Why “Crimea – is Ukraine” and any other wording is impossible?

“This article was translated by the CrimeaSOS’s volunteer Sasha Holub”.

During the 8 years of occupation, russia has militarized the Crimean Peninsula as much as possible (including by creating unarmias) and uses it as a springboard for invading mainland Ukraine. And, considering Crimea is already its own, today russia is trying to play a card about its status in the negotiations. Not to mention the fact that over the past 8 years, allegedly liberal russian opinions about the “permissibility” of a second referendum have periodically arisen – so that “Crimea would decide for itself.”

Let’s see why such questions are untenable and have no legal basis. To do this, we will have to go a little deeper into how events have been developing since 2014 and how they corresponded to international law.

Firstly, it all started not in February 2022 but in February 2014.

Speaking in formal terms, russia has violated all known principles of international law, including territorial integrity and inviolability of the borders. russia invaded another state and declared its rights for a part of its territory.

russia is trying to justify its invasion of Crimea with arguments about the restoration of the historical integrity of Rus’. These arguments do not work, and the question is not whether russia likes the decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of February 19, 1954, on the transfer of the Crimean region from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR.

Separately, the following should be noted about the argument on the “historically russian lands” of Crimea.That is, russia even ignored its own historical context: the moment of alleged “reunification” was not calculated from the moment the territory of the peninsula was occupied by the Russian Empire in 1783. Not to mention the fact that the previous centuries-old historical context of the peninsula as the Crimean Khanate was ignored.

The key point is that after the collapse of the USSR, neither Ukraine nor russia had any territorial claims against each other. And by concluding bilateral or multilateral agreements, they recognized each other as equal within the framework of the sovereignty of states over their territories. The most notable examples are the Border Treaty, treaties within the CIS, the UN Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, and others. putin now cannot make any claims because he signed agreements with Ukraine with his hand, where he recognized its integrity and independence. The rest is the search for excuses for a very bad game.

All other arguments are also a perversion of the principles of international law to justify and legitimize their actions. No one in the world, except for a handful of rogue states, fell for these arguments.

Secondly, the first “referendum.”

The formation of new states in violation of the principles of international law and the constitutions of mother states is not allowed. What does it mean?

According to the Constitution of Ukraine, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol are inseparable parts of Ukraine. No acts of the Verkhovna Rada of Crimea could contradict the Constitution of Ukraine. The only option for considering the issue of the territory of Ukraine is an all-Ukrainian referendum.

russia chose the other way. Having settled a puppet government in Crimea, it initiated a pseudo-referendum and quickly included an allegedly new republic in the russian federation.

However, being a part of the territory of Ukraine, Crimea is not an independent subject of international law. It means that the Verkhovna Rada of Crimea could not make decisions such as holding its referendum, withdrawing from Ukraine, and so on. This is what makes all acts proclaimed by the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol since 2014 illegal.

In the third, “lawlessness can not create law”.

There is a principle of jus ex injuria jus non oritur (“law does not arise from injustice”). You can’t steal a refrigerator, put it in the kitchen, fill it with food and declare it your own in six months. The first act committed was an offense.

Similar situation here – russia has already violated international law. russia has already violated the territorial integrity of Ukraine and encroached on its sovereignty. russia has already occupied the Crimean Peninsula in violation of everything possible, established an occupying authority there, and further down the list over the past 8 years.

All actions over the past 8 years of allegedly Crimea (read: russia) are null and void from the legal point of view. Except for the responsibility for their commission. Therefore, it is impossible to consider Crimea today as a separate subject of international law. The only subject who can decide the status of Crimea is the people of Ukraine.