Facts regarding exchange of Crimea for parts of eastern Uraine

[ML]

Mendy, Boe, jone and others who know more about this.
Where are reference sites to the official exchange of territories discussed below?

= = = = = = = =

Crimea was, is, and will be Ukrainian. It is also the rightful native home of the Crimean Tatar people. If you were to say that Crimea is a Tatar nation you would have more grounding in fact than this ridiculous claim about Crimea being Russian.

Crimea was never indigenous Russian territory. Russia was previously the Duchy of Moscow and before that the Principality of Vladimir / Suzdal, which broke away from Kyivan Rus and with the Mongol Hoard attacked Kyivan Rus

Russia took Crimea from the Tartars and Turks, who earlier took it from Kyivan Rus whose capital was Kyiv, Ukraine.

Crimea was exchanged by the Supreme Soviet in 1954 in a land exchange between the Russian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR. See the agenda and minutes of that meeting of the Supreme Soviet. Ukraine SSR gave up land in the Taganrog, Krasnodar and Kuban regions and received Crimea. Crimea was arid and of little agricultural value, while the Taganrog, Krasnodar and Kuban areas were fertile steppes / plains. So Russia thought they had the better part of the deal.

If you understood the Kruschev situation at all, you would understand that Crimea was actually an exchange of lands, not a gift. So by your own reckoning Russia must give up substantial lands in Western Russia if the Kruschev exchange is now null and void.

[Darth_Budda]

most of the people i have spoken to....  want the war to stop....  they are okay with the fact Crimea and east Ukraine ...  wants to leave Ukraine..  they have no interest in continuing the war....

[mendeleyev]

most of the people i have spoken to....  want the war to stop....  they are okay with the fact Crimea and east Ukraine ...  wants to leave Ukraine..  they have no interest in continuing the war....

Both sides want the war to stop.

The key questions, one which takes moral integrity to answer, is how do Russians feel since most residents of Eastern Ukraine NOT wish to leave Ukraine. If they did, a bloody war with "rebels" transported into Ukraine from Russia would not be necessary.

The other question is the manner in which Crimea was annexed. For example, why did the referendum ballot used to "leave" Ukraine not give the option to stay? (The only two options were to leave and join Russia, or to leave and apply for status as a protectorate of Russia.)

[mendeleyev]

ML, one could start with a tour of Crimea. The region was part of ancient Greece and that is evident everywhere you turn...from ancient ruins, ancient walls, existing names of cities, etc.

For example, the ancient Greek city of Chersonesos is modern day Sevastopol. Another nearby city can also claim that name: Kherson.

The modern day cities of Sevastopol, Simferopol, Mariupol, Melitopol end with "pol" which is from the Greek "polis" meaning "city." Many of the cities that Russia claimed to have "founded" were in reality already in existence long before Russia conquered the region.

After the Greeks came the Turks. Sevastopol was once the Tatar town of Aqyar; Simferopol was Aqmescit, meaning "The White Mosque." Odessa was known as Khadjibey to the Turks.

http://www.blacksea-crimea.com/history1.html

[ML]

Jim, thanks for your response.  However, I knew about the history of Crimea (I have been there multiple times in past).

My question was where is the backup reference to this: 

"Crimea was exchanged by the Supreme Soviet in 1954 in a land exchange between the Russian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR. See the agenda and minutes of that meeting of the Supreme Soviet. Ukraine SSR gave up land in the Taganrog, Krasnodar and Kuban regions and received Crimea. Crimea was arid and of little agricultural value, while the Taganrog, Krasnodar and Kuban areas were fertile steppes / plains. So Russia thought they had the better part of the deal."

[mendeleyev]

Hmm, not certain.

Similar in some respects: http://www.iccrimea.org/historical/crimeatransfer.html

This is a great explanation of how the transfer was not just one leader, but by the whole of Soviet authorities:
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/why-did-russia-give-away-crimea-sixty-years-ago

[Boethius]

Mendy, Boe, jone and others who know more about this.
Where are reference sites to the official exchange of territories discussed below?

= = = = = = = =

Crimea was, is, and will be Ukrainian. It is also the rightful native home of the Crimean Tatar people. If you were to say that Crimea is a Tatar nation you would have more grounding in fact than this ridiculous claim about Crimea being Russian.

Crimea was never indigenous Russian territory. Russia was previously the Duchy of Moscow and before that the Principality of Vladimir / Suzdal, which broke away from Kyivan Rus and with the Mongol Hoard attacked Kyivan Rus

Russia took Crimea from the Tartars and Turks, who earlier took it from Kyivan Rus whose capital was Kyiv, Ukraine.

Crimea was exchanged by the Supreme Soviet in 1954 in a land exchange between the Russian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR. See the agenda and minutes of that meeting of the Supreme Soviet. Ukraine SSR gave up land in the Taganrog, Krasnodar and Kuban regions and received Crimea. Crimea was arid and of little agricultural value, while the Taganrog, Krasnodar and Kuban areas were fertile steppes / plains. So Russia thought they had the better part of the deal.

If you understood the Kruschev situation at all, you would understand that Crimea was actually an exchange of lands, not a gift. So by your own reckoning Russia must give up substantial lands in Western Russia if the Kruschev exchange is now null and void.

http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/119634
http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/119635
http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/119638


1.  Kiev Rus' may have been based in what is now Ukraine, but that empire, which was sophisticated and powerful up to the 11th century, was never Ukrainian.  Nor was it Russian or Belarussian.

2.  The Crimea was never a Ukrainian land.  The Cossacks who settled there would never have considered themselves "Ukrainian" (nor Russian, for that matter).

3.  Crimea was predominantly Tatar, and was ceded (pretty much by force) by the Ottoman Empire.  The Tatars came under the protectorate of the Russian Empire, until the region was annexed in 1783.

4.  Russians started moving to Crimea in the 18th century, however, its population was predominantly Tatar.  It also had significant Armenian, Greek, and Bulgarian populations.  Russians were a minority.  As a result, Crimea was an autonomous republic of the USSR.  It only became a Russian oblast after Stalin deported most of the Tatars, Greeks, Armenians, and Bulgarians, so that the majority remaining population was Russian.

5.  Taganrog was conquered by the Russians, and had a Russian majority population.  It was only part of Ukraine for administrative purposes.

6.  Krasnodar was not part of Ukraine, though it had a significant ethnic Ukrainian minority.

7.  Kuban was pretty much founded by the Cossacks, who originated in Ukraine, and up to the 1930's, was about 68% ethnically Ukrainian (hence why the famine also extended to that area).  But it was not part of Ukraine.

8.  In the Russian Empire, in most of what is East of Kharkiv, the rural population spoke what is now Ukrainian, urban dwellers, Russian.  That was even true of Kharkiv, which was the capital of Ukraine.

9.  The reason for the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian SFSR was probably so that the Russian population of Ukraine would be increased significantly, thereby strengthening the policies of Russification throughout Ukraine.  Overnight, the Russian population of Ukraine increased by about 800,000.  Furthermore, this was done when the Bolsheviks had just completed, for the most part, a particularly bloody conquest of Western Ukraine (against those "fascist bandits" of UPA), and the transfer was sold as a "unification of the Russian and Ukrainian peoples".

10. No matter what Russians write now, Crimea was handed over to Ukraine legally under the USSR's constitution, and that was approved by the RFSFR.  The role of the rule of law in that totalitarian state is a different matter, but the hand off was done legally at the time.

11. Although the Russian referendum was fixed and not what we would call a free and fair election, I have little doubt the majority of Crimeans would have voted to join the Russian Federation.  In my opinion, it is even a net plus for Ukrainians to get rid of that large ethnic Russian population, in a region which has always been an economic drain on Kyiv.

A lot of Russian blood was shed taking, and defending Crimea.  No matter what Ukrainian nationalists say, this region was never, ever, an integral part of Ukrainian national consciousness. 

[mendeleyev]

ML, this may be what you are looking for, although it is disputed.

http://narodna.pravda.com.ua/politics/533404aba98e2/

[mendeleyev]

In agreement with Bo's points, for what it is worth.

[BillyB]

they are okay with the fact Crimea and east Ukraine ...  wants to leave Ukraine.. 

Many Ukrainians, including my wife have said that. When war is involved, people change their minds easy. Because of this line of thinking, war then becomes an effective tool. Putin understands this. After Putin took Crimea and gave the impression most Crimeans didn't want to be a part of Ukraine, many Ukrainians, facing war, are ok with Crimea leaving. Now with conflict in East Ukraine and Putin giving the impression most East Ukrainians don't want to be a part of Ukraine, many Ukrainians, faced with war, are ok with East Ukraine leaving.

they have no interest in continuing the war....

With Crimea gone to Russia and Russia having heavy influence in East Ukraine, what makes those people think Putin won't continue the war if East Ukraine is handed over to Russia? If they want Putin to end his pursuit of Ukraine, they need to hand the entire country over. If they don't want to do that, they need to fight for their nation, every piece of it, and that means war.

[Boethius]

I was discussing the above with the better half.  He added that the Cossacks were asked to settle Kuban by Catherine the Great.  At the time, they were in exile in Turkey (the Zaporizhian Cossacks).  Russia was afraid they would fight for the Turks, so offered them fertile land to settle.  Same with the Cossacks who eventually settled the Don.  Both were wiped out by the Bolsheviks.


He also noted Krasnodar was known, before the Revolution, as Ekaterynadar (gift of Catherine).

[Belvis]

Crimea was exchanged by the Supreme Soviet in 1954 in a land exchange between the Russian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR. See the agenda and minutes of that meeting of the Supreme Soviet. Ukraine SSR gave up land in the Taganrog, Krasnodar and Kuban regions and received Crimea. Crimea was arid and of little agricultural value, while the Taganrog, Krasnodar and Kuban areas were fertile steppes / plains. So Russia thought they had the better part of the deal.

The last exchange of lands between Russian Federation and Ukraine (both within USSR) before Crimea had happen in 1928, a few villages were exchanged. Ukraine SSR gave up land in the Taganrog and part of East Donbass to Russia in 1925.  Krasnodar and Kuban regions never belonged to UkSSR or Ukraine.

[AkMike]

Prior to the Communist Revolution those areas were part of Ukraine. Moscow took a lot of UA lands at that point.

[Boethius]

I disagree.  They were not part of Ukrainian lands, though as I noted, Kuban was predominantly ethnically Ukrainian.


In Tsarist Russia, there were 9 gubernias, or administratrative subdivisions, for the Russian Empire - Volynia, Podolia, Kiev, Kherson, Chernigov, Poltava, Kharkov, Ekaterninoslav, and Tavria.  Part of Ekaterinoslav is now Russia, and part of Tavria (the Crimea) is part of Russia.

[Photo Guy]

most of the people i have spoken to....  want the war to stop....  they are okay with the fact Crimea and east Ukraine ...  wants to leave Ukraine..  they have no interest in continuing the war....

Yeah, I think that's true. It's complicated because there are so many connections between rebel regions and the rest of Ukraine. Especially in Mariupol, where the people have friends and relatives in Donetsk, and business connections.

[JayH]

I  did not comment earlier in this thread as I find any concept of Ukraine conceding any of it's sovereign territory permanently abhorrent.
I have commented numerous times in other threads -- that Ukraine should concede nothing.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has said he expects to bring the Russian-occupied part of eastern Ukraine and annexed Crimea back under government control by the year’s end.

Speaking at a news conference in Kyiv on Jan. 14, a day after another round of peace talks were held in Minsk, Poroshenko said there had been “no sensations” there, and the main thing the country needs is a plan of action to ensure the terms of the truce are met. Russia’s war against Ukraine’s two easternmost regions of Luhansk and Donetsk has killed more than 9,000 people, displaced more than 2.2 million and left the much of the nation’s industrial heartland damaged since it started in April 2014.

Poroshenko vows to ‘restore sovereignty’ over Donbas, regain Crimea in 2016

On Donbas and Crimea

One possible way to accelerate the freeing of Crimea is to start negotiations in what is known as the Geneva Plus format, which includes the United States and European Union representatives and possibly other signatories of the Budapest Memorandum, Poroshenko said.He also said Kyiv was ready restore electricity supplies to Crimea, but the peninsula “should be Ukrainian.”

Power supplies to the peninsula have been disrupted since electricity pylons were blown up in November.

A new power supply contract for this year has yet to be signed. Regarding Donbas, Poroshenko said he was certain that the government “should restore its sovereignty” over eastern Ukraine this year. He said he would use all legal means and international talks to accomplish this. "We – society, the army, the government – have greatly strengthened our country's defense," Poroshenko said, adding that the 2016 budget for the army was Hr 57 billion.

“This is reflected by the fact that our enemy is losing its willingness to continue its offensive against Ukraine,” he said.

http://www.kyivpost.com/article/content/kyiv-post-plus/poroshenko-vows-to-restore-sovereignty-over-donbas-regain-crimea-in-2016-405928.html

[Slumba]

Just a side note - Olbia (right beside modern day Odessa) had Herodotus as a guest - yes, that Herodotus, from 5th century BC.

[krimster2]

hi, slumba, I have some Olbia "dolphin" money I found in Chersonese, I hesitate to call them coins because of their shape, I also have some Scythian money I found which looks like cast bronze arrowheads and a boatload of Chersonese coins from 3rd century BC up to about 1100 AD when the mint stopped making coins, even found 1 Roman coin from 3rd century AD, black sea area of Ukraine did have a lot of famous folks visit in antiquity, Chersonese has two popes buried there, Clement and Martin, 1 Byzantine king was imprisoned there, and St Cyril was there and other Orthodox Saints, amazing place!!