Photo: Ekaterina Kuzmina/RBC

History shows that the world is inclined to put up with geopolitical conflicts like the Crimean one. And the outbreak of tension around the peninsula is only a manifestation of the desire of Russia and Ukraine to take advantageous positions before pacification.

Crimea again turned out to be a bargaining chip in relations with Ukraine. Several short-term power outages on the peninsula, coupled with the suspension of transport communications, were enough for Russia to begin supplying electricity to Ukraine without prepayment, saving the latter from freezing and blackout, because rolling blackouts threatened to become permanent.

Naftogaz, continuing its offensive, announced on January 20 a tender for the development of oil and gas fields on the peninsula, as if it still controls them. On the same day, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk demanded that Energy Minister Vladimir Demchishin explain why the contract in the Russian Federation designated Crimea as the “Crimean Federal District of the Russian Federation” and whether this could not be regarded as recognition by Ukraine of the peninsula’s Russian affiliation. In addition, Yatsenyuk was not satisfied that the price of electricity for Crimea, according to the new contracts, is 15% lower than the current one, and if Kiev limits the supply of electricity to Crimea, Russia has the right to impose fines on Ukraine. These claims and threats were followed by others.

After the current outbreak of aggravation in the Donbass, Crimea will play a key role in the issue of the conditions for concluding a truce. Its status remains a stumbling block in relations between Kyiv and Moscow, and until long-term certainty emerges (even if not formally recorded), there is no reason to expect a calm.

Therefore, the natural question is: what will Crimea become in the new geopolitical reality?

West Berlin was an absurd political entity that nevertheless existed for more than 40 years. And his fate provides a lot of food for thought about the fate of Crimea. Of course, there is a big difference between these two cases: a metropolis cut in half and a peninsula separated by geography. But it was no coincidence that Khrushchev gave Crimea to Ukraine - the decision was also dictated by economic logic. Both the Tauride province and the Crimean Khanate that preceded it always included lands north of Perekop; the province, for example, included Berdyansk and Melitopol. Today, Crimea depends on the adjacent Ukrainian territory for water, electricity, and logistics.

If a constructive agreement cannot be reached, then a blockade of the peninsula, turning it into an island, is quite possible. The bridge across the Kerch Strait will not be built soon, if at all. However, the history of the twentieth century knows many examples when a territory, “cut out” from its usual environment, is forced to adapt to the most unfavorable circumstances. In addition to Berlin, one can recall Northern Cyprus, and Hong Kong after the communists came to power, and Macau in the neighborhood. In all cases, the warring parties quickly found a compromise, despite ideological and political contradictions.

RBC Pro development program Leadership: the first skill Dictator's dictionary: what 6 phrases will betray an authoritarian manager A leader who won't leave: how to earn the loyalty of subordinates Psychology in business: 6 types of destructive leadership New leadership: how to manage a business in conditions of uncertainty The power of the environment: as a leader grow with the team Growing the pie. How great companies achieve their goals and make profits

Even the famous walling of West Berlin in August 1961 was not the result of a desire to make a big deal, but only a consequence of a banal fear that the GDR would be left without a population that would flee to the West. The communists gave three air routes, compromises were reached on the movement of vehicles and trains. Surrounded on all sides by a hostile state, West Berlin nevertheless did not lag behind the Federal Republic of Germany in economic and social development.

Mao Zedong was repeatedly asked by foreign like-minded people: why doesn’t he cut off the water supply to the British colony of Hong Kong, whose existence was perceived as a national humiliation? And every time he had to explain that it was not time yet: Hong Kong was important for the communists as a source of hard currency and trade relations with the West. The same applied to Portuguese Macau.

Interdependence dictated moderation. Even in the most extreme case - the confrontation between Beijing and Taipei, when the artillery exchange between Kinmen Island and the mainland lasted for several decades, the parties did everything to avoid enemy losses - the shelling was carried out purely by shells with leaflets, and there was an informal agreement that was steadily implemented: on odd days On even days the Communists fired, and on even days the Kuomintang did.

In other words, no matter what they say today in Kyiv and Moscow, no matter how much they frighten their opponents, the real behavior of Ukraine and Russia on the Crimea issue will be dictated by realpolitik considerations. A complete blockade on the Ukrainian side will not happen, just as there will be no unprovoked sudden movements on the part of Russia.

Crimea is connected to Ukraine by countless human connections. Quite a few businesses have emerged in Crimea, owned by residents of Kiev and Lviv, Dnepropetrovsk and Cossacks, etc. Many Ukrainian citizens have bought real estate on the peninsula, not to mention family and friendly ties. It will not be possible to quickly reorient established demographic and economic processes. Since there was no mass exodus of the population - as during the conflict and subsequent occupation of Northern Cyprus by Turkey - there will be no “green line” irrevocably cutting off one territory from another.

And the Cypriot case makes it possible to make sure that a geopolitical conflict with the transfer of territory from one hand to another (although the situation differs in a legal sense from the Crimean one: Turkey had the right to intervene in the defense of compatriots, agreed upon at the time of the declaration of independence in 1960) does not lead to isolation. The world tends to accept what happened if there is no genocide, forced population transfer, etc. And it will not be possible to return Crimea by military means, as India returned Goa in 1961: Ukraine is not India, and Russia is not Portugal.

The current outbreak of tension, which directly affects the interests of the residents of Crimea, is only a consequence of the feverish desire of the parties to the conflict to have time to take the most advantageous positions before a long pacification.

How will the annexation of Crimea end?