Explanation of the sent

True and Krivda in the "Crimean speech" Vladimir Putin

Vladimir Putin substantiated the need for “reunion with the Crimea” on March 18 in his extraordinary message to the Federal Assembly. But even in this epoch -making speech there were no inaccuracies and distortions

The message of Vladimir Putin was also interested in the Russians. Donetsk, March 18, 2014

“In the heart, in the minds of people, Crimea has always been and remains an integral part of Russia. This conviction, based on truth and justice, was unshakable, passed from generation to generation. <...> All these years, both citizens and many public figures have repeatedly raised this topic, said that Crimea is the original Russian land, and Sevastopol is a Russian city. ”

There is no doubt that most Russians really consider Crimea to be “an integral part of Russia” and “primordially Russian land”. But to say that this conviction is “based on the truth” is hardly worth it.

If we proceed from the meaning of the word “sparks” (according to the explanatory dictionary of Ushakov - “existing Iskoni, Round”), then Crimea should rather be recognized as originally Greek. Indeed, from the peoples living on Earth, it was the Greeks who mastered this peninsula before everyone else - in the VI century BC. e. And in the 5th century BC. e. They created the Bosporus kingdom there and founded Chersonesos, on the site of which in 1783 and Russian Sevastopol was laid.

But even if we evaluate “inalienability” from the point of view of the duration of possession of this territory - let’s say, over the last thousand years - here are Russians only in the honorable third place. 202 (1239–1441) Peninsula was owned by Mongol-Tatars, 297 years old (1475–1772)-Turks (Crimean Khanate was under the protectorate of the Ottoman Empire), and only 171 (1783–1954)-Russia.

"

If we proceed from the meaning of the word "sparkling", then Crimea should rather be recognized as originally Greek

"

“And when Crimea suddenly ended up in another state, then Russia already felt that it was not just robbed, but robbed.”

By the way, they “robbed” Russia not without the participation of the Crimeans themselves: in a referendum on December 1, 1991, 54% of the residents of the peninsula spoke for the independence of Ukraine within its then borders. This, of course, is not the current 97% for “reunification with Russia”, but also, whatever one may say, the will of the people, expressed, in the words of Putin himself, “in full accordance with democratic procedures and international legal norms”.

“Only in Russia last year (citizens of Ukraine. - The New Times), almost 3 million people worked. According to some estimates, the volume of their earnings in 2013 in Russia amounted to more than $ 20 billion, this is about 12% of Ukraine's GDP. ”

Here, the Russian president even slightly downplayed the contribution of Ukrainian migrant workers to the economy of his country. According to the director of the FMS of the Russian Federation, Konstantin Romodanovsky, in 2013, 2.9 million Ukrainians worked in Russia who earned “about $ 30 billion”. Accordingly, their contribution to the GDP of Ukraine for 2013 ($ 182 billion) amounted to about 16.5%.

“Many state bodies (Ukraine. - The New Times) are usurped by impostors, while they do not control anything in the country, but themselves ... are often under the control of radicals. You can even get an appointment with some ministers of the current government only with the permission of the Maidan militants. This is not a joke, this is the reality of today's life. ”

This example is really not a joke, but no longer the reality of "today's life." As one of the activists of the Maidan, a member of the autonomous union of workers Denis Gorbach, told The New Times, at the end of February there was a period when some authorities were busy with activists: “For example, students who did not allow the appointment of Irina Farion, the representative of the representative of Freedom. The department for migration issues for about a week was occupied by activists of the “Without Borders” movement - human rights activists and anti -fascists, who made sure that the documents on the possible illegal issuance of refugees outside Ukraine. ”

But now no one is sitting in any ministries and, as Gorbach complained, "an ordinary activist approaches there as difficult as to all these events."

“It has already become extremely clear to everyone what exactly the Ukrainian ideological heirs of Bandera, the Hitler’s worker during the Second World War, intended to do in the future.”

The leader of the Ukrainian nationalists Stepan Bandera (1909–1959), his opponents were not called - a chauvinist, anti -Semite, and a terrorist, and a Nazi. But Hitler’s ministry can be considered in the last turn. After the German attack on the USSR, Bandera really hoped to conclude a temporary union with the Nazis to fight the Bolsheviks, but the Germans did not agree with the idea of ​​an independent Great Ukraine. Therefore, on July 5, 1941, the intransigible “ministry” was arrested and sent first to the Krakow prison, and then to the concentration camp of Zasenhausen, where he was until September 25, 1944.

“The UN International Court ... in its decision of July 22, 2010 (On the Independence of Kosovo. - The New Times) noted the following. I give a literal quote: “No common prohibition on the unilateral proclamation of independence follows from the practice of the Security Council,” and then: “General international law does not contain any applicable ban on the proclamation of independence.”

Commenting on July 22, 2010, the decision of the International Court quoted by Putin, the Russian Foreign Ministry insisted that the court evaluated only the Declaration of the Independence of Kosovo, but not the very “right of the region to separate from Serbia”. At the same time, the Foreign Ministry directly stated: “Our position on the non -recognition of the independence of Kosovo remains unchanged. We believe that the solution of the Kosovo problem is possible only by continuing negotiations between interested parties. ” So it is surprising in this case not that Putin suddenly referred to the Kosovo precedent, but that after the absorption of Crimea, Russia did not declare - which would now be completely logical - and the recognition of the independence of Kosovo.

It is amazing not that Putin referred to the Kosovo precedent, but that after Crimea Russia did not recognize Kosovo

"

“From the same United States and Europe, we hear that Kosovo is, they say, again, some kind of special case. What, according to our colleagues, is its exclusivity? It turns out that during the conflict in Kosovo there were many human victims. Is this a legal argument, or what? "

To see the differences between the Kosovsky case and the Crimean, it is not necessary to be a lawyer. Firstly, in Kosovo there were not only “many human casualties”, but also, for example, ethnic cleaning confirmed by international experts, over 230 thousand refugees (according to the UN) and a long-term civil war, for the termination of which NATO troops were introduced on the basis of the UN Security Council resolution. And secondly, Kosovo, unlike Crimea, did not join any other country, but remained independent, despite the presence of the Albanian majority there.

Two typical "well -equipped militants" on the Maidan. Kyiv, February 20, 2014

“A similar scenario (by the type of“ Arab spring. ” - The New Times) was implemented in Ukraine. In 2004, in order to sell the right candidate in the presidential election, they came up with some third tour that was not provided for by law ... And now they have been thrown into the case of a pre-prepared, well-equipped army of militants. ”

In order to evaluate the truth of the president, it is enough to look at any image of this very “well -equipped army” - photographs of people who opposed the “Golden Eagle” in construction helmets, battered pea jackets, with sticks and wooden shields bypassed all world and Russian media.

Photo: AP/East News, Alexey Furman/ITAR-TASS