A milestone in history: the reunification of the Russian world. Crimea (Poll)
March 6 2014, the Supreme Council of Crimea (Crimean Autonomous Republic) at the extraordinary plenary session decided to postpone the holding of the referendum on the status of Crimea on March 30 from 16 March this year. Over - spoke out to 78 lawmakers from 80. At the same time, the official website of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was published and the issues that the authorities of the autonomy are going to put to a popular vote. If originally it was planned for the peoples of Crimea to ask a question of the following nature:
Are you for the state independence of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea as part of Ukraine on the basis of agreements and agreements?
now the wording is significantly changed.
Question one:
Question two:
"Yes", for obvious reasons, there can be only one. The peoples of Crimea 16 March will decide which question they will answer positively.
Thus, after 16 March 2014, the Crimea and the city under the central government of Sevastopol, which will hold a referendum together, uniquely change their current status, and either become a republic with a large degree of autonomy within Ukraine (de facto state within a state - an option Confederation), or get all the features for reunification with Russia.
Crimean parliament to explain the transfer of the referendum on the status of Crimea two weeks ahead that extremist groups have not abandoned their attempts to penetrate the territory of the peninsula in order to escalate tensions and anti-constitutional seizure of power. Once again, the Crimean parliament declared the people who are in positions of power in Kiev illegitimate government, formed in a coup in the country.
One of the most critical points of the decision of the Crimean parliament - a direct appeal to Russian President Vladimir Putin with a proposal to start the procedure for joining the Crimea to the Russian Federation as its subject. The sharpness of this point is the fact that the treatment is directed to the Russian president before the referendum. The very Ukrainian psevdovlasti, take a seat in Kiev, called the decision the Armed Forces of the Crimea as illegitimate, extremist, separatist, and others in the same spirit. This Crimean parliament, and the vast majority of the population of the peninsula rather coolly answered: who's talking ...
A woman with a scythe has already spoken about the future of the Crimean referendum. Ms. Tymoshenko said:
That is, the overthrow of the elected president, the dissolution of the constitutional court, the seizure of the central authorities of Ukraine under the muzzles of sniper rifles, under the blows of automatic rifle butts like on the table, and in the head, the flames, the smoke and stench - it is a normal democratic process, and the decision absolutely legitimate parliamentary body of the Crimea - is violence ... "Gas Princess" knows his stuff. Those who hold her braid tightly taught Yulia Vladimirovna what the true double standards are.
So, Crimea is preparing to choose its further path.
Russian parliamentarians called the decision of their Crimean colleagues historical. Deputy Sergei Neverov on this subject speaks as follows:
But this can become a truly new milestone in the history not only of Crimea and Russia, but also in the history of all modern civilization. If the Crimean peoples vote for the peninsula to be included in the Russian Federation as a subject, and if Russia demonstrates political will and makes its own decision, this will be the first reunion of a divided people from the moment of unification of the two Germans - reunification of parts of the Russian world.
If the referendum is held, it would be interesting to reflect on how votes can be distributed. If we take into account that the ethnic composition of the Crimea is like a puff pie, where there is a place for Russians, Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars, Jews, and other nationalities, then one opinion can hardly be expected. However, it can be assumed that the majority of Crimeans will answer “yes” to the first question. And if the opinion of these Crimeans wins, how will those who vote for the autonomy of the republic within Ukraine behave in Crimea?
Of course, without a search for consensus in this case simply can not do. After all, to get hostile group of people at near by the Crimean authorities, for natural reasons, not desirable. Russia does not want and get a big headache in the form of wanting to necessarily defend their position to preserve their lands in the Ukrainian state. How can a consensus be reached in such a daunting situation? After all, on the one hand, the reunification of the Russian world and the majority opinion are still on the map (hypothetical for the time being, since the referendum has not yet been held), but on the other hand it is a minority opinion (also hypothetical), which also seems to be reckoned with. But, in the end, haven't we been taught democracy in recent years? And democracy is an interesting thing. If the majority said, then the minority must either obey, “either one of the two” ...
It seems that here is exactly the situation in which one has to step over someone's interests, sadly ... Everything returns to normal, says ancient wisdom. Asked whether the Russian authorities in Crimea in 1954 year of their desire to "merge" in brotherly Ukraine? No, I did not ask. Does the current pseudo-power of Ukraine ask the Crimeans about whether their interests include the policy that these pseudo-authorities send? No, not asking. So whether it's time has come, finally, to ask the people of Crimea: with whom and under what laws they want to live?
And the most interesting thing is: when the opinion of the Crimean people was ignored for decades - no one from the outside shouted about illegitimacy, arbitrariness, etc., and as soon as the Crimean people are going to ask about their opinion, appropriate opinions from “international experts” are pouring in and “human rights professionals” with notes of resentment. In this regard, the "experts" and "professionals" want to ask the Lord, where are you before something was? Where was your position when the Soviet Union was slashed, although according to the results of the referendum, the majority of respondents were in favor of preserving it? Where was your indignation when they were going to tear the North Caucasus from Russia? Where .. So today's your indignation and Crimean peoples, and Russia exactly will survive - not as experienced.
PS If Crimeans in the referendum were in favor of joining the Crimea in the Russian Federation, then in order to fully comply with all legal norms, it would be reasonable to hold an appropriate referendum in Russia. But to whom are we going to prove something - to those who have wiped their feet for decades on state and international law? .. Those who “fired” peaceful cities from Yugoslavia to North Africa and the Middle East without any referendums? .. Everything still frothing at the mouth at the "partners" will go, though 10 referendums carried out. Only double standards are good against double standards - popular transatlantic wisdom ...
PPS Washington tensed up: it must be counting the number of Russian-speakers in Alaska ...
Are you for the state independence of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea as part of Ukraine on the basis of agreements and agreements?
now the wording is significantly changed.
Question one:
Are you for the reunification of Crimea with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?
Question two:
Are you for restoring the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea 1992 of the year and for the status of Crimea as part of Ukraine?
"Yes", for obvious reasons, there can be only one. The peoples of Crimea 16 March will decide which question they will answer positively.
Thus, after 16 March 2014, the Crimea and the city under the central government of Sevastopol, which will hold a referendum together, uniquely change their current status, and either become a republic with a large degree of autonomy within Ukraine (de facto state within a state - an option Confederation), or get all the features for reunification with Russia.
Crimean parliament to explain the transfer of the referendum on the status of Crimea two weeks ahead that extremist groups have not abandoned their attempts to penetrate the territory of the peninsula in order to escalate tensions and anti-constitutional seizure of power. Once again, the Crimean parliament declared the people who are in positions of power in Kiev illegitimate government, formed in a coup in the country.
One of the most critical points of the decision of the Crimean parliament - a direct appeal to Russian President Vladimir Putin with a proposal to start the procedure for joining the Crimea to the Russian Federation as its subject. The sharpness of this point is the fact that the treatment is directed to the Russian president before the referendum. The very Ukrainian psevdovlasti, take a seat in Kiev, called the decision the Armed Forces of the Crimea as illegitimate, extremist, separatist, and others in the same spirit. This Crimean parliament, and the vast majority of the population of the peninsula rather coolly answered: who's talking ...
A woman with a scythe has already spoken about the future of the Crimean referendum. Ms. Tymoshenko said:
It is clear to the whole world that this referendum is absolutely illegitimate. The referendum at gunpoint is not a referendum. This is violence.
That is, the overthrow of the elected president, the dissolution of the constitutional court, the seizure of the central authorities of Ukraine under the muzzles of sniper rifles, under the blows of automatic rifle butts like on the table, and in the head, the flames, the smoke and stench - it is a normal democratic process, and the decision absolutely legitimate parliamentary body of the Crimea - is violence ... "Gas Princess" knows his stuff. Those who hold her braid tightly taught Yulia Vladimirovna what the true double standards are.
So, Crimea is preparing to choose its further path.
Russian parliamentarians called the decision of their Crimean colleagues historical. Deputy Sergei Neverov on this subject speaks as follows:
We are a single people, which by the will of the irresponsibility of the party functionaries was divided.
But this can become a truly new milestone in the history not only of Crimea and Russia, but also in the history of all modern civilization. If the Crimean peoples vote for the peninsula to be included in the Russian Federation as a subject, and if Russia demonstrates political will and makes its own decision, this will be the first reunion of a divided people from the moment of unification of the two Germans - reunification of parts of the Russian world.
If the referendum is held, it would be interesting to reflect on how votes can be distributed. If we take into account that the ethnic composition of the Crimea is like a puff pie, where there is a place for Russians, Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars, Jews, and other nationalities, then one opinion can hardly be expected. However, it can be assumed that the majority of Crimeans will answer “yes” to the first question. And if the opinion of these Crimeans wins, how will those who vote for the autonomy of the republic within Ukraine behave in Crimea?
Of course, without a search for consensus in this case simply can not do. After all, to get hostile group of people at near by the Crimean authorities, for natural reasons, not desirable. Russia does not want and get a big headache in the form of wanting to necessarily defend their position to preserve their lands in the Ukrainian state. How can a consensus be reached in such a daunting situation? After all, on the one hand, the reunification of the Russian world and the majority opinion are still on the map (hypothetical for the time being, since the referendum has not yet been held), but on the other hand it is a minority opinion (also hypothetical), which also seems to be reckoned with. But, in the end, haven't we been taught democracy in recent years? And democracy is an interesting thing. If the majority said, then the minority must either obey, “either one of the two” ...
It seems that here is exactly the situation in which one has to step over someone's interests, sadly ... Everything returns to normal, says ancient wisdom. Asked whether the Russian authorities in Crimea in 1954 year of their desire to "merge" in brotherly Ukraine? No, I did not ask. Does the current pseudo-power of Ukraine ask the Crimeans about whether their interests include the policy that these pseudo-authorities send? No, not asking. So whether it's time has come, finally, to ask the people of Crimea: with whom and under what laws they want to live?
And the most interesting thing is: when the opinion of the Crimean people was ignored for decades - no one from the outside shouted about illegitimacy, arbitrariness, etc., and as soon as the Crimean people are going to ask about their opinion, appropriate opinions from “international experts” are pouring in and “human rights professionals” with notes of resentment. In this regard, the "experts" and "professionals" want to ask the Lord, where are you before something was? Where was your position when the Soviet Union was slashed, although according to the results of the referendum, the majority of respondents were in favor of preserving it? Where was your indignation when they were going to tear the North Caucasus from Russia? Where .. So today's your indignation and Crimean peoples, and Russia exactly will survive - not as experienced.
PS If Crimeans in the referendum were in favor of joining the Crimea in the Russian Federation, then in order to fully comply with all legal norms, it would be reasonable to hold an appropriate referendum in Russia. But to whom are we going to prove something - to those who have wiped their feet for decades on state and international law? .. Those who “fired” peaceful cities from Yugoslavia to North Africa and the Middle East without any referendums? .. Everything still frothing at the mouth at the "partners" will go, though 10 referendums carried out. Only double standards are good against double standards - popular transatlantic wisdom ...
PPS Washington tensed up: it must be counting the number of Russian-speakers in Alaska ...
Expert Opinions
KONSTANTIN ZATULIN, Director of the Institute of CIS Countries: “1. I am right now in Simferopol. The delegation of the Armed Forces of the Crimea went to Moscow. In the corridors of the council, people express hot approval, and the same thing happens on the square in front of the Supreme Council.
Let me remind you, three times the Council returned to the question of a referendum. It was to be held on 30 March. But the question that was raised (to expand the rights of the Crimea as part of Ukraine), allowed for ambiguous interpretation. The answer “No” could also imply that a person is against the Crimea remaining in Ukraine. And the fact that against the old scheme of relations between Kiev and Simferopol. Therefore, the questions, of course, required editing. The point is not even in the subtleties of the editorial board, but in the fact that the situation does not stand still. In Crimea, they have already been convinced that the new authorities of Ukraine are not negotiable.
Citizens of Ukraine have the right to hold a referendum. Although the law on the referendum has not been adopted. People have a right, but they could not realize it. The result of the referendum is predetermined. But there will be no 100 percent of votes for joining Russia.
2. There are different opinions. I would sin against the truth, giving an unequivocal answer. But the will of the people can not be replaced by anything. This will create a situation where it will be possible to negotiate, to seek compromises. But the basis should be respect for the results of the referendum. ”
ALEXEY MUKHIN, Director General of the Center for Political Information: “1. The results of the referendum can be predicted. Pro-Russian sentiments are strong in Crimea, and the decision will be in favor of joining. But all this does not mean that the accession process will be launched. It is now more about a direct reaction to the emerging desire of the new authorities in Kiev to join NATO and lie under the IMF on bondage.
2. I believe that theoretically, the entry of the Crimea into the Russian Federation is possible. From a political point of view, this has yet to be discussed. The reaction of the West will be frenzied and hysterical. The annexation of the Crimea to Russia will be considered by them as a catastrophe.
SERGEY MIKHEEV, Head of the Center for Political Studies: “2. I think the reaction of Russia will be restrained. An example is South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria. They have repeatedly made decisions about joining Russia, sounded appeals to the Russian authorities. But so far none of them is a part of Russia ”.
Valery Rashkin, State Duma deputy, member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party: “1-2. Extremely radical terrorist forces will not leave Crimea alone, a violent invasion of the radicals on the peninsula is inevitable if it makes a different decision. And people feel it, so I have no doubt that at least 80% of Crimeans will vote "for" entry into Russia. But in addition to the decision of the Crimea, a decision of Russia on the adoption of the republic as a subject of the Russian Federation should also take place. I believe that we must quickly conduct it through the State Duma, the Federation Council, after which it must be approved by the president. At the same time, it is necessary to resolve the issue of social guarantees and budget expenditures related to reunification. ”
Oksana Dmitrieva, deputy of the State Duma (Fair Russia): “1. I am a Russian deputy and I can not predict the results of the will of the citizens of another at the moment state. I would rather say about the risks that may arise from Russia. I am one of those deputies who in recent years have fought against all oil and gas revenues to invest in the Reserve Fund and the National Treasure Fund and store them in foreign securities. But we stubbornly invested money in the US and some Western European debt instruments. I was against Russia's accession to the WTO and the full opening of the domestic market. I have all the time been opposed to building up external private debt. In the face of economic and geopolitical crises, all of this can be very dangerous.
Add to this the fact that many of our largest companies registered in foreign jurisdictions, and the notorious dependence on raw materials in Russia. As a result, if the West really wants, there is a threat of losing a catastrophic amount of money. As for the most terrible risks - the military, I hope that they will not exist. ”
KONSTANTIN ZATULIN, Director of the Institute of CIS Countries: “1. I am right now in Simferopol. The delegation of the Armed Forces of the Crimea went to Moscow. In the corridors of the council, people express hot approval, and the same thing happens on the square in front of the Supreme Council.
Let me remind you, three times the Council returned to the question of a referendum. It was to be held on 30 March. But the question that was raised (to expand the rights of the Crimea as part of Ukraine), allowed for ambiguous interpretation. The answer “No” could also imply that a person is against the Crimea remaining in Ukraine. And the fact that against the old scheme of relations between Kiev and Simferopol. Therefore, the questions, of course, required editing. The point is not even in the subtleties of the editorial board, but in the fact that the situation does not stand still. In Crimea, they have already been convinced that the new authorities of Ukraine are not negotiable.
Citizens of Ukraine have the right to hold a referendum. Although the law on the referendum has not been adopted. People have a right, but they could not realize it. The result of the referendum is predetermined. But there will be no 100 percent of votes for joining Russia.
2. There are different opinions. I would sin against the truth, giving an unequivocal answer. But the will of the people can not be replaced by anything. This will create a situation where it will be possible to negotiate, to seek compromises. But the basis should be respect for the results of the referendum. ”
ALEXEY MUKHIN, Director General of the Center for Political Information: “1. The results of the referendum can be predicted. Pro-Russian sentiments are strong in Crimea, and the decision will be in favor of joining. But all this does not mean that the accession process will be launched. It is now more about a direct reaction to the emerging desire of the new authorities in Kiev to join NATO and lie under the IMF on bondage.
2. I believe that theoretically, the entry of the Crimea into the Russian Federation is possible. From a political point of view, this has yet to be discussed. The reaction of the West will be frenzied and hysterical. The annexation of the Crimea to Russia will be considered by them as a catastrophe.
SERGEY MIKHEEV, Head of the Center for Political Studies: “2. I think the reaction of Russia will be restrained. An example is South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria. They have repeatedly made decisions about joining Russia, sounded appeals to the Russian authorities. But so far none of them is a part of Russia ”.
Valery Rashkin, State Duma deputy, member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party: “1-2. Extremely radical terrorist forces will not leave Crimea alone, a violent invasion of the radicals on the peninsula is inevitable if it makes a different decision. And people feel it, so I have no doubt that at least 80% of Crimeans will vote "for" entry into Russia. But in addition to the decision of the Crimea, a decision of Russia on the adoption of the republic as a subject of the Russian Federation should also take place. I believe that we must quickly conduct it through the State Duma, the Federation Council, after which it must be approved by the president. At the same time, it is necessary to resolve the issue of social guarantees and budget expenditures related to reunification. ”
Oksana Dmitrieva, deputy of the State Duma (Fair Russia): “1. I am a Russian deputy and I can not predict the results of the will of the citizens of another at the moment state. I would rather say about the risks that may arise from Russia. I am one of those deputies who in recent years have fought against all oil and gas revenues to invest in the Reserve Fund and the National Treasure Fund and store them in foreign securities. But we stubbornly invested money in the US and some Western European debt instruments. I was against Russia's accession to the WTO and the full opening of the domestic market. I have all the time been opposed to building up external private debt. In the face of economic and geopolitical crises, all of this can be very dangerous.
Add to this the fact that many of our largest companies registered in foreign jurisdictions, and the notorious dependence on raw materials in Russia. As a result, if the West really wants, there is a threat of losing a catastrophic amount of money. As for the most terrible risks - the military, I hope that they will not exist. ”
Information