Russia-Crimea-Ukraine
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Calhoun, Institutional Archive of the Naval Postgraduate School Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 2008-03 The Crimean Tatars and their influence on the 'triangle of conflict' Russia-Crimea-Ukraine Davydov, Igor. Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/4255 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS THE CRIMEAN TATARS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON THE ‘TRIANGLE OF CONFLICT’ — RUSSIA-CRIMEA-UKRAINE by Igor Davydov March 2008 Thesis Advisor: Mikhail Tsypkin Thesis Co-Advisor: Daniel Moran Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202- 4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED blank) March 2008 Master’s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE: The Crimean Tatars and Their Influence on the 5. FUNDING NUMBERS ‘Triangle of Conflict’ — Russia-Crimea-Ukraine 6. AUTHOR(S) Igor Davydov 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING Naval Postgraduate School ORGANIZATION REPORT Monterey, CA 93943-5000 NUMBER 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING ADDRESS(ES) AGENCY REPORT NUMBER N/A 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. 12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12B. DISTRIBUTION CODE Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words) The dissolution of the Soviet Union brought about multidimensional problems to the former republics of the USSR and their inhabitants. In 1990s Ukraine, Crimea became a center of conflict between Ukraine and Russia over the former Soviet Black Sea Fleet and Crimea itself, perceived as historically their own by both sides of the conflict. Local Crimean authorities took advantage of the specificity of a demographic situation in Crimea were Ukrainians, the titular nation, are in minority and considerably Russified to claim for autonomy. Later, they attempted to secede from Ukraine. At the same time, the Crimean Tatar influx from exile, orchestrated by the Stalin regime in 1944, further exacerbated the ‘triangle of conflict’ between the dyads Russia-Ukraine and Crimea-Ukraine. The Crimean Tatars, currently 12 percent of the Crimean population, proclaimed Crimea the national territory of the Crimean Tatar people, on which they alone possess the right to self government and claimed greater rights for themselves as allegedly the most indigenous peoples in Crimea, while the rest are colonizers. The thesis explains the historical developments in Crimea and attempts to draw implications to the Ukrainian government in dealing with Crimean Tatar nationalism which seems to be overcoming the problems within the ‘triangle of conflict’ that was so sharp in 1990s. 14. SUBJECT TERMS Ukraine, Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Crimea, Crimean 15. NUMBER OF Tatars, Black Sea Fleet, Autonomy, Indigenous Peoples PAGES 137 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF THIS CLASSIFICATION DISTRIBUTION REPORT PAGE OF ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UU i THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THE CRIMEAN TATARS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON THE ‘TRIANGLE OF CONFLICT’ —RUSSIA-CRIMEA-UKRAINE Igor Davydov Lieutenant Colonel, Ukrainian Army B.S., Kam’yanets-Podil’s’kyi Higher Military Engineering Command School, 1993 Specialist, Kyiv National Economic University, 2006 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN SECURITY STUDIES (CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS) from the NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL March 2008 Author: Igor Davydov Approved by: Mikhail Tsypkin Thesis Advisor Daniel Moran Thesis Co-Advisor Harold A. Trinkunas Chairman, Department of National Security Affairs iii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK iv ABSTRACT The dissolution of the Soviet Union brought about multidimensional problems to the former republics of the USSR and their inhabitants. In 1990s Ukraine, Crimea became a center of conflict between Ukraine and Russia over the former Soviet Black Sea Fleet and Crimea itself, perceived as historically their own by both sides of the conflict. Local Crimean authorities took advantage of the specificity of a demographic situation in Crimea where Ukrainians, the titular nation, are in the minority and considerably Russified to claim for autonomy. Later, they attempted to secede from Ukraine. At the same time, the Crimean Tatar influx from exile, orchestrated by the Stalin regime in 1944, further exacerbated the ‘triangle of conflict’ between the dyads Russia-Ukraine and Crimea-Ukraine. The Crimean Tatars, currently 12 percent of the Crimean population, proclaimed Crimea the national territory of the Crimean Tatar people, on which they alone possess the right to self government and claimed greater rights for themselves as allegedly the most indigenous people in Crimea, while the rest are colonizers. This thesis explains the historical developments in Crimea and attempts to draw implications to the Ukrainian government in dealing with Crimean Tatar nationalism which seems to be overcoming the problems within the ‘triangle of conflict,’ that was so sharp in the 1990s. v THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK vi TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 A. PURPOSE.........................................................................................................1 B. IMPORTANCE................................................................................................2 C. LITERATURE REVIEW ...............................................................................4 1. Survey of Prior Work on the Question ..............................................4 2. Major Questions and Debate ..............................................................6 D. METHODOLOGY AND SOURCES.............................................................7 E. THESIS SYNOPSIS ........................................................................................8 II. BRIEF HISTORY OF CRIMEA................................................................................9 A. CRIMEA AND CONTIGUOUS AREAS IN EARLY HISTORY ............10 1. Prehistoric Times ...............................................................................10 2. Crimea and Kievan Rus’...................................................................11 3. The Mongols, Golden Horde and Crimea........................................12 B. THE KHANATE OF CRIMEA....................................................................13 C. CRIMEA UNDER RUSSIA’S RULE ..........................................................15 D. CRIMEA IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY ...........................................18 1. Crimea After the 1917 Revolution and During the Civil War.......18 2. Crimea in the Soviet Union ...............................................................19 3. Crimea as Part of Independent Ukraine..........................................21 E. CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................22 III. CRIMEA’S IMPORTANCE TO SECURITY IN THE BLACK SEA REGION .....................................................................................................................23 A. SYMBOLIC AND STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF CRIMEA FOR RUSSIA AND UKRAINE .............................................................................23 1. Importance of Crimea to Turkey .....................................................24 2. Importance of Crimea to Russia.......................................................26 a. Ethnic Importance of Crimea.................................................26 b. Military Importance of Crimea...............................................27 c. Historic and Symbolic Importance of Crimea .......................28 d. Economic Importance of Crimea ...........................................29 3. Importance of Crimea to Ukraine....................................................30 a. Political Importance of Crimea ..............................................30 b. Economic Importance of Crimea ...........................................31 c. Strategic Importance of Crimea .............................................32 B. UKRAINE’S POLICY IN CRIMEA SINCE 1991 .....................................33 1. Developments in Ukraine – Crimea Context before 2004..............33 2. Developments in Ukraine–Crimea Relations Since 2004 ...............39