In March 2014, Crimea unilaterally declared independence from Ukraine.
Less than 48 hours later Russia annexed it.
In this video, I'm going to explain why Crimea declared independence,
even though there was never any intention for it to exist as an independent state.
[MUSIC]
Hello. My name is James Ker-Lindsay.
Welcome to 'Independent Thinking'.
A channel dedicated to international relations, independence and the origins of countries.
Crimea's Declaration of Independence, and its subsequent annexation by Russia,
was one of the most important developments in contemporary international relations.
It marked the moment that a major power on the international stage
annexed the territory of a neighboring country.
While there have been a number of cases where territories have been invaded and occupied,
in the vast majority of these situations the invading power has stepped back
from formally trying to lay claim to the territory.
In most cases, it has instead tried to claim that the territory is now an independent state
- albeit under its de facto control.
However, in the case of Crimea, Russia went that one step further
and formally declared its sovereignty over the territory.
Interestingly, however, it didn't march in and directly annexe it.
There was still the intermediate step whereby Crimea declared independence.
Only then did Moscow lay claim to it.
To many, this seemed odd.
Why did Crimea declare independence if the plan was for it to join Russia all along?
The Crimean Peninsula lies on the northern side of the Black Sea.
In 1783, it was conquered and annexed by the Russian Empire,
becoming an important naval base and home to Russia's Black Sea Fleet.
However, in 1954, during the period of Soviet administration, Crimea was transferred to Ukraine.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, at the start of the 1990s, Ukraine became an independent country
and Crimea was granted the status of an autonomous republic within the state.
Crucially, however, Russia retained an important strategic stake in the peninsula.
In 1997, Russian and Ukraine reached an agreement on the division of the old Soviet Black Sea Fleet.
Under the terms of the deal, the Russian Black Sea Fleet would be based
in the Crimean city of Sevastopol until 2017.
In 2010, this lease was extended until 2042.
At the start of February 2014, the pro-Russian government in Ukraine was overthrown.
In the weeks that followed, Russian-speaking parts of the country rose up
against the new Ukrainian administration.
This disruption also included Crimea, whose population was estimated to be around 60% ethnic Russian and
where previous polling had shown consistently strong support for seceding from Ukraine and joining Russia.
In late February 2014, masked Russian troops entered the Crimea under the pretext of restoring law and order.
Seizing control of the peninsula, they disbanded the Ukrainian political institutions and established their own.
Soon afterwards, the pro-Russian parliament in Crimea announced it would hold a referendum
on greater autonomy in May that year.
However, the vote was quickly moved forward to 16 March.
At the same time, the question was changed to where the Crimea should remain a part of Ukraine
or should become a part of Russia.
The decision to hold a referendum caused an international outcry.
As well as being declared illegal by the Ukrainian Supreme Court,
and opposed by the Ukrainian Government,
there was also an attempt to have the United Nations Security Council declare it invalid.
However, this was blocked by Russia - a permanent member of the Security Council.
It's worth noting that a couple of weeks later, on 27 March, the UN General Assembly actually passed
a resolution on the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
This passed by 100 votes in favour to 11 against, with 58 abstentions.
Despite the strong opposition, the vote went ahead on the 16 March.
Held under conditions that fell far short of internationally accepted democratic standards,
both Crimea and its capital city, Sevastopol, voted overwhelmingly to join Russia.
Within hours of the result, and in line with the proclamation passed just days before the referendum,
Crimea and Sevastopol declared independence
- announcing the establishment of the Republic of Crimea.
Moreover, and again in line with the previously announced plans, the authorities of the
newly proclaimed Republic of Crimea also requested that it be accepted into the Russian Federation
as a new constituent entity.
Needless to say, the declaration of independence was condemned by much of the world.
However, the new state was immediately recognized by Moscow.
This paved the way for the next step: Crimea's annexation.
On 18 March, a treaty on the Republic of Crimea's accession to Russia was signed.
Within days, this had been approved by the Russian Supreme Court and Parliament.
The Crimean Peninsula had now been annexed by the Russian Federation.
But why did Crimea declare independence if the intention was for it to unite with Russia?
In reality, it's very easy to explain.
Simply put, Russia fully understood the enormity of what it was doing.
It knew that any attempt to merely march in and annex Crimea would amount to an unacceptable
infringement of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.
This would be an overt violation of the UN Charter.
It therefore needed to create an intermediate step to try and give a veneer of legitimacy to its actions.
By claiming the territory legitimately expressed a desire for self-determination in the form an independence vote
from Ukraine, and that once this had been achieved it then expressed a wish to unite with Russia,
Moscow was attempting to create the impression that its decision to incorporate the territory
was somehow legal and legitimate.
It was not annexing the territory of another state,
it was instead acceding to the wishes of a sovereign state to join the Russian Federation.
Of course, there will be those who will point out that the Crimean Peninsula had been Russian territory
in the first place, and that Russia had been unfairly deprived of it during the Soviet Union.
This may be so.
However, the fact that Russia had not objected at the time of Ukraine's independence, and had
even signed agreements with Kiev that effectively recognized Ukrainian sovereignty over the territory,
rather undermines this argument.
As for the argument that it was merely responding to the will of the people for union with Russia,
this has no validity.
As I explained in another video, the right of self-determination leading to independence
- known as 'external self-determination' - applies only in very limited cases primarily related
to decolonization and military occupation.
It doesn't apply as a general rule.
Russia's claim to be respecting the wishes of the people of Crimea went against a fundamental principle
of international relations that had emerged since 1945.
Ultimately, Crimea's decision to declare independence was therefore merely a smokescreen.
It was designed to give a thin veneer of democratic legitimacy and legality
to a move that was little more than a land grab.
Interestingly, one could even go so far as to argue that the mere fact that Russia felt it necessary
to concoct an intermediate step of having Crimea declare independence - rather than simply say
"this was previously our territory, which was unfairly ceded to Ukraine, and we want it back" -
in fact only goes to show that Moscow knew that it was doing something inherently contrary to international law
and in violation of the UN Charter.
I hope you found this video useful.
If so, please do share it.
And consider subscribing for more videos like this. I post new content every Friday.
Thanks so much for watching and see you again next time.
[MUSIC]