Top-level officials in Russia are fond of inspecting territories annexed to it from neighboring countries – either to show themselves to the people, especially the new citizens, or to show the world that they are determined to defend the loot.
The fifth column is very much alive, as evidenced by the recent “most democratic” (albeit with definite Russian hallmarks) elections to the regional legislative assemblies when the wrong kind of hombres tried to get seats there.
Not that the masses of Russia, having demonstrated 86 percent support for the powers that be, would have let them have their way. Be that as it may, the assassinated member of the Yaroslav regional Duma, Boris Nemtsov, graphically demonstrated that even a single warrior can harm the enemy…
The situation in Crimea is getting increasingly complicated. At one point the Kremlin leadership tried to trade the annexed peninsula for peace in the Donbas. It didn’t work, with international sanctions and restrictions getting tougher. Russia has gone down a blind alley that is getting narrower, with no way out in sight.
Crimea, on the other hand, is facing external problems, in conjunction with Ukraine and other countries, and internal ones that are getting from bad to worse.
Funding the peninsula is an increasing burden on the federal budget. The annexed region has proved financially crippled to an extent no one had anticipated when planning its takeover. Whereas practically all budget items are being cut [in Russia], Simferopol and Sevastopol keep asking for additional funds.
Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev during his visit to Crimea made it clear that no additional funds were forthcoming, that they had to make do with local resources, but the number of requests for funds has not decreased.
Another complicated and worrisome problem is that the local separatist leaders have apparently decided that, in return for turning traitor to Ukraine, they are to be vested with all power in the region, just like Ramzan Kadyrov in Chechnya. Hence the wholesale theft of funds transferred from the center, arbitrary distribution of land, and suppression of any attempt of control from Moscow.
Officials transferred from the Center find themselves ostracized so much so they are unable to discharge their functions. Here is a recent example. Sevastopol Governor Sergey Menyailo fired Andrei Kulagin from his post as director of the Chersonese Taurica National Preserve and replaced him with Archpriest Sergius Khalyuta of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Moscow Patriarchate. The staff of the preserve strongly objected, telling so the governor after he introduced the new manager.
The clergyman had no secular training [let alone a degree in archaeology], but the fact didn’t seem to worry the authorities. After a female preserve employee exclaimed in exasperation, “Why not appoint a vocational training school graduate?” the governor replied in a typically Russian apparatchik’s manner: “We will, if and when we find it necessary.”
The scandal in Sevastopol finally reached the Kremlin’s ear, but then another one was underway. The Russian Orthodox Church demanded that the Kazan Cathedral (also known as the Cathedral of Our Lady of Kazan), currently a major government-run museum in St. Petersburg, be reinstated as a house of God under ROC control.
Moscow distanced itself from the Sevastopol governor’s decision, placing the man in a very embarrassing situation. The thing is that Chersonesus, located practically within city limits, has in its possession large plots of land, so it is easy to imagine how many eager hands are reaching for a slice of the costly pie. Moskovsky komsomolets writes that the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation has filed criminal charges against the national preserve’s ex-Director General Leonid Marchenko, Svetlana Shevchenko, ex-head of the cultural heritage protection department at the Sevastopol City Hall, and Sergei Yutkevich, CEO, Arkheopolis. All are suspected of having committed land frauds resulting in the unlawful acquisition of over 24 hectares of land containing archaeological sites as private property.
In a word, there is a situation in Crimea, precisely in Sevastopol, that has become so complicated it can be resolved only by the leader of the nation.
Formally, the president of Russia will make a sightseeing trip to the peninsula, accompanied by members of the Russian Geographical Society. The itinerary includes visits to sites associated with the Silk Road and dives to ancient ships on the bottom of the Black Sea.
It seems like a long time since the chief of the Russian land had last gladdened the hearts of his subjects by leading a flock of Siberian cranes to their salvation or taking part in an expedition to save the snow leopard in Uvs Nuur Basin. All this is important, of course, but diving is apparently even more important – say, in the Baltic Sea, by the Gogland Island, to explore the remains of the screw frigate Oleg, sunk over collision in 1869.
The masses must know – and the federal channel will make sure they will – that the head of Russian state is constantly concerned about the environment, be it on land, sea or air – but first and foremost, about the tangible components of the history of the Russian state. Whether these components are part of Russian history or that of other countries, eventually appropriated by Russia, is another matter.
History has a political significance for Vladimir Putin. He relied on history when justifying the annexation of Crimea and breaching the inviolability of European frontiers. In fact, appropriation of other countries’ history, mixing up the notions of “Rus’” and “Russia” is the cornerstone of Moscow’s current foreign and domestic politics. Putin’s visit to Crimea is part and parcel of them.
Media reports apart, the Russian president’s trip to the peninsula is to help solve a number of interrelated domestic and international problems.
For the international community, his visit to Crimea will serve as a response to the toughening of sanctions and restrictions on the part of the United States – and very likely, on the part of Europe.
On the face of it, the Russian leader’s actions are easily explained: you’re hurting me with sanctions, I’ll hurt you by strengthening our presence in Crimea. Nothing you can do will stop me.
However, he is actually biting the bullet and putting up a bold front because Russia has reached an impasse. In his and his inner circle’s mind, any reasonable solution to the Crimean and Donbas problems would mean sustaining heavy losses, including rocking the domestic boat. The so-called stability has become almost a dogma for Moscow propaganda and for the corridors of power.
Official Kyiv should respond to Putin’s visit to the annexed Crimea in no uncertain words. The world should know that Ukraine will not part with an inch of its sovereign territory, that the Ukrainian people will fight for their territorial integrity, even if it takes years, even if it takes one soldier’s war.
