People are starting to ask why one shouldn’t just respect the results of the vote in the Crimea. Here is why.
Imagine that in 2004 you are planning to vote against George W. Bush at the presidential elections. If that is difficult, imagine that you are planning to vote against Barack Obama in the 2012 elections.
A few weeks before the election, federal troops occupy your town. They remove all of the local and municipal authorities, begin to patrol the streets and assault people. You hear daily reports of people who are suspected of not supporting the incumbent being brutalized. The soldiers don’t leave in peace even small children or elderly people, beating them when a suspicion visits them that these citizens might be unsympathetic towards the sitting president. The headquarters of any organization that might be supportive of the opposition are broken into by the troops who destroy the records and beat everybody they find there. You lose your access to the world outside your town. You can’t leave and nobody can enter the area. Your regular means of communication are interfered with.
On the day of the election, you walk down a heavily patrolled street to the voting poll. There, you see that the urn where you are supposed to place your ballot is transparent and the soldier standing next to you will see who you voted for.
Are you sure you would vote as you originally planned in this situation? Do you believe the results of such a vote should be respected?
Clarissa's Blog 
we live in a time when propaganda has been used by just about every group out there, to force their opinion on others, this time it’s crimea, but isn’t the poverty issue in america and elsewhere, more of an issue, it is for those who suffer, and are ignored daily by their own governments and most of the population, amen
LikeLike
There have also been credible reports of dead people voting and pre-marked ballots. Finally, how do you get 93% of the eligible vote when large minorities like the Crimean Tatars (over 12% of the population) are boycotting the vote? The answer is Soviet math.
http://jpohl.blogspot.com/2011/12/soviet-math-two-spies-security-threat.html
LikeLike
“The answer is Soviet math.”
– Oh yes, absolutely.
LikeLike
I’m disappointed Clarissa, who are you to question the will of 123% of the population that voted?
http://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/news/2014/03/17/7019270/
LikeLike
Ah, I see that the Russians are trying to repeat their feat of 2011 when they officially reported 128% of voters voting in one of the regions. 🙂
LikeLike
Soviet math can do that. 😎
LikeLike
I can imagine Putin doing this. 😉
LikeLike
OK you don’t recognize the vote in Crimea after a few weeks of armed control and intimidation. While you did overdo some of the descriptions (like no one is really prevented from leaving, entering is the problem), in general the position is fair enough. I’m no fan of that vote either, perhaps for somewhat different reasons.
I just wonder if you similarly reject independence of Kosovo, which was achieved after *years* of Islamist and NATO armed control and intimidation.
LikeLike
This inane comparison with Kosovo was made by Putin today. What are you, a Putinoid? There is nothing even remotely similar between these situations. The Crimea did not achieve any independence. It was annexed by Russia today.
LikeLike
The fact that Putin, or Obama, or whoever else makes a statement does not make it right or wrong in itself. The comparison was up in the air for weeks before Putin adopted it. In fact it worked better until today’s annexation (which I see as a bad step and I’m not just saying it here; that much for “Putinoid”).
Kosovo was a part of Serbia. It was separated from Serbia by a violent Islamist group which was supported, for its own reasons, by NATO, which proceeded to bomb Serbia over false accusations of ethnic cleansing and to occupy Kosovo. After some years of military intimidation on the ground, when the Serbian and pro-Serbian minorities were marginalized, dispossessed, and sometimes outright killed, formal independence took place. So the parallel is exactly in the parts you pointed out – the effective disenfranchisement of those opposing the move by means of military control. Obviously the timescale is different.
I was firmly against NATO actions in Kosovo before I heard the name Putin for the first time. And, yes, it appears that Putin has accepted the NATO-set precedent today 😦
I hope that he can at least keep it bloodless unlike what NATO did in Kosovo, but honestly after the annexation the chance is much lower for that. If he did not annex he could use the existing position to bargain for a federal Ukraine, which would also relieve the people in the Southeast. He threw away the bargaining in favour of getting Crimea, but now there is apparently nothing to stop the “Right Sector” from gaining free rein in the Southeast – and any Russian invasion of that part would obviously NOT be bloodless. (Nor would it be a good idea).
So no, I’m not happy with the line Putin took.
I would still be happy to know your position on Kosovo. All I want is the same standards applied to Russia and the States. And by the standards I apply, at this point (after the annexation declaration) both fail. I guess it’s “Abby Martin for president” for me…
LikeLike
“f he did not annex he could use the existing position to bargain for a federal Ukraine, which would also relieve the people in the Southeast”
– Relieve them from what exactly???
“I would still be happy to know your position on Kosovo.”
–I wrote about Serbia here and really prefer to keep any discussion of that country separate from what is going on in Ukraine. The two situations couldn’t be more different.
LikeLike
“Relieve them from what exactly???”
From the Right Sector having free rein on their streets like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6u-ZFL8uTEE
From Ms. Farion making language laws for them (she is a prominent member of the rump parliament’s commission on the issue), forcing them to use a language they do not fully grasp in all interaction with the State and in education. (I’d say the Quebec Canadians or Finnish Swedish-speakers would not be happy in their shoes).
Please note I wrote that federalization of Ukraine, *not* a Russian military presence, would relieve them. A military presence can very well make the issues worse, and can very well cause bloodshed in and of itself.
I’ve read through the post but it says nothing of Kosovo. I’d like to understand why they “couldn’t be more different”, other that an “Americans good Russians bad” perspective (which is no better than an “Americans bad Russians good” one).
LikeLike
“From the Right Sector having free rein on their streets”
– Come on, let’s not be ridiculous.
“rom Ms. Farion making language laws for them (she is a prominent member of the rump parliament’s commission on the issue), forcing them to use a language they do not fully grasp in all interaction with the State and in education.”
– Ukrainian has been the only state language of Ukraine in the past 20 years. Nobody has suffered in the process. If you believe that there are citizens of Ukraine who “don’t grasp” Ukrainian, then you are very confused.
“(I’d say the Quebec Canadians or Finnish Swedish-speakers would not be happy in their shoes).”
– You do seem very dedicated to comparing things that are vastly different. Are you not aware of why the Russian/Ukrainian language pair cannot be compared to French/English?
“other that an “Americans good Russians bad” perspective”
– Can you provide quotes from me where I adopt this perspective? Please understand that I expect either an exact quote from me or an apology. There are few things I dislike more than people ascribing weird opinions too me and then condemning me for them.
LikeLike