Countries that recognize Crimea as Russian. Which countries recognized Crimea as part of Russia?

Four former Soviet republics are ready to recognize the reunification of Crimea with Russia. The leader of the extremist organization “Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People”*, a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, stated this on Monday, December 26, on the air of the 112 Ukraine TV channel. Refat Chubarov.

“It is painful for me that four states of the former Soviet Union - Armenia, Belarus, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan - are almost ready to recognize Crimea as not the territory of Ukraine. I had a conversation at the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry, I think that here we must take some very specific actions, at least with the ambassadors of these countries. We must more clearly and firmly define our position regarding the inadmissibility of such behavior,” Chubarov said.

At the same time, Chubarov emphasized that Crimea remains not a “gray” but a “black” zone against the backdrop of Donbass. “There is the OSCE there, there are some contacts there (in Donbass - author's note), but in Crimea they (Russia - author's note) do not allow anyone. We are working in Kyiv in emergency mode with those members of the Mejlis who are on mainland Ukraine,” he noted.

To date, six countries have officially recognized Crimea as Russian territory. These are Afghanistan, Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, North Korea and Syria. Some experts add to this list states that, without formally recognizing the reunification of Crimea with Russia, actually did so by voting against UN General Assembly resolution 68/262 adopted on March 27, 2014 in support of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.

Let us recall that on November 16, the General Assembly approved a resolution on the alleged violation of human rights in Crimea. The document was supported by representatives of 73 countries, 23 voted against it. In addition to Russia, these are Angola, Armenia, Belarus, Bolivia, Burundi, Cambodia, China, Cuba, Comoros, North Korea, Kazakhstan, India, Iran, Nicaragua, Serbia, South Africa, Sudan, Syria, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Eritrea, Zimbabwe.

US President-elect Donald Trump announced his readiness to consider the issue of recognizing Crimea as part of Russia during his election campaign.

— The situation in the world may change so radically that Crimea may be recognized not only former countries USSR, but also other states: Türkiye, BRICS countries, I am convinced political scientist, head of the expert group “Crimean Project” Igor Ryabov.

— Chubarov feels these changes and, in fact, is trying to “persuade” reality not to come true so quickly. Another question is that recognition or non-recognition of Crimea does not yet affect the life of the peninsula. Crimea faces completely different tasks, which it solves by simple fact that he is complete Russian region. Reflections on the opinions of other states about Crimea are to a certain extent virtual. Yes, if Crimea were recognized, perhaps the crimes that the Ukrainian authorities are committing today together with the “Mejlis” and illegal armed groups that stand on the border with Crimea, blockading the peninsula, would receive a much harsher assessment. But even the blockade causes more damage to Ukraine than to Crimea.

"SP":— Belarus, Armenia and Kazakhstan are allies of Russia in the CSTO and members of the EAEU. Why haven't they recognized Crimea yet?

— The relative neutrality of these countries gives both them and Russia the opportunity to play special role V international politics. Look - Minsk and Astana today are a negotiating platform for both Donbass and Syria. And Belarus, in general, thanks to its skillful maneuvering in this matter between Ukraine and Russia, is benefiting economically. For a number of positions, it has become a key supplier and commodity hub for Ukraine. This is pure pragmatics. If Belarus recognized Crimea unilaterally, this would affect its current status, which has many subtleties.

"SP":— How did Uzbekistan, which does not participate in the integration projects carried out by Moscow in the post-Soviet space, get involved in this “company”? What can you expect from the new president of this country? Will he move closer?

— Uzbekistan is a key regional player. IN Central Asia the situation is not simple, and if the situation escalates there, help will have to be sought from Russia. Chubarov is also worried about Uzbekistan preventively: because this country has been a haven for thousands Crimean Tatars. The possible recognition of Crimea by Uzbekistan is of great concern to the Mejlis members.

"SP":— Currently, six countries have officially recognized Crimea as Russian territory. What do you think guided the authorities of these powers?

— These countries are looking to the future. Russia is their strategic partner, and Russia is growing stronger. Why should they, due to their long-standing specific relationship with the United States, listen to the voice of Washington? In addition, some of them were called “rogue countries”, so they are confrontational.

"SP":— Is it possible to expand the list to include other non-post-Soviet countries? If yes, then at what expense?

— Sooner or later, Crimea will be recognized by many states. Again, this depends on the speed of change in the world. If the elected US President is already ready to overestimate the essence of the events that took place in Ukraine as a result of the Maidan - and this is precisely the key point on the path to recognition of Crimea, then the same thoughts come to the minds of other representatives of the Western elite, especially those who stand on threshold of power in Europe. I think the future president of France will be ready to rethink the situation after February 2014. But the main thing is that with a high degree of probability the conductor function of the United States in the world will change, which is why many countries, especially neutral ones, will resolve the issue of Crimea at their own discretion. It is possible to predict in more detail the course of events after Trump’s inauguration. What he definitely won’t do is listen to Chubarov.

“The leaders of the Majlis, banned in Russia, are professional liars who, unfortunately, still remain unpunished,” notes Crimean journalist Alexander Dremlyugin

- They long years profited from tragedy own people associated with the eviction from Crimea in 1944. Their anti-Soviet, anti-Russian, anti-people activities were supported for decades by powerful funding from abroad, in particular from Turkey. After the return of the peninsula to Russia and the expulsion of the Majlis from political life Crimea, this organization has practically lost its former relevance in front of its foreign sponsors. It has become much less in demand in the new realities, so its leaders have been bending over backwards for several years now so as not to completely fall to the sidelines of history and by any means to maintain the fading interest in themselves on the part of Ukrainian politicians. Recent history has proven that for this they are ready to commit any lies, manipulations, provocations and crimes, therefore their statements must be assessed accordingly, even when they say obvious things.

"SP":— How likely is what Chubarov is talking about?

— These countries did not support the anti-Russian resolution at the UN, so anything is possible. the main problem The fact is that the leadership of our country has still not formulated a new serious unifying idea for our region, and it categorically does not want to revive old Soviet ideas, which the overwhelming majority of the peoples of the neighboring countries would gladly support. Therefore, the emphasis is again placed on financial and economic cooperation, primarily among elites, and this, as we have already seen in the example of Ukraine, is not always the key to a successful and long-term partnership. Therefore, you should not be surprised by another “knife in the back.” Where there are no ideas, where everything is built exclusively around money, this is usually a matter of production costs.

"SP":— TO What other countries could recognize Crimea? Not necessarily from among former republics. What do they need for this?

— International legal recognition of the USSR stretched over two decades between two world wars, which completely changed the picture of our world. The Soviet Union survived. In my opinion, the real strength of our state, the economic independence of the USSR served main reason his confessions. It’s the same now - Russia will be strong and independent, no matter how trivial it may sound, Crimea will definitely be recognized by all major international players. But this requires fundamental political and economic changes. Therefore, the question remains open. I say this as a person who, for a quarter of a century, without changing his registration, lived in three states. There would be someone to recognize, and the rest would be a matter of technique.

"SP":— Chubarov believes that Ukraine should take some very specific actions, at least with the ambassadors of these countries. “We must more clearly and firmly define our position regarding the inadmissibility of such behavior.” How will it look like? How else can Kyiv “work” with these countries, and what effect will this give?

— There are a lot of options to “work”: international economic pressure, bribery, deception, blackmail of elites, sanctions, threats to destabilize the situation in these countries, coup d’etat, persecution, physical elimination of political leaders. The West has enough tools to influence our post-Soviet countries. The West, but not Ukraine, which itself became a victim of a similar “elaboration”. Chubarov and his Mejlis members in this sense are collaborators, policemen, voicing options for action by the higher leadership. After the collapse of the Union, our fraternal countries unanimously entered into someone else’s game of the capitalist world, where the rules were not written by us, so they are trying to do whatever they want with us. To counter this requires extraordinary effort and will on the part of our leaders and our people. But, unfortunately, there is no methodological work to strengthen Russia, only emotional outbursts, which brought an intermediate result over a short distance, but are unlikely to help over a long distance. At the same time, the slow but sure destruction of the country continues; the spirit of 1991 has not yet been expelled from the corridors of power.

"SP":— According to Chubarov, Crimea remains not a “gray” but a “black” zone against the backdrop of Donbass. Does Kyiv really have no “contacts” in Crimea?

“I think that specialists from the special services would argue with these statements, since they are still regularly thinning out the Mejlis underground on the peninsula. In addition, in the power structures of the Crimean Republic there are still a lot of officials of past years, political chameleons with whom Chubarov and his associates may still have connections, and, accordingly, some common murky affairs. Again, quite a lot of former Mejlis members still occupy leadership positions in Crimea. Therefore, one should not be surprised by high-profile and scandalous arrests in the future. In addition, in Crimea, due to a number of factors: the economic crisis, the illiteracy of some officials, the sabotage of other officials, the extreme inefficiency and corruption of most of them, dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs is growing among the people. Every day you can increasingly hear the phrase that under Ukraine it was better and calmer.

This serious problem. Many people, including young people who grew up in the “House-2” paradigm, do not want to understand the details, preferring to think in propaganda templates. Being determines consciousness. Our “Maidan” opponents will try to take advantage of these dangerous trends, since many of our people, unfortunately, due to the lack of higher ideas, still have “Homeland where it’s warmer.”

* The Supreme Court of the Republic of Crimea recognized the public association “Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People” as an extremist organization and banned its activities in Russia.

SIMFEROPOL, October 9 - RIA Novosti Crimea. One of the three newly elected leaders of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Milorad Dodik, said that he recognizes the legitimacy of the referendum on March 16, 2014 in Crimea, as a result of which the peninsula became part of Russia. According to him, the events in Crimea took place in a more democratic atmosphere than the separation of Kosovo from Serbia, and, despite this, the United States and most of its allies recognize the independence of Kosovo, but do not recognize Crimea as part of the Russian Federation. Dodik assured that he intends to seek recognition of the Russian status of the peninsula at the level of Sarajevo.

Club of Seven

This small list includes the South American state of Venezuela. In March 2014, the President of this country, Nicolas Maduro, supported Russia on the air of one of his radio programs, and also accused states that did not recognize the Crimean referendum of using double standards.

Afghanistan also recognized the results of the expression of the will of the Crimeans through the mouth of its President Hamid Karzai. Moreover, the head of state made a corresponding statement during a meeting with representatives of the US Congress and Senate.

"We respect the decision of the Crimean people, which they made in the recent referendum, recognizing Crimea as part of Russian Federation"Karzai said.

The “club of selected countries,” as the states that recognized Russian Crimea were dubbed in the Western press, also includes Syria, with which Russia is in last years have particularly close relations in light of the difficult and protracted military conflict in this country.

This year, a large delegation from Syria led by Ambassador Riyad Haddad visited the Yalta International Economic Forum. And in the near future there will be a visit of the Crimean delegation to Damascus, during which it is planned to sign a number of important agreements, including on cooperation with the province of Latakia, as well as on the creation of a Syrian trading house in Crimea and a joint shipping company.

In October 2017, the country released a new political atlas of the world, in which the Crimean Peninsula was designated as part of the Russian Federation.

“The DPRK respects the results of the referendum held in Crimea on the entry of the peninsula into the Russian Federation, considers its results legitimate and fully consistent with international legal norms,” the Russian embassy commented on the situation and noted that Pyongyang adheres to a similar position regarding the ownership of the Kuril Islands.

The Palestinian Ambassador to Russia, Abdel Hafiz Nofal, made an almost similar statement in a media interview, noting that the people of Crimea “have the right to self-determination,” and Palestine itself “supports Russia’s actions on this issue.” However, the Palestinian diplomatic service soon refuted the ambassador’s words, saying that Nofal had not made any statements on the status of Crimea.

Voting Recognition

At the same time, the resolution was supported by representatives of 70 countries, representatives of 76 states abstained.

According to political scientists, this trend suggests that global community, tired of anti-Russian hysteria, is gradually recognizing, albeit formally, Crimea as an integral part of Russia. State leaders understand that they will have to cooperate with the Russian Federation as a major international player in various fields, and the position of non-recognition of Crimea, which is in fact a Russian region, will only pose obstacles to the establishment of this interaction.

Through public diplomacy channels

Thus, in March 2015, former Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama visited Crimea. Contrary to the recommendation of the Japanese Foreign Ministry, Hatoyama decided to visit the peninsula in order to objectively assess what was happening in the Republic and personally find out from local residents their opinion regarding the referendum held on March 16, 2014. In September 2015, former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, one of the few European politicians who fully supported Russia’s position on the Ukrainian crisis, visited Crimea on a private visit. Berlusconi met on the peninsula with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Chapter Russian state and the former head of the Italian Cabinet visited the memorial in Sevastopol, dedicated to memory those killed in Crimean War soldier of the Sardinian Kingdom, St. Vladimir's Cathedral in Chersonesos, Massandra Palace in Yalta, the Massandra winemaking association, as well as the Khan's Palace in Bakhchisarai.

In March 2017, in honor of the third anniversary of the reunification of Crimea with Russia, a large foreign delegation arrived on the peninsula, which included members of the European Parliament and national parliaments of a number of European states, as well as politicians from the European Union, CIS and Latin America. In particular, the delegation included deputies of the People's Assembly (Parliament) of Serbia from the Serbian Radical Party Milovan Bojic and Dubravko Bojic, member of the Presidium of the Serbian Radical Party Aleksandar Seselj, Serbian writer and political scientist, professor at the University of Banja Luka Srdja Trifkovic, as well as a member of the Chamber of Deputies Member of the Parliament of the Czech Republic Jaroslav Golik, Chairman of the United Kingdom Independence Party branch in the Enfield and Haringey area (London) Nigel Sussman and others.

And this is only a small part of the foreign delegations that have visited Russian Crimea over four and a half years and expressed unconditional support for the will of the Crimeans. The quintessence of this process was the forum of friends of Crimea held in November last year, within the framework of which the international Association of Friends of Crimea was created - an informal club of politicians, parliamentarians and public figures from different countries peace. This structure is designed to help solve problems aimed at restoring constructive interaction and normalizing relations between Western countries and Russia, and building diverse ties between the peninsula and foreign partners.

“As an example, we can cite the governments of Italy, Austria, Cyprus. Take even Trump’s statements: he never said that Crimea was occupied, that Crimea was annexed. On the contrary, he says that Russian people live in Crimea, Crimea turned out to be where he wanted “We understand perfectly well that as influential people from all over the world visit Crimea, attitudes towards Crimea in foreign countries are changing for the better. De facto, the topic of Crimea has already disappeared from the world agenda. Now we need to consolidate the result de jure,” he said. Muradov during the recent Moscow-Simferopol video bridge at the multimedia press center of the Rossiya Segodnya MIA.

MOSCOW, May 14 - RIA Novosti, Anton Lisitsyn. The arbitration in The Hague has ruled on claims of Ukrainian companies against Russia over assets in Crimea. This is not the only legal battle related to the peninsula. Kyiv also appealed to the International Court of Justice and arbitration on the law of the sea. The Ukrainian authorities want to challenge the right to use coastal waters, stop the construction of the Crimean Bridge, and generally create as many problems as possible. RIA Novosti tells what legal paradoxes judges have to face when examining Kyiv’s claims regarding Crimea.

"Zrada" surrounded by Poroshenko

Ukrainian media reported that the companies' claims were satisfied by the arbitration court and they were awarded compensation in the amount of $159 million.

The claim was filed on 18 legal entities and one individual - former chairman of the board of Privatbank Alexander Dubilet. Both he and almost all companies are associated with Ukrainian oligarch Igor Kolomoisky.

© AP Photo/Alexander Polegenko

© AP Photo/Alexander Polegenko

“This case may have paradoxical prospects. The plaintiffs insist that they have property on the territory of Crimea, but since they make claims against the state - the Russian Federation, they recognize Crimea as Russian,” notes the candidate of historical sciences, an expert on international maritime Law of the Institute of World Economy and international relations(IMEMO) RAS Pavel Gudev.

The problem of property in Crimea is difficult for official Kyiv, because officials of the highest rank had assets there. In April, another “zrada” (“treason” in Ukrainian) happened in Kyiv. The media mentioned this silently. The so-called prosecutor's office of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (located in Kyiv and part of the structure of the Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine) informed that it intends to investigate the high treason of the representative of the country's President Petro Poroshenko, Konstantin Kartoshkin.

The basis was a statement by a certain lawyer Andrei Portnov that Kartoshkin, being in 2014 the general director of the Sevastopol Marine Plant, the ultimate owner of which was Petro Poroshenko, entered into correspondence with the Russian authorities regarding the transition to Russian jurisdiction. Thus, the representative of the current head of the Ukrainian state, according to the vigilant lawyer, “actually recognized the jurisdiction of the Russian authorities” in Crimea. Poroshenko himself indicated the plant in his tax return in 2018.

Partially satisfy

In addition to private lawsuits, the Ukrainian government is also making accusations. Kyiv complained to the International Court of Justice at the beginning of 2017 about some “Moscow financing of terrorism” and “restrictions based on nationality in Crimea.” An interlocutory decision was made the same year. The claims were only partially satisfied. The court found that “Ukraine did not provide sufficient evidence of Moscow’s financing of terrorism.”

At the same time, the court ruled that Russia must allow the activities of the “Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People”*, recognized as extremist, and ensure the right of ethnic Ukrainians to education.

At the same time, Kyiv’s claims about pursuing a policy in Crimea of ​​“erasing the cultural identity of the Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar communities” were rejected. The Russian Foreign Ministry drew attention to this when commenting on the decision. “It is important that the court took a principled position and did not support Ukraine’s statements about the alleged “aggression”, “occupation” or the status of Crimea as not related to the essence of the proceedings,” noted the foreign policy department.

Gudev believes that Moscow may file a counterclaim against Kyiv regarding the infringement of the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine. “After all, their rights are being violated, and on an even larger scale,” he adds.

At the same time, Moscow’s bewilderment regarding the interim decision of the UN court is understandable. After Crimea became part of the country, the Russian authorities did what the Crimean Tatar leaders had asked Kyiv for so long and unsuccessfully. In April 2014, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree on the rehabilitation of the Crimean Tatar and other peoples of the peninsula who suffered from repression. The Crimean Tatar language is recognized as an official language in the region along with Russian and Ukrainian.

"He wants and is afraid"

In February, Kyiv applied to arbitration under the law of the sea over the coastal waters of Crimea. Ukraine considered that Russia, “brazenly violating international law, <…>steals energy and fishery resources<…>blocks the entry of ships into Ukrainian ports in connection with the illegal construction of the Kerch Bridge."

According to Gudev, an interesting situation has developed here too. “The question immediately arose: is the claim about establishing sovereignty? Arbitration does not consider such claims, so now the court is deciding whether the Ukrainian claim falls under its jurisdiction. And this may take a year or two,” says the expert.

There are also legal difficulties in determining the status Sea of ​​Azov. In 2003, Moscow and Kyiv concluded a corresponding agreement, which stated that “the Sea of ​​Azov and the Kerch Strait are historically the internal waters of the Russian Federation and Ukraine.” “The agreement is still beneficial to both parties. That is why Ukraine wants to terminate it, and is afraid to do so. What is the point: both Russia and Ukraine have maximum rights in the sea, this is common maritime space, there is no 12 mile territorial zone here. The Convention on the Law of the Sea does not apply here,” notes Gudev.

By the way, after Crimea was reunited with Russia, the borders in the Sea of ​​Azov also changed. If before 2014 Kyiv could lay claim to two-thirds of the sea, today it is about 20 percent of the water area.

According to Gudev, due to the special status of the Sea of ​​Azov, the detention of the Russian ship Nord by Ukrainian border guards was completely illegal.

The captain of the Nord himself, Vladimir Gorbenko, commented to RIA Novosti on the situation as follows: “In fact, we are prisoners. From the very first day when the seiner was detained. Initially, the ship was arrested, but I and ten crew members were taken hostage. Our documents were taken away, and since there are no documents, we have no right to return to Kerch."

In May, Russian border guards detained Ukrainian fishermen near Cape Tarkhankut. As the expert notes, these actions were legal - the ship was within a 200-mile exclusive economic zone Russia in the Black Sea without permission.

“Russia, as you know, has two allies - the army and the navy. I’ll add - the FSB border service. It would be good if border guards could quickly come to the aid of our sailors in case of danger of capture by Ukraine,” the IMEMO expert expresses his opinion.

The head of the Center for Political Information, Alexei Mukhin, in a commentary to RIA Novosti noted that it was no coincidence that Kyiv chose such tactics in the disputes over Crimea. “Russia did not violate international law when incorporating Crimea into the country, but there are many nuances that the Ukrainian side will cling to,” he explained.

In addition, Kyiv filed several claims with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Ukrainian authorities said Moscow had violated some provisions of the human rights convention. According to solicitor and Russian lawyer, visiting professor at the University of Westminster in London, Dmitry Gololobov, the Russian political leadership understands the legal consequences of Kyiv’s claims against Moscow regarding Crimea. “This must be treated philosophically, no matter what decision is made. I don’t think this poses a problem for the government of the country. If Moscow had decided that this would have serious consequences, they would have left the European Court. But since Russia is a member there , which means this is beneficial for Moscow,” the expert sums up.

*An extremist organization banned in Russia.

When will Crimea be finally recognized as part of Russia?

Political scientist, CEO Institute of Regional Problems Dmitry Zhuravlev, commenting on the mistake of the British newspaper, which on October 2 “recognized” Crimea as part of the Russian Federation, confidently stated that, however, it would take some time for the public to agree with this fact due to the constant reservations of Western politicians.

“In general, society recognizes Russia when it gets used to it. I think it will take six months to a year of such reservations. If we talk about the elites of Western countries - not the world, but specifically the elites of Western countries: I don’t think that it is very important for any Latin American or African country who owns Crimea - they would rather support us, and there are so many problems in Africa now, that they definitely have no time for us... This is probably a very seditious thing, everything was recognized a long time ago,” said Dmitry Zhuravlev, commenting on the British newspaper’s recognition of Crimea as part of the Russian Federation.

On October 2, the British newspaper The Telegraph published a video from YouTube, which shows how a hurricane gust of wind blew a man through the air to a distance of 9 meters. The incident, according to the newspaper, occurred "in Sevastopol, in southern Russia" - the publication reports that the southern part of Russia suffered from heavy rains and a hurricane.

Dmitry Zhuravlev is confident that representatives of the Western elite initially recognized the annexation of Crimea to Russia, evidenced by their inaction on the day of the referendum in Crimea: “When Crimea was annexed, there were no serious comments in the West, there were none then, and at the same time - I have already said this several times - on the day of the referendum in Crimea, the UN Commission on Inland Seas recognized the Sea of ​​Okhotsk as internal sea ​​of ​​Russia. Getting a decision through this commission is tantamount to I don’t even know what - here you need to butt heads with them for 10 years in order for them to admit something. Here they recognized it with a bang! And you yourself understand that the UN commission, to put it mildly, greatly influences Western countries. Therefore, even then it was clear that the Western elite recognized everything,” Dmitry Zhuravlev is sure.

However, after Russia recognized the results of the referendum, the European Union and the United States introduced the first package of sanctions: assets were frozen, visa restrictions were introduced for persons included in special lists, as well as a ban on companies from countries that had imposed sanctions on the Russian Federation from supporting business relationship with Russia, and a ban on ships flying the flags of these states from arriving at the ports of Sevastopol and Crimea. But our expert believes that if we are talking about territorial integrity, then the situation in the east is much more significant than the annexation of Crimea to Russia: “Punishments for violations of territorial integrity came from eastern Ukraine. When Crimea voted to join Russia, everyone was completely silent. And Mr. Henry Kissinger even supported this position. He spoke publicly in support of the fact that Crimea is Russia. And he is a very large representative of the American elite.” [Winner Nobel Prize world, former Secretary of State, US National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, in an interview with The Washington Post, called on Ukraine to refrain from anti-Russian steps, and called on Russia to recognize that Ukraine is an independent state, and also said, in particular, that the annexation of Crimea by Russia will disrupt the existing world order - approx. editors.]

Another, more problematic situation V this issue, according to Dmitry Zhuravlev - public opinion, which does not share the Ukrainian crisis and the annexation of Crimea: “For them, Ukraine and Crimea are a problem of the same order. Although the Ukrainian crisis and Crimea are different problems for the Western elite, they are one problem for society. And it’s much harder to admit it all.”

However, public recognition of Crimea by Russia will happen in the near future, Dmitry Zhuravlev believes, and he associates the answer to the question of why this has not happened yet with some snobbery that prevails in the West - supposedly if it did not exist, Russian Crimea would have long ago been officially recognized by the whole world: “As for reservations, in my opinion, they are associated with a certain snobbery. They, in general, don’t really care where it is, what belongs to whom. The task was to find shortcomings in Russian politics, they began to talk about Russian expansion in Ukraine, about the violation of the territorial integrity of an independent state, and by and large, try to force them to find Ukraine on the globe,” the political scientist assures, adding that the West adheres to the position that the ideal of life is in the United States and has nothing to do with they don’t know where Crimea is: “Thank you for not saying that Altai is on the Black Sea, but they could have.”

Note that in currently the word “Russia” in the mentioned article about the hurricane in the south of the Russian Federation was replaced by employees of the website of The Telegraph newspaper, which on October 2 mistakenly “recognized” Crimea as part of the Russian Federation, with the word “Ukraine” in the part of the text where the events in Crimea are discussed.

At the moment, only six countries recognize our Crimea as part of the Russian Federation. Well, this is not so bad, considering the demonization of Moscow by Western countries. But it still seems that recognition from Afghanistan or Cuba is not enough. Firstly, these countries have nothing to do with Crimea, and it is unlikely that there will ever be economic cooperation between the peninsula and, say, Kabul. In addition, recognition did not entail any consequences for these countries, absolutely none.

Secondly, Nicaragua or the DPRK today are not among those states whose opinion is considered important in the world. In this regard, Russia lacks recognition from some more influential player in the international arena. Türkiye is perfect for this role. She has long been considered as a candidate for this role.

She has an interest in developing relations with Crimea - under favorable circumstances, Ankara could become the main supplier of products to the peninsula, and Turkish construction companies are always ready to come and build up almost the entire peninsula, in any case, representatives of Turkish business have repeatedly spoken about such opportunities. This, of course, is still only a theory, but it speaks too much for it. For example, Ankara has a powerful lobby on the peninsula in the form of the Crimean Tatars. No one will deny that in Crimea this national minority is represented in all spheres of government by very influential people. Of course, this is also facilitated by the proximity of the regions.

In general, Turkey could have very good a good relationship with Crimea. But something is not going well. Ankara has repeatedly refused to consider Crimea part of Russia, officially recognizing the peninsula as an annexed republic of Ukraine. For example, recently the head of the Turkish Foreign Ministry Mevlut Cavusoglu once again stated that Crimea has been annexed, and Türkiye will never give up these words. Why is Türkiye so principled, despite strengthening cooperation with Russia?

We decided to talk about this with Turkish economist Taner Beksoy.

“SP” - What is the reason for Cavusoglu’s recent statement on Crimea?

- He has political reasons. He held a meeting with part of the Crimean Tatar community loyal to Ukraine. He simply outlined to them Turkey’s official position: Turkey voted for the adoption of resolution 68/262 (UN General Assembly resolution on the territorial integrity of Ukraine - author) and has always officially advocated for Crimea to belong to Ukraine.

"SP": - Can Türkiye change its mind?

“We shouldn’t expect this in the coming years.” International politics is a complex thing, so it makes no sense to talk about the complete independence of any country. In Turkey itself, society has little interest in this issue, and in politics there are many people who advocate rapprochement with Russia and abandoning the need to follow European countries. This also applies to Crimea. But these people cannot change their official position. But they are allowed to develop economic cooperation projects with the Russian Federation, including Crimea. Now this cooperation is difficult, but thanks to the actions of this part of the Turkish elite, Ukraine does not prevent Turkey from developing projects in Crimea. Nobody bothers Turkish ships when they call at Crimean ports. This suits everyone, so there is no need to change your political position about this question. Türkiye is developing relations with Crimea as part of Russia, while officially recognizing the rights of Ukraine. Is not new approach, for example, like this for a long time Taiwan developed, and even today it is not officially recognized by most states, but everyone trades with it.

“SP”: — Is there a possibility that Turkey will recognize Crimea as part of Russia in the future and what is needed for this?

— It is still unknown what will happen after the elections (soon early presidential and parliamentary elections will be held in Turkey - author). But if the current president wins the election, then this possibility remains. This is explained by the position Erdogan on Russia, and his desire to make his policy independent of the European Union and the United States, but this requires many conditions. One of them is guarantees from Russia. Türkiye might think about Crimea if it were given exclusive rights to a number of economic projects in the region. This, of course, is not enough. First of all, there must be big changes in international politics, this largely depends on the actions Donald Trump, which has still not decided on its relations with Turkey. He likes Erdogan because they are similar in many ways, but this is not enough to build mutually beneficial relations between the states that each represents. In order for Erdogan to recognize Crimea as Russian territory, either a major crisis in Turkish-American relations or progress in America’s relations with Russia is needed.