Russia. Crimea. History. Nikolay Starikov
Читать онлайн книгу.
appeared in the history books and began to be used as a name of the country or a part of the USSR only by the Bolsheviks. Then Russian people were officially considered to consist of three groups: Great Russians, Little Russians, and Belarusians. The project “Ukraine” was created by Austro-Hungary at the end of the XIX century. It became particular important just before the First World War. But the residents of the present-day Ukraine couldn’t imagine Ukraine as being a separate state. Even Petlyura and Professor Grushevsky[141] had to lie in the document on the establishment of the UPR, known as “the Third Universal on establishment of the UPR”. It was obvious, that Ukraine would be separated from Russia from the very beginning, but they had to write it in a different manner[142]. As there are some other interesting issues in the document, we will provide it below in a full version[143].
“UNIVERSAL CENTER RADA
Ukrainian people and all the people of Ukraine!
The Russian Republic suffers from hard times now. The internecine struggle is in progress in the northern parts in the capitals. There is no central authority, anarchy and devastation are everywhere. Our region is also in danger. Without the central, consolidated and strong government Ukraine will also be plunged into fatal strife and complete collapse.
The people of Ukraine!
You, together with the fraternal people of Ukraine, assigned us to guard the rights obtained by struggle, and establish order, keep and build better future for our land and we, the Ukrainian Central Rada, bringing your will to life for the sake of establishing order in our region, salvation of the whole of Russia, announce that Ukraine will be “the Ukrainian People’s Republic” from now on. Keeping integrity with the Russian Republic, preserving its unity, we will stand solid on our land to help the whole Russia become the Federation of equal and free people. Before the convocation of the Constituent Assembly of Ukraine all decisions of governmental level as to rule, hold court, issue laws should be made by us, the Ukrainian Central Rada and the Government, the General Secretariat of Ukraine. We are aware of our strength and the power of the Ukrainian border. On the home land we will be on guard of law and revolution not only here, but in the whole of Russia. Therefore we declare that the following territories inhabited mostly by the Ukrainians belong to Ukrainian People’s Republic: Kyiv region, Podolia, Volhynia, Chernihiv Kharkiv region, Poltava, Katerinoslavshchina, Kherson, Tauria without the Crimea.
The final border demarcation of the Ukrainian People’s Republic that concerns accession of the areas of Kurschiny, Voronezhschiny, Holmshiny, populated mainly by Ukrainians, as well as other adjacent provinces, should come next in accord with the people’s will.
He speaks of the unity, but thinks about the separation. He just does not want to scare people. However, the historical truth cannot be hidden. Therefore, even Petlyura, who can hardly be called “Moskal”, writes in the document that the Crimea does not belong to Ukraine.
And THIS Ukraine is chosen as a reference by Leonid Kravchuk, who grew up in the USSR. How can you then wonder with all that happens there[145]. Ukraine was actually drawn into a civil conflict by taking idols of Petlyura and Bandera, who became active agents of civil hatred and war.
However, President Kravchuk did not waste his time. During his occupation of the presidency, oligarchs, who then divided the country, started to accumulate their primary capital. The symbol of his presidency became a hand truck – “kravchuchka”, which people used for carrying products to survive somehow. Entrepreneurs, attached close to the government, earned a lot of money on hyperinflation and export-import schemes of the “new state”. The first corruption scandal connected with the decree of the first president of Ukraine. He rearranged the Black Sea Shipping Company in the shipping concern “Blasko”. After that the Prosecutor General’s Office detected violations such as kickbacks during the sale of Ukrainian ships. Wholesale accounts in Swiss banks belonging to number of involved persons “from Kravchuk’s team” are the proofs[146].
Unfortunately, the Russian executive government represented by Yeltsin and his team did not support the legislative government of Russia in the form of the Supreme Soviet. Comparison of the dates will help to understand why. In 1992, when nationalism and division of the state property took place in Ukraine, the same American advisers, as in Kiev, also “helped” to give life to privatization in Moscow. Shock therapy and price rising from January 1, 1992 was the background, used by Russian Supreme Soviet of that time when it supported Crimeans. However, a conflict was about to brew inside Russia, which led to bloody events in Moscow in October 1993. In this situation, Russian President Boris Yeltsin often worked on the principle that the enemy of my enemy was my friend. Therefore, when the Russian members of parliament supported the Crimea and in doing so became enemies of “the young Ukrainian state”, Yeltsin did not support them. Yeltsin’s Russia was weak in all aspects; “reformers” of Gaidar’s team were destroying economy and army, quickly bringing the country to the threshold of combat capability. That was how the Russian Federation, so rapidly losing its sovereignty in the early 1990s, actually betrayed the Crimea. All the citizens of the Crimea got a stamp in the passports with the Ukrainian “trident” in summer 1992. This was despite the fact that even in 1954 at the time of handing the Crimean ASSR over to the jurisdiction of the Ukranian SSR, there was not a single legislative action concerning any change in nationality of the residents. They remained to be citizens of the USSR and RSFSR all that time![147]
In the early 1990-s, the entire Crimea was in a difficult situation, with Sevastopol residents who felt the “cutting” from Russia in the keenest way. However, the city of Russian military glory did not give up. On August 23, 1994 according to the results of public opinion poll, Sevastopol City Council appealed to Presidents Yeltsin and Kuchma and Heads of the Parliaments with a proposal to give a Russian status to Sevastopol and asked to make final decision on the problem of Black Sea Fleet[148]. No answer was received from Moscow. Two years later, residents of Sevastopol involved the heavy artillery to settle the problem. Moscow Mayor Yury Luzh kov initiated a statement from the Federation Council of Russia “On the status of Sevastopol” on December 5, 1996. The senators expressed regret in the document that during negotiations the Ukrainian party did not wish to discuss the issue of Russian status of Sevastopol. Luzhkov reported his message in a clear, but diplomatic manner: our fleet could not leave the Crimea, as it would lead to weakening of Russia’s geopolitical position and dominance of other state fleets in the Black Sea[149]. While the patriotic forces in Russia tried to convince Boris Yeltsin that it was necessary to deal with Ukraine in a more drastic way, a real legislative war broke out within the Ukrainian state. Kiev was trying to restrain the Crimea. The Supreme Council of Ukraine changed the legal status of the peninsula unilaterally by the Law dated March 17, 1995 “On the Autonomous Republic of Crimea”. In accordance with it the Crimea became “administrative-territorial autonomy” but not state formation. So, the position of the president of the republic was abolished[150]. The new Constitution of Ukraine of 1996, in which the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (Article 134) was declared as its inalienable part was adopted. The Crimea fell between two stools: legislative and executive power in Ukraine. Ukrainian leaders notified Russia of the fact, and Russian senators had nothing to do but react to this very unfriendly policy. Nevertheless, the final word rested with president Yeltsin. In fact, the Crimea, and its future were entirely dependent on the decision of the Russian President and his will. And a signal was given – the signal to obey and accept the new status quo. Intergovernmental agreements were signed in Kiev on May 28, 1997, according to which Sevastopol as the main base of the Black Sea Fleet ceased to exist. Russia agreed to lease the territory from Ukraine. Renunciation of Russia by Yeltsin resulted in signing of “Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine” on May 31, 1997. The idea
Grushevsky, who was named like Gorbachev Mikhail Sergeevich, was one of the leaders of the Ukrainian bourgeois-nationalist movement. He was a professor of history at Lviv University. In March 1917, he joined the Socialist-Revolutionary Party and headed the Ukrainian bourgeois-nationalist Ukrainian Central Rada, having become one of its main ideologues. The Central Rada drafted German invaders to Ukraine with his active participation. After the collapse of the German occupation, Grushevsky immigrated to Austria in early 1919 and established Ukrainian Institute of Sociology in Vienna – an ideological center of Ukrainian nationalist counter-revolution. After several appeals to the Ukrainian Soviet government, in which he condemned his counter-revolutionary activities, the All-Ukrainian Central Executive Committee allowed him to return to his homeland for scientific work in 1924. Grushevsky was elected and became the academician of the Academy of Sciences of Ukranian SSR in 1924. He headed the historic section of Ukrainian History Branch of the Academy. In 1929 he was elected as an academician of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Since 1930, he worked in Moscow. It is remarkable that the most intense conflicts of 2014 between militants and law enforcement forces took place exactly on the Grushevsky street in Kiev.
The very first document was “the First Universal”, which was adopted by the Central Rada of Ukraine as early as on June 23, 1917. That was when the Provisional Government held the office. The Universal appealed “to Ukrainian people, in Ukraine and outside the country and declared autonomy within the borders of Russia. That was how it was written, “without seceding from Russia … let the Ukrainian people have the right to manage their own life” (ref.: Ukrainian statehood and lessons of history. Retort of Maxim Kononenko // http://www.vesti.ru/doc. html? id = 1718252 & tid = 105474). After negotiations with Kerensky, the Central Rada pledged not to introduce autonomy unilaterally. “The Second Universal” was released on this occasion. The paper, published in Ukrainian, Russian, Polish and Jewish, stated: “we, the Central Rada …always stood for keeping Ukraine as a part of Russia”. However, the purpose of “revolutionary democrats” was to destroy Russia, and the shortest way to do it is to separate it from Ukraine. Nothing concerning separation is observed in the text of “the Third Universal” either, the text of which is fully given. However, Ukraine will be separated in the text of the Brest peace. Just four months after the release of “the Third Universal”.
The end of Symon Petlyura was also quite symbolic. He was murdered on May 25, 1926 in Paris by a Jewish emigrant, who thus took vengeance on for violence of Petlyurites towards the Jews. Anti-Semitism along with Russo-phobia is the identity of Ukrainian nationalists.
Ref.: http://sevkrimrus.narod.ru/ZAKON/1917.htm
Meanwhile, few Ukrainians know about further twists and turns of state construction during the chaos and civil war. These events painfully resemble present days. “A few months after the proclamation of the Ukrainian People’s Republic in Kiev, one will not believe, the West Ukrainian People’s Republic was proclaimed in Lviv. In January 1919, these two People’s Republic – united! But Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic did not join them for ideological reasons – the territory, where the story repeats after almost a hundred years” (ref.: Ukrainian statehood and lessons of history. Retort of Maxim Kononenko // http: // www. vesti.ru/doc.html?id=1718252&tid=105474).
A. Ulyanova From Kravchuk to Yanukovich. What did the presidents contribute to Ukraine? // http://www.aif.ru/euromaidan/prediction/1175839
Speaking of Crimeans’ citizenship, it is important to note that according to the Law of the Russian Federation № 99-FZ “Concerning the state policy of the Russian Federation relating to fellow nationals abroad” dated May 24, 1999 the Russian Federation is the only successor to the USSR. Therefore, none of the residents of the USSR could be deprived of USSR-Russia citizenship against his/her will. However, that was done in the Crimea against the will of Crimean people.
S. Baburin Crimea is forever with Russia. – M .: Book World, 2014, p. 66.
S. Baburin Crimea is forever with Russia. – M.: Book World, 2014, p. 67.
In response to these actions, the State Duma of the Russian Federation makes a statement “Concerning the attitude towards the decisions of the Supreme Council of Ukraine in regards to the Crimea” on March 22, 1995, condemning humiliation of the Crimean citizens’ will.