Daniel Halliday
Jul 15 · Last update 3 mo. ago.
Was Russia wrong to annex Crimea?
Amidst accusations of breaking international law and strong Russian sympathies in East Ukraine, was Russia wrong in annexing Crimea?
Stats of Viewpoints
Yes, they broke international law in order to hastily secure more territory
0 agrees
0 disagrees
This is all part of Russian expansionism and probably won’t stop at Crimea
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Russia chose to intervene preemptively to stabilise a potential catastrophe
0 agrees
0 disagrees
Viewpoints
Add New Viewpoint
Yes, they broke international law in order to hastily secure more territory

Russia utilised the civil unrest around the Ukrainian revolution in 2014 to bypassed the diplomatic process and installed a pro-Russian government. A snap referendum was held, international oversight was refused, and Russia officially declared Crimea part of Russian territory. Russia utilised the instability of the region, breaking international law and hence received wide spread international condemnation and sanctions.

The history of Russia mismanaging Crimea which goes back to World War Two when Russia deported all of the ethnically Crimean Tatar people group to Uzbekistan. This example of ethnic cleansing was Stalin’s heavy handed attempt to deal with civil unrest in the area. It was during this time that Crimea was transferred and came to be known as a territory of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. Following Ukraines independence in 1991, Crimea was recognised to have autonomous status as part of Ukraine’s territory.

Instability swelled in the region following anti-Ukrainian demonstrations in 2009. This was amid accusations of the Russian government handing out Russian passports in Crimea, while declaring their intent to use military interventions abroad to protect Russian citizens. Crimea’s population is majority Russian as a result of former Soviet policy, with ethnic Ukrainians and Tatars forming minorities in the region.

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Aug 28
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Instability swelled in the region following anti-Ukrainian demonstrations in 2009. This was amid accusations of the Russian government handing out Russian passports in Crimea, while declaring their intent to use military interventions abroad to protect Russian citizens. Crimea’s population is majority Russian as a result of former Soviet policy, with ethnic Ukrainians and Tatars forming minorities in the region.
This is all part of Russian expansionism and probably won’t stop at Crimea

Russia want to expand their already huge territory in a bid for further domination on the world stage. In return for swallowing up choice bits of real estate, Russia gains further resources under the guise of protecting its own people. This was planned from a long time ago and goes back to the days of the Soviet Union when Russians were forcibly settled in the area in a bid to cause the Russification of Ukraine.

Ukraine has vast offshore oil and gas resources, estimated to be tens of billions of cubic meters of gas alone, in the Black Sea. The annexation of Crimea followed Ukraine’s falling imports of Russian gas, and future plans to become a gas self-sufficient state by 2035. Coupled with the growing EU sentiment in Western Ukraine, Russia decided to take action and annexed Crimea, not to prevent unrest but to gain a resource rich territory.

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Aug 10
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Russia want to expand their already huge territory in a bid for further domination on the world stage. In return for swallowing up choice bits of real estate, Russia gains further resources under the guise of protecting its own people. This was planned from a long time ago and goes back to the days of the Soviet Union when Russians were forcibly settled in the area in a bid to cause the Russification of Ukraine.
Russia chose to intervene preemptively to stabilise a potential catastrophe

Crimea has an ethnically Russian majority of 77% (speaking). The diplomatic process would have lead to this point anyway but may have lead to a war of civil violence in the mean time. Russia was simply protecting Russian citizens living abroad by reclaiming this former Russian territory.

The vote to remove Yanukovych from office lacked the required three-quarter vote of the Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian parliament) to be a legitimate decision, and therefore remains illegal under Ukrainian law. The interim government and the one that followed are illegitimate governments and came to power illegally in a coup d’état. This understandably lead to protests and instability across Ukraine.

Agree
Disagree
Latest conversation
Daniel Halliday
Aug 10
Approved
DH edited this paragraph
Crimea has an ethnically Russian majority of 77% (speaking). The diplomatic process would have lead to this point anyway but may have lead to a war of civil violence in the mean time. Russia was simply protecting Russian citizens living abroad by reclaiming this former Russian territory.
Translate