Coercion to freedom

The release of two deputy chairman of the Majlis of the Crimean Tatar people Ilmi Umarov and Akhtem Chiygoz occurred according to the scenario, reminiscent of how political prisoners from the Soviet Union were released: secretly, according to secret decrees, to the Western country, which was ready to act as a refuge or transit. However, I would narrow this comparison before the "prisoners of Zion", Jewish political prisoners or "refuseniks" who fought for the right to leave for a historical homeland. Umarov and Chiygoz are the same “prisoners of Zion”, with the only difference being that their people are already in their historical homeland and requires recognition of their right to determine the fate of Crimea without “polite green men” and other swamp abominations.

Then, in Soviet times, the state of Israel was a country, preoccupied with the freedom and security of its heroes. But Israel, to be honest, had no much influence on the Kremlin elders, anti -Semites who were not able to forgive the small country of the defeat of the Arab armies and their Soviet curators in the six -day war of 1967. And then the Middle Eastern state resorted to the assistance of the international community, primarily the Jewish community of the United States. It turned out that it was not so easy for the Soviet leaders to refuse American presidents - the levers for influence on the Kremlin at the White House were then, there is now.

Today, the country that took responsibility for the future of the Crimean Tatar people and the preservation of its “parliament” prohibited in Russia - the Mejlis, has become Ukraine. But its influence on the Russian authorities is quite comparable to the then influence of Israel: just as Jews in Soviet times, Ukrainians are now the Kremlin chiefs who will not forgive the willingness to fight for freedom.

And then Ukraine, like Israel in the recent past, has to resort to the help of the international community, primarily to the help of Turkey, where hundreds of thousands of Crimean Tatars were forced to move after the occupation of the peninsula by the troops of Catherine II. And it turns out that Poroshenko can be ignored, but Erdogan is much more difficult.

The liberation of the “prisoners of Zion” demonstrated that the Jewish movement in the Soviet Union really exists, that it must be considered that contempt for this movement and repression against its activists can lead to undesirable consequences for the leadership of the USSR - the amendment of Jackson -Viennik really played a historical role, influencing the technological lag of the “Evil of Evil” from the civilized world. The liberation of Umarov and Chiygoz - it is according to this scenario, in secret, in Ankara - also shows that no court decisions on the ban on the Majlis can abolish either the international authority of the People’s Parliament of the Crimean Tatars, or the need to be considered it.

Having freed the leaders of the Mejlis by agreement with the President of Turkey, Putin admitted that Umarov and Chiygoz, like other leaders of the Crimean Tatars, are not violators of occupation calm, but politicians whose freedom must be respected. And this once again proves that the issue of Crimea - no matter what official propaganda says there and repeat the "Crimean -making" from the presidential administration and the Russian parliament - is by no means closed, as the Jewish issue was not closed after the next ban from leaving the USSR. The will of peoples - even very small, but free peoples - is always stronger than the will of dictators, even closing millions.