According to the memoirs of contemporaries, the decision to transfer the Crimea from Nikita Khrushchev, the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, had been ripening since the 1944-1947 years. He headed the Council of Ministers of Ukraine. Not even a year has passed since I. Stalin’s death, as 25 in January of 1954, the question “On transferring the Crimean region from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR” has already been put on the agenda of the CPSU Central Committee Presidium meeting, though only 11 point (not the main after all!). The discussion took 15 minutes. Decided: "To approve the draft decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on the transfer of the Crimean region from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR."
The Decree on the transfer of the Crimean region from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR itself was adopted by the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the USSR on February 19, 1954. It is clear in those years of this kind historical the act within the framework of the “indestructible” Soviet Union was a formality. When, for example, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR met before, only 27 out of its 13 members were present. And although there was no quorum and the meeting could not be held, everyone voted “unanimously”: give Crimea to Ukraine.
People did not even ask what he thinks about this. Although, according to the Union law, the question should first have been submitted for open discussion by the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR, clarified in referendums the opinion of residents of both republics - the RSFSR, including without fail - of the Crimea region, and the Ukrainian SSR, then holding an all-union referendum. After that, and conclusions to do. However, none of the party "bonzes" did not even doubt the expediency of the decision.
But years have passed, and 16 July 1990. The Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of Ukraine, a year later Ukraine became “non-base” and left the USSR, naturally, together with the Crimea.
On this occasion, Sergey Khrushchev, the son of Nikita Khrushchev, in an interview with the newspaper Today. ua "(18.06.2009) said:" ... if the Russians are worried about this topic, then we know how in the Belovezhskaya Forest three leaders agreed on the collapse of the Union. Kravchuk then asked Yeltsin: “What about the Crimea?”, He replied: “Yes, take it.” So it was not Khrushchev who gave you the peninsula, but Boris Nikolayevich, put a monument to him ”.
By the way, according to one of the versions, Ukraine received a “gift” in the form of the Crimea precisely on the occasion of the 300 anniversary of Ukraine’s accession to Russia. Maybe, but neither this “gift” version, nor many others have yet received documentary evidence. But it is well known that the inclusion of the Crimea into the Russian Empire was preceded by the Kyuchuk-Kaynardzhi peace treaty of 1774, which ended the Russian-Turkish war of 1768 – 1774. In accordance with this agreement, the Crimean Khanate gained independence from Turkey. 8 April 1783 was issued by the Empress Catherine II's Manifesto on the annexation of the Crimea, Taman and Kuban to Russia, and already in June 1783 was founded the city of Sevastopol. Less than a year after the publication of the Manifesto by the Imperial Decree of 2 in February of 1784, the Tauride region was established, transformed into 1802 into a province.
Today, it is useful to recall that after the Crimea was incorporated into Russia, all the inhabitants of the peninsula were given certain freedoms, in particular, freedom of religion, freedom of movement, they were freed from military service.
The imperial decree in February 1784 of the Tatar feudal nobility granted the rights of the Russian nobility. Representatives of the Muslim clergy were exempted from paying taxes. With a series of legislative acts, Tatar and Nogai settlers were equated to various categories of peasants of the Russian Empire. In 1827, the Tatar population received the right to own real estate. Local farmers were free to sell and mortgage their land, and those who worked the landowners' plots, carried out this activity for hire and had the right to transfer to other landowners or to official lands. From the moment of the annexation of Crimea to Russia, the situation of the population of the peninsula was much better than the situation of residents of other provinces of the empire. At the beginning of the XIX century, four Tatar regiments of volunteers were created, who carried out the protection of order. By natural population growth, Taurida Province occupied the third place in Russia in the 50 – 90-ies of the XIX century. In 1897, the share of the Russian population of the peninsula was 33,1% and was almost equal to the number of Tatars, Ukrainians (Little Russians) were 11,8%.
Crimea, we note, was the last territorial acquisition of Ukraine. An amazing thing, having lost all wars at the beginning of the 20th century in a short period of existence as an independent state (periodically), Ukraine as a union republic “occupied” by “moskals” from the time of Bogdan Khmelnitsky, as orange politicians shout on all “Maidans” »Such territories, about which neither“ Father Hop ”, nor his independent followers dared to dream. Soviet power, which has been cursed for more than two decades in modern Ukraine, has created this very Ukraine in its present state borders.
Thus, the Bolshevik Defense Council of February 17 1919 decided: “... to ask Comrade. Stalin through the Bureau of the Central Committee to carry out the destruction of Krivdonbass ". And in 1918, the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Republic was "built in" by the Bolsheviks in Ukraine. Kharkiv and Yekaterinoslav provinces constituted the newly formed republic. Now it is the current Donetsk, Lugansk, Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye regions, as well as part of Kharkiv, Sumy, Kherson, Nikolaev and Russian Rostov. Galicia and Volyn taken from Poland in 1939, and also joined to Ukraine. Part of Bessarabia and Bukovina (taken from Romania in 1940) also went to her. Subcarpathian Rus (from Czechoslovakia) was renamed the Transcarpathian region and given to the Ukrainian SSR.
By and large, Ukraine is a certain phenomenon, when the national state was formed not as a result of the natural historical process, but in a directive way, and, from the outside (from Russia, solely on the basis of which and due to which both the Russian Empire and Soviet Union).
Today, if we reject the “evil” of the Soviet legacy, as required by the “nationally preoccupied” citizens of Ukraine, then the “unfazed” one will have to be reduced to five pre-revolutionary provinces: Kiev, Podolsk, Volyn, Poltava and Chernigov.
It was this territory that was practically claimed by the Central Rada (CR), which, shortly after the October Revolution, proclaimed the Ukrainian People's Republic, which existed until February 1918.
The interim government of 3 July recognized the General Secretariat of the Central Committee as a "regional" authority over the listed lands, in fact, the former possessions of Bohdan Khmelnytsky. Grushevsky and Petlyura did not even claim to Novorossia, which was conquered by Russia from the Crimean Khanate. Of particular interest is the position on the ownership of the Crimea by the Petliura Central Council. In the Universal, signed by S. Petliura 8 in November 1917, it is unequivocally stated: “In the consciousness of our own power and the power of the Ukrainian border, in our native land we will guard law and revolution not only in ourselves, but in all of Russia, and therefore we declare territories: The Ukrainian People’s Republic owns lands that were mostly inhabited by Ukrainians: Kyiv, Podolia, Volyn, Chernihiv, Kharkiv, Poltava, Yekaterinoslav, Kherson, Tavria without Crimea. ” Subsequent events showed that the “fathers of the Ukrainian nation” in this matter were realists: the New Russians (Little Russians) supported the White Guards in the Civil War, the Makhno, the Bolsheviks, but not the Petliurists! Among the troops of Baron Wrangel in the Crimea were, by the way, more than half of the Little Russians.
For the first time, the plan for the creation of the Crimean autonomy as part of the RSFSR was announced at a joint meeting of the Crimean Regional Revolutionary Committee and the Regional Committee of the RCP (B) in January 1921. Decree on the formation of the Crimean Autonomous Republic V. Lenin and M. Kalinin signed 18 in October 1921. And the formation of the Crimean ASSR preceded by the emergence of the Tauride Republic. By January 1918, the Bolsheviks managed to seize power in the Crimea, and in February, the Extraordinary Congress of Soviets of the Tauride Province convened, which on March 21 of 1918 proclaimed the creation of the Soviet Republic of Tavrida. It did not last long: 30 on April 1918, German troops invaded the Crimea.
It seems that it was this precedent that later became a kind of basis for the plans of the end of 40-x - the beginning of 50-x on the return of the “Taurian” name to Crimea.
A feature of the autonomous republics formed in the first half of 1918 was that they emerged within the framework of the former administrative-territorial units. There was no exception and the Tauride Republic, which included all the counties of the Tauride province, located both on the peninsula and on the mainland.
If, in a broader context, the prehistory of the transfer of the Crimea (Crimea region of the RSFSR) to Ukraine in February 1954 has not yet received due, objective coverage in Russian historiography.
It is little known, for example, that the leadership of the Crimean Regional Committee of the CPSU, for the most part, strongly opposed the rejection of the region from Russia, and favored the return of the historical name Tavricheskaya to it.
So, according to officially unconfirmed data, back in October 1952 the first secretary of the Crimean regional party committee, P.I. Titov, being a delegate to the 19th Congress of the CPSU, personally addressed Stalin with a written proposal to rename the Crimean region into Tauride. In his opinion, this would be fully consistent with the history of the creation of the region. Titov also appealed to the forgotten Soviet Republic of Tauris. He believed that the Crimean region of the RSFSR "it is time to restore its Russian, Russian name."
Titov’s proposal was not previously discussed in the Crimean Regional Committee of the CPSU, since the second secretary of the regional committee, D.S. Polyansky (in 1952-1953 - Chairman of the Crimean Regional Executive Committee, in 1953-1955 - First Secretary of the Crimean Regional Committee). But he supported the transfer of the Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR. In this connection, the assessment by Georg (Gevork) Myasnikov, the second secretary of the Penza Regional Committee of the CPSU (in 1960-ies), D.S. Polyansky: “I remembered how he went up the hill. Khrushchev, Titov and he met in the Crimea. There was an idea of transferring Crimea to Ukraine. Titov rejected the idea straight off, and Polyansky said that it was “brilliant.” The next day, a plenum of the Crimean Regional Committee was assembled, Titov was driven out, and Polyansky became the First Secretary of the Regional Committee ”(diary entry from 04.02.1973).
... Stalin hesitated with an answer to Titov. But according to the memoirs of some of Titov's colleagues, in the spring of 1953, and later he referred to Stalin’s brief reply, sent personally to him at the end of January, 1953, supposedly, his sentence “is interesting and, perhaps, correct. This issue can be discussed and resolved. ” On this opinion of Stalin, Titov spoke to Khrushchev and Polyansky in the middle of November 1953, when the decision to transfer Crimea to Ukraine was in fact already made.
These facts were told to one of the authors of the article two years ago in the Simferopol Central Museum of Taurida and in the Museum of Local History of the Rostov Region. But the relevant materials seem to have been removed from the archives or classified after March 1953. However, there are quite a few sources about the renaming of the Crimean Tatar names to Russians, which began in the middle of 1940's, initiated by Stalin. Thus, the complex project of renaming in the Crimea is dated 25 in September of 1948, when the Crimean regional committee adopted the decree “On the renaming of settlements, streets, certain types of work and other Tatar designations”.
True, then it was not planned to rename the Crimea itself. But still in 1944 – 1946. renamed 11 from 26 of the Crimean regional centers (for example, Ak-Mechetsky district became the Black Sea, Larindorfsky - Pervomaisky) and 327 villages. For the period from 1948 to 1953, it was planned to rename some cities.
The documents stated, in particular, that Dzhankoy was supposed to become Uzlovy, Severny or Verkhnekrymsky, Saki - Ozerny, Bakhchisaray would be called Pushkin. Kerch was supposed to give the name "Korchev". In general, for 1947-1953. new - Russian - names, mostly instead of Tatar, received 1062 villages and almost 1300 natural objects. Obviously, a political-geographical ground was being prepared for changing the name of the Crimea itself.
However, with the renaming of cities, the matter slowed down. According to some reports, it is possible that, at least indirectly, Beria, Khrushchev, Kaganovich, Polyansky slowed down this process. And after Stalin's death, the plan to rename the Crimean cities was abandoned ... But, let's say, very transparent hints at the mentioned projects appeared five years later in the guidebook “Crimea”. For example: “... the ancient Panticapaeum (Kerch) is mentioned in ancient Russian historical monuments under the Slavic name Korca, Korcheva. In the X century. on the Crimean and Caucasian banks of the Kerch Strait, the Tmutarakan principality, which was part of Kievan Rus, was established. Korchev was closely associated with the capital of the principality - Tmutarakan ... the Eastern Kerchs called the Russian River the Kerch Strait at that time ”.
It is further emphasized that Russia settled again in the Crimea long before its incorporation into the Russian Empire: “... in 1771, the Russian troops took Kerch and Enikale fortress next to Kerch. Under the peace treaty with Turkey (1774), this city with the fortress was the first on the territory of Crimea to become part of Russia. ” By the way, the role of Kerch and the Kerch Peninsula as a whole in the Russian development of Crimea became in November 1953, one might say, the basis of Titov’s proposal addressed to Khrushchev and Polyansky and repeated by Titov in January 1954. Crimean region in the status of the Kerch region in the RSFSR.
Even then, Titov reasonably believed that the RSFSR was inappropriate to “leave” the Crimea, and thanks to the new region, the strategically important Kerch (Azov-Black Sea) strait would remain part of the RSFSR.
The “Kerch” idea of Titov was rejected by the Khrushchevites, and the Kerch Strait was assigned to Ukraine during the transfer of the Crimea.
Only through 27 years after the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine, P.I. Titov was mentioned in the list of the leaders of the Crimean Regional Committee in the reference book MM. Maksimenko and G.N. Gubenko "Crimean region". According to the memoirs of Nikolay Vizzhilin, son of N.А.Vizzhilin (1903-1976), which is in 1950 by 1957. was deputy chairman of the board of the All-Russian Society for Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries, and in 1958-1960. - Deputy Chairman of the Board of the Union of Friendship Societies with Foreign Countries (SOD), Vizzhilin Sr. “praised Pavel Ivanovich Titov, his neighbor in Kutuzovsky Prospekt, a strong, resolute and courageous man who in Stalin's time was elected first secretary of the regional committee of the Crimea party ... P .AND. Titov categorically objected to Khrushchev regarding the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine - this is worth mentioning, because now almost no one knows about such objections. Titov had constant clashes with the First Secretary of the Central Committee on this issue, as a result of which the overbearing and zealous owner of the Crimea region was deposed to the rank of Deputy Minister of Agriculture of the RSFSR. This dizzying demotion completely brought Pavel Ivanovich out of the upper echelons of power ... "(see" The Family Were. N.N. Vizzhilin,).
A supporter of the idea of renaming Crimea to Tavria was, according to some data, and P.V. Bakhmurov, secretary of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR in the middle of 1940-x - the beginning of 1950-x.
These are just some of the touches associated with the project of including Crimea to Ukraine, which, we repeat, was preceded by a project to strengthen the Russian presence in the Crimea and re-rename it to Tavria. But this project after 5 March 1953 was closed. Apparently, this is the main reason why both Titov and his project were quite consciously “forgotten”. In general, in many respects, which is connected with the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine, “white spots” prevail to this day.
... Of fundamental importance is, first of all, the question of what character the Crimean autonomy had - national or territorial. At first Lenin Sovnarkom created autonomies of both types, but over time only national ones remained. The Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic became a unique autonomous entity, and in the future preserved its territorial character. According to the all-Union census 1939, the Russians in the Crimean population were 49,6%, the Crimean Tatars 19,4, the Ukrainians 13,7, the Jews 5,8, the Germans 4,6%. But since the total population declined sharply during the war, and its ethnic composition underwent fundamental changes, 30 June 1945, the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was transformed into the Crimean region.
During the years of occupation, the Nazis destroyed 25 thousand Jews. Almost everyone who failed or did not want to evacuate died. After the war, Russians and Ukrainians began to dominate the population. In August 1941, the Chekists transported from the Crimea to 50 thousands of Germans who settled here mainly in the time of Catherine II. The wording of the prosecution was the same for all: "aiding the Nazi invaders." Note that for such a formulation there were grounds.
Several years ago in Simferopol at the Russian-Ukrainian "round table" Russian expert, political scientist, senior researcher at the Institute of CIS Countries Valentina Goydenko said: "In the archives I received an interesting case number 712 / 1 on the transfer of the Crimea region from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR . Started 4 February 1954 of the year, ended 19 February 1954 of the year. That is, 15 days were enough to transfer the Crimea, and create such a serious problem for the future not only for Crimeans, but to lay a mine in the prospects for Russian-Ukrainian relations. ” V. Goydenko quoted the following quotation from the book "The Nuremberg Process":
“Hitler first belonged to the idea of taking the Crimea from Russia and handing it over to Ukraine. The Fuhrer believed that this is a brilliantly calculated move to make the two largest Slavic countries blood enemies. Ukraine essentially does not need Crimea, but from greed it will not give it to Muscovites. And Russia will need the Crimea desperately, and it will never forgive the appropriation of it by Ukraine. ”
And concluded her speech with the following words: “The latest international legal act regarding the Crimea in terms of its legitimacy and legal purity was Catherine the Great’s Manifesto of April 8 of 1783 of the year. It was a contract. That is, from the point of view of international law, every territory is transferred by a treaty. Only this can be considered a legitimate transfer. ”
Unlike most autonomies, where there was a predominance of the indigenous population, the Crimean Autonomous Republic was not Tatar. Moreover, the 2 / 3 population of the Crimea was Russian, and only one-third consisted of the peoples who settled here before the Russians and made up the indigenous population of the peninsula.
At the same time, flirting with Kemalist Turkey, the Soviet leadership traditionally nominated people of Tatar origin to the leading positions in this republic. The deceptive impression was created that the Crimean autonomy was, like all others, national. As is known, in accordance with the decisions of the State Defense Committee of May 11 and June 2 1944, the Tatars from the Crimea were evicted.
The Crimean region was transformed back into the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic as part of Ukraine in 1991. And in connection with the return of the Crimean Tatars to their historical homeland (in large quantities - from 1987), the ethnic map of Crimea began to change again. Between population censuses in 1989 and 2001. the proportion of Russians decreased from 65,6% to 58,3%, Ukrainians - from 26,7% to 24,3%. At the same time, the share of Crimean Tatars increased from 1,9% to 12%. And the self-proclaimed “Majlis” (“parliament”) of the Tatar people is practically an alternative authority to the governing body in a large area of autonomy.
The idea that the Ottoman Caliphate, liquidated by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, was the heir to the state founded by the Prophet Muhammad was spread among the Crimean Tatars. Consequently, the duty of every Muslim is the struggle for the creation of the World Caliphate, which will continue the interrupted tradition.
The most surprising thing in this whole story is the support of the Tatar separatists of the Crimea by the neo-Bandera Freedom party and other Ukrainian structures of a nationalistic orientation.
They, together with the Islamists, are calling for the “Crimean peninsula to be cleared of the“ non-Tatar element ”, meaning, of course, Muscovites. But what about the Ukrainians who have long been living in Crimea? The Islamists, therefore, found in the person of "purebred patriots of Ukraine" a force that supports them in the ethnic rejection of the non-Tatar, and therefore the Ukrainian population of Crimea. No matter how wild it sounds, almost Ukrainian nationalists support those who advocate the collapse of Ukraine as a state. Bogdan Bezpalko, deputy director of the Center for Ukrainian Studies and Belarusian Studies at Moscow State University, says: “... you must understand that the existence of Islamists is caused by external causes. The main value of Crimea is that it is a base of naval forces in the Black Sea. Mostly Russian fleet. The Western powers do not care what will happen to the inhabitants of Crimea, how the situation will develop there. They will support any actions that will contribute to crowding out Russia. ”
So, the fate of the Crimea was solved in the bowels of the party-bureaucratic machine. It is these days 60 years ago, Crimea was transferred from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR. As it was then emphasized in official documents, “given the territorial concern of the Crimean region to the Ukrainian SSR,” and also as “evidence of the unlimited trust of the great Russian people to the Ukrainian people.”