Without question the most important event of the year for the Crimean peninsula was the 'Crimean Spring'. What exactly happened here, in your view?
Alexandr Formanchuk: This year has opened a new chapter in the history of the Crimea. Our descendants will read about what happened in textbooks; academics will analyze the events of February and March in detail. An era comes to an end when the last remaining delusions about the previous era end, when we are stripped of our illusions.
Let us recall the turbulent beginning of 2014, associated with the Euromaidan in Kiev. Events unfolded rapidly, and competent analysts foresaw that a new era was coming to pass. At that time Ukraine had exhausted its possibilities for development in the post-Soviet period; it was no longer possible to live off the legacy the country had been given in the Soviet era. Ukraine had been one of the richest and most developed republics of the Soviet Union, but had turned into one of the poorest and worst off on a wide range of issues.
Crimeans have always considered their peninsula as a special territory. Ukraine seems to have considered it otherwise.
Alexandr Formanchuk: Ukraine considered Crimea as a 'separatist' region. We were distrusted, condescended to and treated with irritation because Crimeans always held to their own position. Kiev deliberately created conditions under which the economy of Crimea and its infrastructure would be maximally dependent upon Ukraine. In the Soviet period, Crimea was a self-sufficient region, especially in agriculture. As part of the USSR we cultivated fruits and vegetables, developed viticulture, livestock and poultry production, and supplied all these goods in large quantities to other regions across the country.
As part of [independent] Ukraine Crimea became a depleted region, regarded by wealthy Kiev deputies who bought up the peninsula's southern land for a pittance as their summer garden, building a series of haphazardly placed elite cottages. Crimea had a choice –to resign itself to the status of economic outsider as part of Ukraine, or to hope for a miracle.
And a miracle occurred…
Alexandr Formanchuk: Yes, and it occurred as a result of Ukrainian politicians' own dismissive attitude toward Crimea. They helped us to maintain a mood of healthy Russian conservativism. It is for this reason that the 'Crimean Spring' manifested itself so energetically; it's as if people had come to expect it, and to take advantage of the situation correctly when it happened.
So Crimean have always shown sympathy toward pro-Russian politicians?
Alexandr Formanchuk: Always. But such politicians risked becoming outcasts in Ukrainian society. Recall the peninsula's resistance to the [2004] Orange Revolution; these are the events which fundamentally undermined the foundations of trust between Crimea and Kiev. It was at that time that we came to understand that we are different –that our political majority preferred a different development path. Yushchenko was focused on working out his political relationship with Tymoshenko, the parliament doing the same with the government. The authorities did not have time or interest in us, and Crimea's budget in those years was the lowest in the country.
And then 2014 began –the second Maidan. Ukraine set out on the path of an anti-Russian project. Crimeans understood that we must go another way. Sergei Aksenov created self-defense units in late February. The Crimean parliament sounded the alarm. Some laughed, and said that our desire for self-determination was unrealistic, but current speaker of the parliament Vladimir Konstantinov continued on with a stubborn steadfastness. It was only later that we realized how important these steps had been.
There exists the opinion that if Crimea had not joined Russia, the peninsula would repeat the Kosovo scenario –that in addition to the political question the national question would arise as well.
Alexandr Formanchuk: The worst thing that the Ukrainian authorities did was to begin to play the card of the Crimean Tatars as their most active and consistent allies in the confrontation with Russia, thereby driving a wedge between the Crimean Tatars on the one hand and everyone else on the other. This is the worst thing that happened, and we still have not completely resolved this problem. We are well aware that the Crimean scenario could have been much larger and more terrible than the one which has unfolded in south-eastern Ukraine. I do not want to exaggerate; history does not allow for 'what ifs'; let me just thank God that none of this occurred.
When we joined Russia, [Russian authorities] were well aware that it would be necessary to defuse this negative mood, to minimize it as much as possible. And so one of the first decrees by the president was the decree on rehabilitation. When we received the draft bill, there was no mention of Armenians, Bulgarians or other deported nationalities. We made our own suggestions, which were quickly and positively reacted to by the Russian presidential administration. And we thank them for their support. By the way, even by the name of the decree it is clear, that this document stands for tolerance, since the nations in it are listed in alphabetical order.
Crimean Tatars must be made to feel that within the Russian Federation they will be given the same respect as the rest of the country's nationalities. 193 nationalities live in Russia. The state can come to exist, to develop and to persevere only on the principles of equal rights. It is not right to give speculative promises, as was done in Ukraine, showing special treatment to one nation. In joining Russia, we understood that we would be maintaining peace and harmony among the peoples living in the Crimea. It was psychologically easy for us to join a multinational state, because from the very beginning we considered this situation normal and natural. We felt that in Russia people of every ethnic group are respected, that there are no favorites, and we therefore feel comfortable as far as the interethnic dimension is concerned.
What else do you believe the success of the 'Crimean Spring' was dependent upon?
Alexandr Formanchuk: There exists a famous phrase –that events make the man. I believe that in due time the appearance of Sergei Aksenov will be so characterized. I had told him that such times awaited him. He was not afraid to take responsibility upon himself, to be bold and resolute. I remember the uncertainty: 'What if we voted for independence and get stuck in an uncertain status, like South Ossetia and Transnistria?', 'What if Russia doesn't support us?' People were afraid, and were uncertain. But in choosing to believe in Aksenov, they achieved what may have seemed impossible.
After that came the period for routine work. There were no precedents to base our work on –it was necessary to do everything from scratch. Of course we didn't always have enough time: queues formed for passports, for the reregistration of property and vehicles. But take note that there was no picketing or demonstrations. There is a sense of fatigue, of irritation; not everything is occurring as quickly or as smoothly as we might like. But people understand that all the queues and inconveniences are compensated by guarantees of personal safety. They continue to believe Sergei Aksenov.
Do you agree with the statement made by the president that Crimeans are not at fault for sanctions against Russia?
Alexandr Formanchuk: President Putin has consistently, patriotically and competently protected Crimea in the eyes of those who may try to use our peninsula as a detonator in a turbulent environment. One can only stand in awe of his skillful navigation of the situation. For this reason Crimeans trust the president. His rating on the peninsula stands at 93-94 percent. Crimea has not only not reduced Russia's possibilities or become a burden for her, but on the contrary, has contributed to an explosion of patriotism, of consolidation of Russian society, of rallying around the president. And this is the main guarantee that we will survive in a complex world, and find answers to the challenges that have been brought to bear against Russia. The return of the Crimea to Russia has strengthened its potential in the international arena. Russia does a lot for Crimea, and now it's our turn to respond with gratitude.
Crimea has charged people throughout the country with a sense of true patriotism, and now there are questions coming to the fore of a spiritual nature, of a social nature…
Yes, questions, such as the ability to defend family values, which fit well with Crimean tradition, are coming to the fore. Today Crimean patriotism is becoming is an important part of all-Russian patriotism.
Questions of national consolidation, of Russian conservativism in its positive sense are becoming leading issues for the country. And these are our guarantors for the long term –which will allow us to become stronger and to provide for a descent life, built not on the standards of consumer society, as in the West, but a worthy, dignified life –so that people would not lack anything that makes life comfortable.
And Russia is capable of providing this [to its people], although there doubtlessly exist problems –corruption, sanctions, fluctuations in the value of the ruble. This process is painful, but Russia is on the right path. We understand that the United States will put up a fight and put us at a disadvantage in financial and economic terms. But already today it is becoming clear that this does not inspire fear in us, because we are patriots and we are proud of our great country.
What would you like to wish everyone in the New Year?
I would wish that people will not be disappointed in the historic choice they made on March 16; that they continue to believe that a great country has joined with us, that with our return we too will help to expand her horizons. And our country will become the engine of world history. The world today is changing, and someone must take responsibility upon himself, to know how to take the right risks, and Russia is capable of doing this. We have a worthy president, a great people, rich historical traditions. We Crimeans are rich like no one else. But we are not selfish; we are ready to share with everyone who approaches us with understanding, and who is ready to lend us a hand of friendship. And because of this we have a great future ahead of us.
I would like to wish Crimeans faith, hope, that each of us plays his or her part in building the prosperity of Russia together with Crimea. Happy New Year!
