were noticed on the Crimean peninsula military uniform. Politicians who illegally gained power in Kyiv immediately accused Russia of military aggression. In turn, Russia denied the presence of its military contingent on the peninsula, except for based units in accordance with the agreement between Russia and Ukraine.

Later, the military personnel who redeployed on the peninsula began to be called “little green men” and “polite people.”

It must be said that Ukraine refused to create conditions for the expression of the will of the people by the leadership of the Autonomous Republic. And, thanks to the presence of the Russian military contingent, which had the right to be on the peninsula, the annexation of Crimea to Russia took place peacefully.

Questions of the legality of the secession of Crimea from Ukraine

Ukraine and its allies immediately denounced the illegal actions of the Crimean and Russian governments. The results of the referendum and the very fact of its holding, according to the leaders of many countries, are illegal. The countries of the European Union and the United States did not recognize the annexation of Crimea to Russia and continue to claim that the peninsula is under occupation.

At the same time, they supported the unconstitutional coup in Kyiv, and, moreover, representatives of the United States and European countries met with Euromaidan activists and even advised its leaders.

The announcement of a referendum in Crimea was accepted by the legitimate government autonomous republic. The turnout at the polling stations showed the interest of the population in resolving the issue of the future life of the peninsula in the context of the growing crisis in Ukraine and the world. The absolute majority, exceeding 90% of those who voted, supported the annexation of Crimea to Russia.

International law implies the possibility of people living in certain territory, decide your own destiny. And the population of Crimea did it. The autonomy of the republic within Ukraine allowed the government to announce a referendum, and so it happened.

The first months after the referendum

The transition period is difficult for the residents of the peninsula. The annexation of Crimea to Russia in 2014 is undoubtedly the most important historical event in the life of the entire country. But what has the life of Crimeans become and will become in the near future?

In March-April 2014, businesses and banks began to close on the peninsula, and payments by cards and at cash desks stopped. Ukrainian businessmen withdrew their assets.

Interruptions in water and electricity began, unemployment increased, and queues for re-issuance of documents did not add joy to the everyday life of Crimeans. In April-May, the first wave of refugees from the south-east of Ukraine poured onto the peninsula, where an armed confrontation between the Kyiv authorities and the militia of the Lugansk and Donetsk regions began.

How did local residents perceive the annexation of Crimea to Russia a few months later? The reviews were very different. Some succumbed to sadness and panic due to the worsening economic situation. Others showed a willingness to follow their chosen path through any obstacles. Life on the peninsula has changed, and not for the better in all areas, but Crimeans live and enjoy the changes.

Haven't changed numbers yet cell phones, the hryvnia has not been taken out of circulation, new license plates have not been received for cars, but tricolor flags are already flying everywhere.

How Crimeans celebrated New Year 2015

The annexation of Crimea to Russia in 2014 added troubles and worries to the life of the indigenous population. Because of these worries, someone did not even notice that the New Year was approaching. In cities, power and water are being cut off more and more often, prices are rising as well as traffic jams, new jobs have not yet been created, so many will celebrate the holidays modestly: no work, no money.

It’s almost a year since the annexation of Crimea to Russia took place. Opinions still vary. But here and there you can hear the call: “Don’t worry, we’ll survive.”
In 2015, Crimeans still face a lot of changes, but they have already learned to be patient. The main thing that many of them note is the calmness that allows them to look into the future without fear.

Russia after the annexation of Crimea

Many political scientists, economists, and entrepreneurs believe that the annexation of Crimea to Russia is so expensive for the country that it would have been cheaper to buy the peninsula from Ukraine. Sanctions initiated by the United States began to be felt in the work of Russian enterprises by the summer of 2014. The country's financial system has also destabilized.

Even large enterprises are forced to reduce the number of products produced, and therefore layoffs of workers are expected, which means an increase in unemployment throughout the country.

The United States was supported by most EU countries. Sanctions are getting tougher, Russia is accused of occupying Crimea and actively assisting the militias of South-East Ukraine. The Kyiv authorities constantly make statements about the presence of regular Russian troops on their sovereign territory.

Europe and the United States are trying to isolate the Russian economy, collapse financial markets, and force it to play by its own rules. But the situation has not gotten out of control, the country has serious allies, and the economy is beginning to reorient itself towards new markets.