Just last brief note - yesterday there was the round table on the Crimean situation in Kiev. From Crimea there were Ilmi Umerov, Head of Bakhchisary district state administration, and Serghei Kunitsin, the representative of the President in Crimea; from Kiev - the principal speaker Igor Semivolos of the AMES Center for Middle Eastern Studies, and many other people. Briefly points: Kunitsin - he was the first speaker, and I did not really catch a lot of what he said, but basically - he can operate to some degree in his official capacity - by far not all state bodies went over to the so called new government. He seems to be able to work with some of the police, some of the prosecutors, etc. He needs to move though, since the titushki or samoborona are actively blocking him. He thinks the gov should, with urgency, show to Crimea certain signs of the forthcoming economic autonomy, language autonomy, etc - even on the level of some emergency laws and guarantees, to erode the rationale for joining Russia. Plus, he also seems on the side of the need to act harder/harsher on the security/military side, although here I did not fully catch his position. He also said we need diplomats, we need journalists in maximum number in Crimea. Why Russia sends their parliamentarians to Crimea, and why our parliamentarians are not there?!. Indeed, why? An important bit from Kunitsin - Crimea is super-dependent from all sides on Ukraine. So, the move to take Crimea does not make much logistical sense. Russia will not be able to supply any of the main needs of Crimea - transport, electricity, water, gas. They can, essentially, only provide the money, but not the resources. If Russia really wants Crimea, it would stand to reason that they would need to grab part of the mainland as well, at least so far out as to make sure they have access to the Dnieper water. So the real battle for Crimea, if it comes to that, would be the battle for the supply lines... It is a bit chilling to imagine where that leads. The Admiral Kabanenko, one of the speakers at the later panel, said the Russian buildup of 35,000 people or more was clearly in excess of the number needed to keep Crimea - it was buildup sufficient to try a move up to Odessa. Financial Times asked whether Ukraine should consider blocade, in case Crimea votes to leave... Kunitsin did not take the bait, and other commented that we should not, that these people are still our citizens.. But it is an interesting question. Ilmi Aga - the Russians and the samooborona are concentrated in certain points, mostly around the military installations. There is not a Crimea-wide saturation by either LGM or the titushki. In Bakhchisaray there are very few of them. We still keep the Ukrainian flag on our administration. It is depressing, because there is war/violence in the air. But the events have united the Tatars - previously we had our little factions and whatever, but now there is no left and no right - there are just us, and we are on the side of the united Ukraine. There was a question from a German journalist about whether there are refugees, whether Tatars are trying to leave. Ilmi said he did not know of any massive movements, only individual cases. We wont leave. The question of sending kids away, women away - we do not discuss that question. Even discussing it would send a message, we do not discuss. On the referendum, he said Crimean Tatars were clearly against it; the rest - 50/50. There was a question whether the Tatars could do something else to preempt the referendum... Kunitsin said that Ilmi was the only one who can afford to call a cancellation to the referendum - because there are 25% tatars in Bakhchisaray, and they wont let anyone in. But that was a pretty unique situation to Bakhchisaray, and a couple of other selsoveti; the rest was a toss-up. Neither him nor anyone had any doubt that the Russians would have the referendum whatever way they want it. Someone - not sure if Ilmi or Kunitsin said - yeah, they have the two protocols already prepared, 78% voting yes for question one, and 78% for question two. Which protocol will be signed depends on what happens next week - meaning, whether the international pressure will be high enough for the Russians go with the state within state option. Both Ilmi and Kunitsin said that nothing was over yet regarding Crimea. Talking to the marionetki would be futile, they do not decide anything; all critical issues are decided in Russia, but Russia does not appear to be impervious to pressure. The Russians left options for themselves to get out without losing too much face, including the second question on the ballot. So, it is time for a lot of international pressure. Igor Semivolos said keeping it calm is the best startegy. Maidan taught us that the use of force always creates a counter force. Keeping it calm calms things down... I had to agree with this, indeed Maidan was, to a large degree, perpetuated by the governments violence. He called this Ghandi policy. But still he conceeded, the situation in Crimea was getting out of control - the window of opportunity to reverse the damage was narrowing quickly. There is a sense that the new Ukrainian government - justifiably disoriented on the aftermath of the Revolution - still missed many opportunities to react. They could have complicated things to Russian enormously by more forceful early reaction. There were questions on whether Ukraine could do something/much on the issue. For example, to initiate a Ukrainian national referendum on the status of Crimea, etc. Kunitsin was pretty clear that he did not think any of that was a good idea, or it would help. Putin will only react to international pressure. From the rest of it: there was one of the diplomats, who pretty clearly said that in diplomatic-speak what the US and NATO have declared so far cannot be stated more starkly and harshly. He seemed to think they were committing to even some sort of military engagement. Not clear in what form, but the committment, apparently, was there. Admiral Kabanenko, one of the more forceful speakers, was on the side of harder military measures internally - mobilization, maneuvers, ready to fight; plus that the Government was not engaging NATO effectively enough. He basically said, if we want maximum effect of NATO, we need to put some senior military mission permanently there, to work the internal machinery of NATO towards our ends. They are willing to listen, but coordination seems to be suffering. Also someone said that Russia may have forces to take Crimea, and even take part of Ukraine, but it does not have resources to keep them. The miliary seems to be overstretching as it is, and a prolonged campaign, especially with smart/active resistance and international sanction measures, would drain them pretty quickly. There were many more good speakers, I did not keep notes for all of them. Overall mood around the table - unfortunately, there is a sense of war in the air, but people in different positions are feeling the international pressure is building up, and some unprecedented international committments are starting to take shape; and that the Russians feel that too, and are starting to move in a hurry. All that gives hope... for something...
Posted on: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 23:58:46 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015