CRIMEA IS UKRAINE

OLEH SHAMSHUR, Ambassador

Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to France:

‘The deoccupation of Crimea is one of

the prerequisites for the restoration of

European security’стор. 6-7

THE TRUTH ABOUT CRIMEA

Environmental disaster in the north of Crimea

стор. 8

THE TERRITORY OF DISCRIMINATION

A story of the unshakeable.

Volodymyr Balukhстор. 10-11

Vadym Chernysh:"We would like international partners to pay attention to integration projects."

#7 (15) • 2018

OLEH SENTSOV FORCED TO STOP HIS HUNGER STRIKE The threat of forced feeding made the Ukrainian film director and a Kremlin’s political prisoner Oleg Sentsov stop the hunger strike starting on October 6. He wrote about this in a letter that he passed to the media through his lawyer.“Due to the critical state of my health, as well as the pathological changes in the internal organs that have begun, in the very near fu-ture I am scheduled to start forced feeding. My opinion is no longer taken into account ... Compulsory feeding will be used as a rehabili-tation measure to save the patient's life,” Oleg Sentsov wrote.“Minus 20 kg, plus a debilitated body, but the goal has not been achieved,” he concluded.The hunger strike of the Ukrainian director, who demanded the re-lease of all Ukrainians - political prisoners of Russia, lasted 145 days.Despite all the appeals of the world community, famous people to the Russian President, Oleg Sentsov was not released or pardoned. At the same time, in early October, the European Court of Human Rights accepted Oleg Sentsov’s lawsuit against Russia.

UKRAINE WILL BAN THE BLACK SEA FLEET IN SEVASTOPOL

On 17 September, a Resolution on the non-extension of the Friend-ship Treaty with Russia, adopted by the National Security and De-fence Council, was put into effect by an Edict of the Ukrainian Presi-dent. The Foreign Ministry must forward a relevant note to Moscow. The President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, will also be tabling a Bill prohibiting the basing of the Russian Sea Fleet in the Ukrainian Sevastopol. The President publicly declared this on 20 September, when delivering his annual State of the Nation Address to the Verk-hovna Rada.‘It is suggested that the Constitutional clause permitting the basing of the Black Sea fleet in Ukraine is withdrawn. Also, after we return Crimea, there will for sure be no Russian base in Sevastopol,’ empha-sized Petro Poroshenko.The Ukrainian President expressed confidence in the restoration of Crimea to Ukraine. ‘Russia’s aggression began with the annexation of Crimea, and it has to end with its restoration, including compensation for all damages, and this time effective guarantees of a non-recur-rence of aggression. We are fighting for this in International courts, and I am confident that we will win,’ declared Petro Poroshenko.

‘Russia’s purpose is to occupy the

Azov Sea, the same way it did

Crimea. This is a brutal viola-

tion of international law, and

we cannot accept it. We are

strengthening our military

there and launching a case

against Russia in the inter-

national Permanent Court of

Arbitration.

Russia has no right to attack

or stop our vessels, which carry

goods and passengers from two import-

ant Ukrainian ports, Mariupol and Berdyansk. If Russia does not

stop, we have only one instrument, which is sanctions.’

President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko in an interview

with The Washington Post

ACTIVITIES OF THE PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE OF THE AR OF CRIMEA IN FIGURES (AUGUST 2016 – AUGUST 2018)

1444 criminal proceedings with procedural control exercised by

the Prosecutor’s Office of the AR of Crimea.

Pre-trial investigations have been completed in 210 criminal pro-

ceedings.

128 criminal proceedings have been forwarded to a court with in-

dictments (80 of them were closed and 2 forwarded to a court with

applications seeking relief)

176 individuals have received a report of suspicion of committing

a crime.

200 volumes of evidence have been collected and assembled

during the investigation into the facts of the violation of Constitutional

rights of individuals within the temporarily occupied Crimea.

Crimea Inform Magazine, No. 7 (15). Certificate of State Registration КВ №22665-12565 Р of 04.05.2017.Founder: Ukrinform Ukrainian National News Agency.

Publisher: PE “Company ”Apollon“, 79054, Lviv, Yavornitskogo, 8/82, tel .: +38 (032) 290-15-80, +38 (067) 671-15-80, e-mail: imperial@mail.lviv.ua.Editor in Chief: Kazdobina Y.

Address of the editorial office: B. Khmelnytskoho, str. 8/16, Kiev, 01001, tel .: (044) 299-00-10; fax: (044) 279-86-65, e-mail: office@ukrinform.ua.Reprint only with written permission of the editorial office.

Published by: Imperial Group Company LLC. Address: 79056, Lviv, Haiduchka, str. 1, tel. +38 (032) 290-15-80, +38 (063) 122-26-25, e-mail: imperial@mail.lviv.uaOrder no. КА-00037-6 from 25.09.2018. Circulation: 2695 copies. Distributed free of charge.

FACTS

TREASONOne of the areas of its activities is the investigation of cases of treason.

During the past two years only, materials of 88 criminal proceedings in

such cases were deposited with the court. Involved in litigations were for-

mer members of the Verkhovna Rada, Crimean elected officials of var-

ious levels, etc. In addition, the investigative law enforcement agencies

are currently treating a number of criminal cases brought on the basis of

the facts of treason by the former officers of law enforcement and other

State bodies. These are the Central Department of the Incomes Ministry

of the AR of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, the Central Department

of the Interior Ministry of Ukraine in the AR of Crimea, a local division of

the Antimonopoly Committee in the AR of Crimea, the Department of

the State Penal System in the AR of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, etc.

It has been established as of today that the staffing of these agencies

before the occupation exceeded 19,000. The Prosecutor’s Office in-

vestigators have prepared a register of ITNs of these individuals and are

making efforts to establish their full biographical details together with

the level of their involvement in the occupation of Crimea.

MILITARY CRIMES AND CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITYResulting from the painstaking work carried out by prosecutors and in-

ternational law experts engaged by the Prosecutor’s Office of the AR of

Crimea, it has developed a legal position for the investigation of crimes

against humanity, and military crimes that are also covered by the juris-

diction of the International Criminal Court.

Above all, Russia’s criminal objective is being established, which in-

cludes the accession (annexation) of Crimea and the changing of the

demographic situation on the peninsula by violent means.

COMMUNICATION AND INTERACTIONInforming the public of the operation of the Prosecutor’s Office as a

State institution is one of the most important tasks of the reformed

Prosecutor’s Office, that is now capable of taking measures to protect

and restore the people’s eroded rights.

The Prosecutor’s Office of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea is

widely employing the opportunities afforded by social networks, such

as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and others. An online form for the

anonymous reporting of offences against the law has been introduced

to minimise any adverse consequences for victims. A dialogue be-

tween persons who have suffered from the occupation, and witnesses

of violations of the rights of Crimeans, is maintained via Skype.

A specific highlight in the operation of the Prosecutor’s Office is the

development of close links with the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people,

and Human rights organisations that are handling Human rights issues

within the temporary occupied peninsula.

The Prosecutor’s Office of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea: Those responsible for the occupation of Crimea will be identified and punished

The Ukrainian Prosecutor’s Office of the Autonomous Republic (AR) of Crimea has been operating outside of Crimea for the fourth year. According to a decision adopted by the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine, the Prosecutor’s Office of the AR of Crimea was moved to Kyiv after the occupation of the peninsula. Its present-day Head, Giunduz Mamedov, has been occupying this position since 22 August 2016. Taking into account the peculiar conditions in which it operates, the Prosecutor’s Office of the AR of Crimea focuses on the investigation of crimes against the foundations of the national security of Ukraine, military crimes, crimes against humanity, violation of the rules for entrance to and exit from the temporary occupied Ukrainian territory, and also the representation of the interests of individuals and the State in the courts.

Crimean Attorney Gunduz Mamedov conducts a welcome visit to Kherson by citizens who have suffered from the Crimean occupation authorities

Meeting at the Crimean Prosecutor's Office

3# 7 (15) • 2018 / CRIMEA INFORM

THE FOCUS OF ATTENTION

What are the priorities of Ukrainian state policy regarding temporarily occupied Crimea?Today, the main efforts are focused on short-term priorities related to the protec-tion of rights and freedoms of citizens who live in the occupied territory of the Autono-mous Republic of Crimea. These people, re-gardless of nationality, suffer because their position is different from that of the Russian Federation. The position that Crimea be-longs to Ukraine, and that its population is a part of the Ukrainian political nation, is prohibited by the Russian legislation.A short-term task for all governmental au-thorities is to make the international com-munity not only condemn this position, but also take active action, initiating sanctions, prosecuting perpetrators and, possibly, re-

fusing to "shake hands."A large number of NGOs, law enforcement and other government agencies and other authorities collect evidence of offenses and present them at international sites, which may have an impact on Russian Federation.Disclosure of such information may part-ly help to reduce pressure and persecution on the part of the Russian Federation. Of course this is difficult for us. Russia is a re-pressive machine that acts even in violation of its own legislation, for example, it does not allow international observers to pris-ons. Ukraine files international lawsuits that Ministry of Justice is responsible for. We work closely with international human rights organizations, with lawyers who pro-vide protection for prisoners in accordance with the Russian law. This work is not visi-

ble sometimes, but it engages many people who have the appropriate authority and work in this area.Maintaining ties between citizens who live in the temporarily occupied territories and those who live in the controlled territories is our mid-term priority. There is the plan that was approved by the government this March (Plan of measures aimed at imple-menting some of the principles of the state internal policy in respect of the temporar-ily occupied territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevas-topol approved by the Government resolu-tion №218-r on March 26, 2018) It regulates actions of all government agencies in this area. For example, occupation authori-ties of RF cut Crimean population off from Ukrainian broadcasting. Ukraine, in the

Minister for Temporarily Occupied Territories and Internally Displaced Persons Vadym Chernysh:

‘We would like international partners to pay attention to integration projects.’

4 CRIMEA INFORM / # 7 (15) • 2018

POSITION

person of Ministry of Information Policy, National Council for Television and Radio Broadcasting, and to some extent MTOT, has built an entire infrastructure to at least partially resume broadcasting for a part of Crimea.Long-term perspective includes the use of international levers. First of all, it is appli-cation of mechanisms provided by interna-tional law, international humanitarian law, sanctions and other restrictions aimed to resolve the matter of a peaceful return of Crimea under control of Ukraine.There should be a transitional period of course. And here it is worth to pay attention to those integration concepts that we offer. It is important that they themselves have support in Ukrainian politics, and not the proposals for creation a commandant's of-fice and access control system. Such things cause fear and misunderstanding of the population which is left there.

How successful is the connection with people from the occupied territory?If people live in Crimea and only vis-it Ukraine ties, of course, are torn apart. We need to create comfortable conditions at check-points, arrange services as close to the administrative line as possible. Ac-cording to the Government plan, Ukraine should provide residents of Crimea with the right to education and medical services in controlled territories. It is also planned to facilitate admission into higher education establishments, access to distance learn-ing, administrative services, transportation to Kyiv or other Ukrainian cities. This year UAH 106 million was allocated to improve the infrastructure at check-points at the administration line with the temporarily occupied Crimea and the establishment of centers for administrative services.

Do you feel the support of international community in these matters?There are various reasons why there are not so many international projects aimed at helping Crimea the way they help Donbas. Help with Crimea mainly falls within the framework of protection and promotion of human rights and freedoms. Ukraine now spends a lot of money on security and de-fense, and many sectors of economy are at gunpoint. And despite the fact that even under such conditions we demonstrate economic growth there is not enough mon-ey. We would very much like international partners to pay attention to integration projects. But I think that there is also a po-litical component here.

And what exactly do you mean?Crimea is annexed and incorporated into the Russian Federation, and a political com-ponent here is to maintain connections in spite of decisions and actions of Russian au-thorities in Crimea in contrast to Donbas.

But the world does not recognize the annex-ation?No, it does not recognize it and it's good. But the projects that are being implemented need attention. The situation with regards to Donbas and Crimea is different even in terms of financing. Some countries, such as the USA, cooperate with us and finance proj-ects aimed at improving service provision to the residents of Crimea. Others discuss the projects for providing medical services. However, there are no projects that would help small business in territories in close proximity to the administrative line, which is the case in the east of Ukraine. There are organizations which work in Kherson re-gion generally, but this issue is crucial for southernmost part, for example, Genichesk raion. Donors are in no hurry to implement projects near the administrative border with occupied Crimea. They have anxiety about the security, and concerns about RF provocations, but there are no risks in re-alizing projects in Kherson region, even in settlements near the administrative border. We saw the same problem in Mariupol two years ago, but now, with joint efforts of cen-tral and local authorities, it is rapidly being resolved.

You mentioned "refusal to shake hands" as means of influence. Is it really effective?Ukrainians must understand that in the world you cannot do “swoop”. There is a principle, first applied by Americans to "dirty money" problem called "name and shame". And this is not just the legal side of the issue. In legal field we have conventions, courts. And if it's archaeologists for exam-ple? They come, do excavations without the permission of the Ukrainian authorities, and then take the artifacts to Moscow, or St. Petersburg. We must make a list of such people, and provide it to archaeological as-sociations and unions. These people should not be accepted in serious and decent circles of archaeologists. We must do the same with everyone without exception: with business-men, ship owners. In cases, where we can-not apply legal mechanisms, we must apply mechanisms of reputation and moral in-fluence. We often underestimate them, but they work in the West. When civil societies of other countries start to “boil”, it is not so

easy for politicians to go to Crimea and tell everybody how good everything is there."Crimean Titan" is a very interesting situa-tion. Occupants use Ukrainian gas from the Black Sea shelf of Odessa, artesian water of the Black Sea Artesian Basin that includes Kherson region, as well as all Ukrainian il-menite in all their schemes. They use three components - water, mineral resources, natural resources, which, according to the Constitution, belong to people of Ukraine, for the production, sale and enrichment of the Russian budget. It turns out it is profit-able to organize production, when every-thing is stolen.

And where do they sell to?They sell abroad. And now we have to cre-ate intolerable conditions that would close international markets for them. Nobody wants to say hello to Somali pirates? The same should be the case here. Business that now mercilessly exploits Ukrainian re-sources should not have access to Western markets.You see, Russia will be able to defend itself against sanctions only if it "breaks" the uni-ty of Western countries. And RF authorities understand it very well and work on it. And we have to work towards protection and preservation of our values. And this is not an attempt to illegally influence certain po-litical and social processes; it is an attempt to draw attention to the values that paved the way to the foundation European Union, Council of Europe, and so on. And we have to do such a job so that it has a positive im-pact on behavior of politicians, business and citizens.

5# 7 (15) • 2018 / CRIMEA INFORM

POSITION

In France it is understood that the International community should take coordinated and cohesive actions to restore Crimea to Ukraine. Oleh Shamshur, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to France, explained to us the wide-ranging problems existing in the Crimean Peninsula, and the actions taken to counter Russia’s violations of the law.

‘What are the attitudes presently existing in France concerning Crimean sanctions aimed against Russia?’‘The French Foreign Ministry in its state-ment of 30 July, once again confirmed the consistent stance of France as regards to Crimea and its firm commitment to the full restoration of sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. However, some French companies are seeking ways to circumvent these sanctions. We are carefully tracking such cases and responding quickly.

As a whole, resulting from last year’s elec-tion in France, many pro-Russian figures who previously formed a lobbyist core in parliament, have been thrown out from the important politics. Many have been elected to the National Assembly who clearly com-prehend the nature of events in Crimea and Donbas, and heartily condemn the Russian aggression against Ukraine.At the same time, right-wing and left-wing extremists in France attempt to implement policies as an alternative to the official ones.

However, they only receive a very scant sup-port from the local print media, and also from within intellectual and expert circles.As regards to the ordinary French public, 73% have a negative attitude to Vladimir Pu-tin, according to a survey conducted by the Odoxa agency. Almost 71% of them believe that the Russian President plays a negative role in the international arena, and 53% are convinced that Russia attempted to influ-ence the Presidential election in France.’

OLEH SHAMSHUR, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to France:

‘The deoccupation of Crimea is one of the prerequisites for the restoration of European security’

6 CRIMEA INFORM / # 7 (15) • 2018

CRIMEA IS UKRAINE

‘What is the vision within France with re-gard to Crimea’s future, and the prospects of its return to Ukraine?’‘The stance taken by France, upholding the indisputable return of the peninsula to Ukraine, has been confirmed time and time again. The consensus formed, following the signature (on 1 August 1975 –Editor’s note) of the Helsinki Final Act stating the inviolabi-lity of the borders, has been destroyed by the Russian aggression. With Russia con-tinuing its occupation of Crimea the renew-al of European stability is not a subject for any serious debate.The European security system was com-pletely destroyed - not merely undermined - by the Russian aggression. The deoccupa-tion of Crimea and the termination of the war unleashed against our country – these are the absolutely necessary preconditions for creating a new security architecture.’

‘What efforts does the Embassy take to keep the Crimean issue on the agenda and con-demn the unlawful takeover of Crimea?’‘The Crimean spotlight, the peninsula de-occupation issues, and the situation regard-ing Human rights in Crimea, are always in the focus of our attention, and we hold many relevant events. For example, a presentation on the current situation re the preservation of the cultural heritage in occupied Crimea was organised by our embassy together with the permanent delegation to UNESCO, and timed to the fourth anniversary of the occupation of Crimea. Evidence of the threat of destruction of the Khan’s Palace, due to the barbarian “restoration” works carried out by the Crimean occupying au-thorities, was presented to members of the UNESCO Secretariat and the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), the permanent delegations to the UNESCO, and to the public.Qirim - a documentary on the subject of the traditions of Crimean Tatars shot covertly in the already occupied Crimea, and direct-ed by Ksenia Zhornokley – was screened in the Culture and Information Centre in Par-is. Yaroslav Lebedynskyy, Lecturer at the National Institute of Oriental Languages and Civilisations (INALCO), acquainted the audience with the history and traditions of Crimean Tatars. A presentation of a book, written by the Crimean journalist Giulnara Bekirova, was held at this year’s Paris Book Salon.The Trial documentary has already twice been screened in Paris – in February and in July – as part of a campaign to free the Ukrainian film-maker Oleh Sentsov who

comes from Crimea. Present at the doc-umentary screening were François Cro-quette, Ambassador for Human Rights, For-eign Ministry of France; Christiane Taubira, ex-Minister of Justice; and Françoise Nys-sen, Culture Minister. This documentary is currently being screened in various regions across France.A vigil in support of Oleh Sentsov was held on 30 July near to the building of the office of the Mayor, in the 4th district of Paris. It brought together representatives of local authorities, members of Parliament, intel-lectuals, and civil society members. This event was organised on the initiative of the Mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, and the Paris 4th District Office of the Mayor, in coopera-tion with the Les Nouveaux Dissidents As-sociation.A campaign launched by the latter is cur-rently gaining momentum on social net-works. It advocates sending postal cards to the French President, Emmanuel Ma-cron, demanding his help in influencing and resolving the situation regarding Oleh Sentsov. Notable authors, public figures, and artists have already participated in this campaign.We respond strongly to any occurrences of an incorrect presentation of information on the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. In Feb-ruary, the Embassy addressed the Eyrolles Bookstore as a result of them offering for sale global maps with an incorrect Crimea. The bookstore responded to the Embassy by confirming their immediate withdrawal of the said global maps. Previous to this, the

Larousee publishing company made cor-rections in the Socio-Economic Atlas 2017 as a result of the efforts taken by the Embassy and the public.I should highlight the actions taken by so-cial activists and Human rights advocates in response to anti-Ukrainian manifestations. The public organised an event to protest at the visit of French parliamentary members to Crimea, and the further promotion in the National Assembly and Senate of reso-lutions on the removal of sanctions from Russia. This street performance took place near the National Assembly of France and Crimee metro station in Paris, with the in-volvement of French actors and Ukrainian activists wearing clothing and accessories with a sea/beach theme. Both the French and Russian media (RFI, FranceInter, 20Minutes, L'Obs; Novaya Gazeta) referred to this event as ‘a visualisa-tion of the true objectives behind the visits of French parliamentary members to occu-pied Crimea’ (Libération), and ‘an elegant trolling aimed at Thierry Mariani’ (RFI).During the second half of October this year, a conference will be held jointly with the Europa Nova think tank, to discuss, among others, such issues as the unlawful occupa-tion of Crimea and Sevastopol and their de-occupation. We expect that leading French politicians, members of parliament, scho-lars, and representatives of the business community and media, will take part in this event.’

Olha Budnyk, Ukrinform, Paris

7# 7 (15) • 2018 / CRIMEA INFORM

CRIMEA IS UKRAINE

A number of atmospheric emissions of an unknown substance from the Crimean Titanium plant occurred in late August/early September in the city of Armiansk in the north of Crimea. It inflicted extensive damage on the population and the environment. The Ukrainian authorities have no access to the occupied peninsula, and cannot clearly identify the causes of this incident. Nevertheless, by drawing attention to the situation, they forced the occupying authorities to evacuate people and cease the harmful production.

On the night of 24 August, the smell of acid was present in the air, and the city was covered by a yellow oily layer. Locals start-ed complaining of throat irritation, and of household plots and kitchen gardens ‘burnt down’. Despite this, the local authorities continued denying the occurrence of any environmental disaster over a period of sev-eral weeks, stating that the level of harmful substances in the air was within the per-mitted limits.From the 29 August, residents of the Chap-lynka district in the Kherson region, locat-ed near to the Crimean Peninsula, started complaining of health problems. Ukrainian services reported a high level of toxic el-ements. Ukrainian border guards at the Chaplynka and Kalanchak checkpoints were poisoned, two out of three exit/entry checkpoints were closed at the entrance to Crimea, and Armiansk residents were en-couraged to seek medical aid at the medical facilities in the Kherson area.Borys Babyn, Permanent Representative of Ukraine’s President in the AR of Crimea, re-ported a critical situation in several villages in the Kherson region bordering on Crimea.

The evacuation of children from seven vil-lages to Skadovsk began.It was not until the 4 September that the Russian occupying power acknowledged the presence of a highly harmful substance in the air in the north of Crimea. Evacuation of children began even later, on the 7 Septem-ber, after a further emission. The operation of the Crimean Titanium plant was brought to a halt on 9 September. On the 14 Septem-ber a further emission of harmful substanc-es into the atmosphere was reported. Only at this point was an emergency situation declared in Armiansk.The so-called Vice Prime Minister of Crimea, Ihor Mykhailychenko, stated that emissions of a harmful substance occurred as a result of the very hot weather – through evaporation. The Crimean occupying au-thorities explained the activation of the evaporation process by the boiling hot sum-mer and the absence of Dnieper water sup-plies via the North Crimean channel.According to the Minister for Temporari-ly Occupied Territories Vadym Chernysh, there is not one single version of what actu-ally occurred at the Crimean Titanium that

can be currently adopted with 100% confi-dence. Resulting from monitoring conduct-ed by the Ministry, the cause is in the enter-prise itself, rather than in the acid storage pool. ‘Most probably, this is a sub-standard operation and a man-made accident,’ Cher-nysh commented regarding the situation. To his mind, Russia is using this environ-mental disaster to force Ukraine to supply water to occupied Crimea.He placed the emphasis on the Ukrainian authorities taking coordinated actions, preventing the occupants from covering up the situation, and forcing them to take the relevant measures.Before the occupation, the plant was owned by the Ukrainian tycoon, Dmytro Firtash, who currently is residing in Austria under house arrest. At the time of the takeover of Crimea by Russia, the business changed its structure, since property control in the peninsula became unmanageable. The Rus-sian occupying power declared Crimean Titanium bankrupt, and after the environ-mental disaster it declared its intention to nationalize it, allegedly to carry out a re-construction.

Environmental disaster in the north of Crimea

Evacuation from Armenian, September 2018

8 CRIMEA INFORM / # 7 (15) • 2018

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE CRIMEA

Ukrainian historian Serhiy Hromenko debunks Russian Myths related to Crimea

HAS CRIMEA ALWAYS BELONGED TO RUSSIA?

One of many of the arguments that Russia uses to justify the annexation of Crimea is that allegedly it belongs to Russia historically. From this point of view, the events of 2014 are viewed as a ‘restoration of historical justice’ and a ‘return to the home harbour’ rather than a seizure of a foreign territory.

‘Dear colleagues, in the hearts and conscienc-es of people, Crimea has always been, and re-mains, an integral part of Russia. This con-viction is based on truth and justice, it was unshakeable and was transferred from gener-ation to generation; time and circumstances, and all the dramatic changes that we and our country experienced throughout the 20th cen-tury were powerless against it.’

V. Putin. Crimean Speech, 18 March 2014

However, since the date when Crimea re-ally became a part of the Russian Empire, i.e. 1783, does not placate the Russian pro-pagandists and spin doctors, they prefer to remain silent on this topic, or manipulate it by means of the medieval history of the peninsula. For example, they used to insist that a part of the Kerch peninsula belonged to an old Russian Tmutarakan principality, and that the ancient Chersonese, seized by Prince Volodymyr in 989, came under the influence of Rus. In this way they legitimise Moscow’s claims to ‘old-Ruthenian heri-tage’.In reality, year after year excavations have proved that modern Kerch and its outskirts never belonged to Rus, and this incorrect data is simply replicated in school text-books and atlases. This concept is shared by Ukrainian and Russian professional histo-rians alike. Similarly, Chersonese, after its conquest by Volodymyr, was returned to Byzantium and never remained under Ky-iv’s rule.Any claims of Crimea being in the posses-sion of Ruthenian princes in the olden times are totally groundless. Thus, an actual ‘Rus-sian period’ in the history of the peninsula only began in 1783, at the time of the first annexation of Crimea and ended in 1954, when it became part of Ukraine.

The Russian rule over the peninsula contin-ued formally for 171 years only, and actually, taking into account the European occupa-tion periods, 4.5 years less, making 5.6% of the total three thousand-year long period of the recorded history of the peninsula. In comparison: the Crimean Khanate definite-ly existed in the peninsula for twice as long.Many foreign journalists and analysts used to make this mistake, accepting in good faith the assertions of Russian propaganda about the ‘two hundred yearlong’, let alone ‘a thousand yearlong’ period of Russia’s rule over Crimea; this period supposedly exceeding the duration of Ukrainian sov-ereignty over the peninsula, thus giving Russia certain ‘historical rights’ to it. In this event, present-day Turkey possesses

even more of so-called ‘historical rights’, since a Sultanate state ruled the peninsula from 1475 through 1774, ie 299 years formal-ly – twice as long as Russia. This example highlights the folly of the appeal regarding the duration of rule of the territory in the dispute on its status.To summarise: Crimea legally fell under Russia in 1783 only, and at no time or in any way earlier, and ceased to be Russian in 1954. Therefore, any assertions about Rus-sia’s long-term historical possession of the peninsula are in no way relevant or correct.

9# 7 (15) • 2018 / CRIMEA INFORM

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE CRIMEA

‘I am ready to pay any price for the love of my Homeland, as well as of my mother and my family.’ This quotation from the last plea of Volodymyr Balukh at the court hearing on 2 July 2018 was reported by a large number of the Ukrainian and the world’s media. Volodymyr had behind him several years of his struggle, against the occupation regime for the right to remain a citizen and patri-ot of his country, and to stand firm with his principles.Behind him was a long record of searches, detentions, court rulings, and also three and a half months of hunger striking. In front of him… Volodymyr did not know what lay there in front of him. He only knew that the occupying power had set in motion an objec-tive to break him at whatever cost. He also knew that he would not break down, nor be-tray his principles, his people, and his land.Also, this truly is his land. Here, in a small village of Serebrianka, in the Rozdolne dis-trict in the north-west of Crimea, he was born in 1971, and attended the local school. On graduating from the Agrarian University in Simferopol, he returned to his home vil-lage and worked as an water supply engineer in the local collective farm. Subsequently he took up farming. Two land plots and a large

household allowed him to make his living and support his elderly mother.Volodymyr was never one to ‘go with the flow’. On the contrary, he was an active champi-on of justice, always seeking to ensure that Ukraine was democratic and successful, and Crimea a wealthy and flourishing area. Twice he ran for the Crimean Parliament, having been nominated by patriotic forces, and always responded to requests of help from his neighbours.‘He has done so much for people. He would never refuse any requests for help in any way. Today, those people remember how Volodia assisted them in resolving various problems and their thanks and gratitude are ongo-ing,’ recollects Natalia, Volodymyr Balukh’s mother.Being a true patriot, Volodymyr Balukh, like many other Crimeans, did not recognise the occupation of Crimea by Russia in 2014. He refused to apply for Russian citizenship, remaining a Ukrainian citizen after March

2014.Most probably it was the sight of the Ukrainian flag waving over Volodymyr Ba-lukh’s house that annoyed the occupying power most of all. The representatives of the occupying authorities tried everything to persuade him and issued threats. Final-ly, realising that words and threats were not enough, they moved on from threats to ac-tions. Twice they removed the flag under the pretext of searching his house.The first time this happened was in April 2015. Law enforcement officers arrived at Volodymyr’s house to carry out a search con-cerning a report received of the theft of trac-tor parts stolen from a neighbouring village. This report and the subsequent search were simply a pretext to put pressure on Volo-dymyr. The next search – in November 2015 – was conducted as part of a different case: Balukh was a ‘suspect’ relating to car theft. Volodymyr was beaten during the search, and was also accused of an alleged insult

A story of the unshakeable. Volodymyr Balukh

10 CRIMEA INFORM / # 7 (15) • 2018

THE TERRITORY OF DISCRIMINATION

made to a representative of the authority. A court sentenced him to forced labour. This sentence was subsequently changed to one of a 40-day imprisonment in an open pris-on. However, despite being under great du-ress and pressure, Volodymyr did not give in. In November 2016, a plaque appeared on his house reading ‘18 Heavenly Hundred Heroes Street’. The Heavenly Hundred Heroes are those who perished during the tragic events in Maidan, standing up for democracy and freedom in Ukraine. Just the mere mention of them causes unrestrained anger within the Russian occupying authorities. They started openly threatening Volodymyr. ‘The Chair of the Village Council, together with the as-sistants, issued warnings that his display of such strong and independent behaviour would result in unfortunate consequences: possibly “finding” Balukh in possession of ammunition or drugs. They demanded that he removed the plate on his house,’ - this is how these events are described in a state-ment by the ‘Memorial’ International Human Rights Centre concerning the recognition of Volodymyr Balukh as a political prisoner.Since these threats had no effect, law en-forcement officers of the aggressor state vis-ited Volodymyr Balukh once again. During a ‘home inspection’ they ‘revealed’ 89 rounds of ammunition from the garret of a village house. Volodymyr was arrested. During the proceedings in the Crimean courts, Balukh’s lawyers reported an unheard-of disregard for law. No requisite expert examinations were carried out, and in particular the ammuni-tion produced was not verified as being live. Whereas the findings of those expert exam-inations that were carried out and resulted in Volodymyr’s favour – those proving the ab-sence of his fingerprints on the ammunition – were disregarded. Nor did the court take into account the testimony of Balukh’s fellow vil-lagers in his favour, and ignored Volodymyr’s

own testimony to the effect that several hours prior to the search he had noticed a stranger coming down from the garret.On 16 January 2018, the Rozdolne District Court in Crimea sentenced Volodymyr Ba-lukh to 3 years 7 months in prison, together with a fine. The Supreme Court of Crimea re-duced the sentence by 2 months. That same day Volodymyr began a hunger strike.The occupying authorities meanwhile were busy investigating another case against Ba-lukh. This was brought by the temporary detention facility warden Valeriy Tkachenko after Volodymyr had been delivered to this facility.Tkachenko insisted that Volodymyr Balukh had attacked him.On 2 July 2018, the Rozdolne District Court in Crimea heard the case on the ‘disorgan-isation of the temporary detention facility operation’ and sentenced Volodymyr Balukh to a cumulative sentence of five years in a standard regime penal colony, together with a fine.‘The Kremlin regime is pathologically scared

by just a single word: “Truth”, being afraid of this even more than gunshot,’ wrote Volody-myr Balukh, sentenced to a five-year term. ‘An unheard-of cynicism in this trial is ev-ident to everyone. Ukraine will continue its struggle with each hostage,’ – that’s how the President, Petro Porosheko, reacted to the latest sentence of a Ukrainian patriot.Volodmyr Balukh is attempting to establish justice in courts. His lawyers continually file appeals on the rulings, despite their beliefs that the occupying power is not capable of dispensing justice. Volodmyr Balukh is not going to ask for a pardon.‘I will not ask Putin to pardon my son. Vova will not understand what I would be trying to do for him. He is completely against seeking a pardon. This would mean pleading guilty. He cannot plead guilty, because he has no guilt.’ Volodymyr’s mother told journalists.The woman is experiencing difficult times. She is unable to leave her house due to ill-ness. She cannot visit her son.Meanwhile, the occupation regime continues putting extreme pressure on the prisoner. In September 2018, Volodymyr, who by that time had been on hunger strike for 181 days, was once again beaten. His health deterio-rated to such extent that he decided to write a Living Will, as reported by the Ukrainian Ombudsman Liudmyla Denisova.Ukraine and the global community continue to struggle for the liberation of Volodymyr Balukh. ‘I am sure that Ukraine will defend and assert its right to live and work in dig-nity on the God-given lands of Crimea and Donbas much quicker than the Kremlin-es-tablished clique expects, and the fact that they have taken our citizens as hostages is to play a significant role in this process,’ Volodymyr Balukh wrote in his letter to the Ukrainian President.

11# 7 (15) • 2018 / CRIMEA INFORM

THE TERRITORY OF DISCRIMINATION

Andriy Senchenko:

‘At that time the Russians were able to occupy Kyiv from the Sumy and Chernihov side, and in fact could do this very easily’

In 2014, Andriy Vilenovych Senchenko was a Deputy Chief of the Ukrainian President’s Administration. He was personally involved in the negotiations aimed at the release of hostages seized in the AR of Crimea. He also organised the evacuation from Crimea of the Ukrainian servicemen and their families, and conducted negotiations concerning the removal of the Ukrainian military equipment from the occupied peninsula.

‘At what point did it become clear to you that there were no further opportunities to counter Russia’s intentions to occupy Crimea?’‘After I fled to Simferopol, arriving by plane on 26 February 2014, I spent a whole day engaged in meetings: with the political authorities of Crimea, Berkut riot police personnel, and Commanding Officers of the internal forces attached to the Crime-an Department of the Internal Ministry. By

the time of my return flight to Kyiv, around 75 Parliament members were ready to vote for a candidate, as suggested by Kyiv, for the role of Prime Minister. There was only one condition relating to this; the candidate should be a resident of Crimea. Interesting-ly, no global issues were raised nor any com-plaints expressed to the Central authorities, throughout these negotiations. The talks were conducted at a, so to say, bargaining level. Each group of Deputies showed their

willingness to vote, however, demanded that certain positions be secured for them. This all changed though on the night of 26/27 February, through the intrusion by the Russian military. It is very plain to me why this happened during that time interval. On 27 February the Ukrainian Parliament had to vote for the formation of the Ukrainian government, ie it was necessary for Ukraine on 27 February to obtain a more or less le-gitimate and viable structure. Russia knew

12 CRIMEA INFORM / # 7 (15) • 2018

DETAILS AND TRENDS

they had to take advantage and seize the moment - and so did.It was still possible to correct the situation on 23–25 February by changing the power in Crimea - and there were enough votes for this. Yet unfortunately intrigues and scheming began. This resulted in Kyiv’s inability to adopt any decision on Crimea within three days – and this played a tragic role. Had a clear-cut decision been taken by Oleksandr Turchinov (the then Acting Pres-ident of Ukraine – Editor’s note) and troops sent to Crimea, we would have held a session to replace Anatoliy Mohyliov (Prime-Minis-ter of the AR of Crimea – Editor’s note), and been ready to peacefully transfer power, whilst waiting for a lawful decision. This did not mean, however, that we would not have faced any problems, and that Russia would have accepted the situation and stopped challenging the status quo. Nevertheless, there was a chance to retain and stabilise Crimea. After the 27 February there also were 2 or 3 days when it was possible, and necessary, to demonstrate our will to stand for Crimea, but this was not done either.I will not assume any responsibility in al-locating blame towards anyone, or in sup-porting a conspiracy theory – all this is just nonsense. I simply saw how all this worked out at that time.’

‘Many people today still cannot find an an-swer to the question why the Army had not acted in defence of Crimea, and whether it was actually capable of doing so?’‘Until 27 February, the country had no Min-ister of Defence and Chief of General Staff. All these accounts about no orders being given to act in defence are untrue. I was personally present in the office of Oleksan-dr Turchinov when we spoke on the phone with the Commandant of the Marine Corps in Kerch inquiring: “Why are you not firing? Do you not have the Guard Regulations? Your military base is being attacked and I order you to fire!” This Commandant sub-sequently switched to the occupiers. This means that Russian intelligence services were to an extent proactive among our troops. Ukrainian military counter-intelli-gence was passive.In addition, we could not bring the army into full action for two reasons: firstly, we did not have sufficient manpower or the or-ganisation, and secondly this would have given Putin the pretext for a full-scale in-vasion. I know for sure that at that time the Russians were able to occupy Kyiv from the side of Sumy and Chernihiv, and in fact could do this very easily. They could justi-

fy such acts, for example, by the deaths of civilians in Crimea. At that time, actually, strong pressure was also exerted on our newly-formed government by Europeans and Americans, politicians and ambassa-dors. They asked us to refrain from firing, saying that they would sort out the situation and resolve it peacefully.’

‘You took up the position of the Deputy Head of the Presidential Administration on 11 March 2014. What tasks lay in front of you? What did you succeed in within the oc-cupied Crimea?’‘My first task was to accomplish the release of 18 hostages held captive by the occupiers. Very difficult negotiations were held. We have, after much effort, succeeded in secur-ing the release of 40 people from captivity. They were exchanged for the Russian Spe-cial Forces operative Roman Filatov. Unfor-tunately, we did not manage to secure the release of every one of the hostages. Oleh Sentsov was listed as number 41 in the hos-tage list, but it was already impossible to get through to him. Sentsov had, by that time, been handed over to the Russian Secret Ser-vice, and they rejected the possibility of any negotiations.’

‘You also managed to remove the service-men and their families from Crimea, and protect the military equipment…’‘Evacuation from the peninsula of our mil-itary together with their families, cadets, and students from the Sevastopol Military educational institutions, and also the re-moval of equipment, were some of the major problems I faced. This procedure was very difficult. The general rule used by occupiers

was as follows: It has been announced that Crimea is an “independent republic”, and all Ukrainian property, including that of the military, has come into the ownership of this “Republic”. Subsequently, Crimea joined Russia with all of this “dowry”. It was therefore extremely difficult to force Russia to give back the equipment.Resulting from these complicated negotia-tions, we were able to remove 3502 units of military equipment and armaments from the peninsula, including 92 planes and he-licopters, all of the tanks and half of the armoured vehicles. The overall cost of this returned property totals almost one billion dollars. The last train containing the mili-tary equipment left Crimea on 16 June 2014. Subsequently Russia shut down any further opportunities. The procedure for removing our ships was extremely difficult, helped by a defector acting on the other side: Denys Berezovskyy (On 1 March 2014, the Ukrainian government appointed him Commander of the Ukrainian Naval Forces, and the next day he defected. – Editor’s note). He was appointed Deputy Commander of the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Federation. He was very active in countering Ukraine’s attempts to remove its military equipment.Aircrafts also posed a problem. Several air-crafts departed from Crimea, after which Russia began demanding that our Foreign Ministry forwards Notes for flights over the territory of a foreign state. In this way, they were trying to force us to recognise Crimea as a territory of another state. Of course we would not agree to this. Later on, a decision was made to only remove the aircrafts dis-assembled.’

13# 7 (15) • 2018 / CRIMEA INFORM

DETAILS AND TRENDS

Tauric Chersonese

Tauric Chersonese, a UNESCO World Heritage landmark, is situated on St Volodymyr’s Cape, near Sevastopol in Crimea. This historic place was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List one year before Crimea’s occupation, in 2013, at the 37th session of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee. Together with Chersonese, inscribed on this list was Chora, the agricultural landscape surrounding it.

St. Volodymyr's Cathedral on the territory of the National Reserve "Chersonese Tavriyskiy"

14 CRIMEA INFORM / # 7 (15) • 2018

HISTORY AND CULTURE

‘Chersonese’ in the old-Greek language stands for ‘peninsula’. It was the name of a city-state founded by Greek settlers from Heraclea. During the ancient times, Cher-sonese was a democratic state and a large trade, artisan, and political centre with its own currency. At the end of the 4th c B.C. the city joined the Byzantine empire. From the 5th through 11th cc, Chersonese was the largest city in the Black Sea northern coast and a significant centre of Byzantine cultureResearch conducted into the Chersonese ruins began in 1827, nearly half a centu-ry after Sevastopol was founded. Revealed during excavations were the remains of Greek, Roman, and Byzantine walls, living quarters, household and artisan structures, more than 50 Christian churches, a theatre (seating 3000), etc. Many burials with their rich possessions were excavated outside of the city walls.

The ‘Taurus Chersonese’ National Reserve – a pearl of Sevastopol and the whole of Crimea – was for many years a site used for research by archaeologists, historians, and ethnographers. However, after the occupa-tion of the peninsula, the Russian govern-ment decided to interfere with the authentic remains of the ancient city, and turn them, according to the Russian President, into ‘an Orthodox Mecca’.Construction works were started within the conservation area. Within this ‘Tauric Chersonese Historical and Archaeological Park’ construction project, already there is a large car parking area, and concrete pedestals on which to stand and showcase the antiquities found. Resulting from these works, the cultural layer has been damaged in many areas. Construction materials and rubbish are scattered close to the site of the ancient settlement. This is despite the

UNESCO regulations prohibiting any con-struction within World Cultural Heritage sites. Only a cautious restoration is allowed. The monument must be preserved with the same appearance in which it was inscribed on the World Heritage List. In the event that these requirements are not complied with, this remarkable cultural site can be with-drawn from the UNESCO List.The complete list of works that are planned to be carried out within the ‘Tauric Cher-sonese’ reserve is hidden from the public. However, experts and international repre-sentatives of the community have already issued their warnings that, through the flagrant interference as regards the ap-pearance of this reserve by the occupying power, this most precious and outstanding cultural landmark of Crimea and the whole of Ukraine, can be removed from UNESCO’s protection list.

The Volodymyr's Cathedral in Chersonesos Tavriyskiy in the Crimea looked like a restoration. Crimea. 1989 year The remains of the columns of the ancient basilica in Chersonese

15# 7 (15) • 2018 / CRIMEA INFORM

HISTORY AND CULTURE

81 instances of Human Rights violations

and abuses were documented during the

reporting period

167 persons became victims of the hu-

man rights violations (among them 34

women and 72 representatives of national

minorities)

RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL

39 instances of the right to a due process

of law and fair trial infringements with re-

gard to 94 persons. In several instances,

such sentences were decided as a punish-

ment for political dissent

19 wrongful arrests and detentions

10 persons were sentenced, based on

Russian laws, for actions committed before

the occupation. 5 sentences were punish-

ment for posts on social networks. Anoth-

er 5 sentences concerned Crimean Tatar

men allegedly involved in ‘mass riots’ on 26

February 2014, before the legislation of the

Russian Federation took effect in Crimea (18

March 2014)

PROPERTY RIGHT

514 land confiscation judgements were

decided in contravention of international

humanitarian law, according to which pri-

vate property is not subject to confiscation

under any circumstances

ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES

OF PERSONS

4 persons still missing

RIGHT TO PHYSICAL AND MENTAL INTEGRITY

7 imprisoned persons were subjected to

torture by means of electric shock, sexual

violence, and by the use of other prohibited

methods

PERSECUTION ON THE GROUNDS OF

NATIONALITY

86% documented property searches and

raids that affected Crimean Tatars, indicat-

ing a pattern suggesting intent on targeting

this group (based on 95 cases documented

from 01.01.2017 through 30.06.2018)

The number of searches conducted during

the first 6 months of 2018 has increased

three times compared with the

same period in 2017

FREEDOM OF OPINION AND RELIGION

3 persons calling for the restoration of

Ukraine to Ukraine’s jurisdiction were sen-

tenced to probation

45% reduction in the number of regis-

tered religious organisations, as compared

to a pre-occupation period

FORCIBLE CONSCRIPTION

5200 men, residents of Crimea, were

conscripted to the Russian army during the

autumn 2017 conscription campaign and

the spring campaign in 2018, in contraven-

tion of international humanitarian law

9 persons were fined up to 20-25 thousand

roubles (320-430 US dollars) for evasion of

military service

RIGHT TO THE MOTHER-TONGUE INSTRUCTION

14% reduction in the number of children

receiving instruction in the Ukrainian lan-

guage (in the 2017/8 school year as compared

to the 2016/7 school year)

UNLAWFUL RESETTLEMENT

512 deportation judgements were made

in 2017 in Crimea and Sevastopol, 287 of

them concerning Ukrainian nationals

13 instances of resettlement to Russia of

Ukrainian nationals detained in Crimea for

trial or serving their sentence, were con-

firmed by the OHCHR during the reporting

period

Situation of Human Rights in the temporary occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea

and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine)Attributed to a Report by the Office of the High Commissioner for

Human Rights: follow-up of UNGA Resolution 72/190

Observation period: 13.09.2017/30.06.2018

‘During the 10 months covered by this report, Crimean residents continued to be subjected to the legal and governance framework of the Russian Federation, in violation

of international humanitarian law. Against this background, the overall human rights situation in Crimea continued to be marked by restrictions in the exercise of

fundamental freedoms and a lack of effective remedies to claim rights and seek justice.’From the findings by the OHCHR

CRIMEA INFORM / # 7 (15) • 2018

IN THE LANGUAGE OF NUMBERS