User:Kuban kazak/1954 transfer of Crimea

Introduction

This article is about the transfer of the Crimean Oblast from the Russian SFSR to the Ukrainian SSR. The transfer was conducted by decree of the Supreme Soviet to the Presidium on the 26th of April 1954. Although initially this move was purely administrative and had little effect on the daily life, larger political implications rose later on in 1991 following the fall of the Soviet Union and remains a point of conflict between Russia and Ukraine.

History

Crimea is a peninsula in the middle of the Black Sea that has always been a focal point in Russian history. Renewed for its military glory and past victories, it was always a matter of pride for the Russian people. Originally the peninsula was populated by Crimean Tatars which had their own vassal khanate to the Ottoman Empire, but after the territory was annexed by Russia in the late 18th century, the pininsula was quickly settled by Russian migrants who colonised the land. In 1918 when revolutionary developments took place all of the short-lived Ukrainian states, although claiming the similar history southern land called New Russia nevertheless recognised Russian ownership of Crimea. Following the Bolshevik victory, the Crimean ASSR was founded which represented the Tatar population. In the World War II however the Tatar population was en masse, and the ASSR was downscaled into an Oblast.

Transfer reasons

The original decree stated three reasons: geographic, economic, and cultural closure with Ukrainian SSR.

First, the Crimea territory was physically detached from RSFSR, and the Soviet republican authorities sought that it would be more efficiently administered by the Ukrainian SSR authorities than those of the Russian SFSR.

Second, in 1944 as a part en masse deportation of Crimean Tatars from Crimea, the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was abolished and downscaled into Crimean Oblast inside the RSFSR. For the next 10 years the territory, damaged by the World War II and the deportation of the aboriginal population was lagging in the economic recovery. Already migrant workers from Ukrainian SSR were encouraged to move to Crimea to fill the gap.

Third, Crimea was claimed to be culturally closer to the Ukrainian SSR due to the common history that tied the region with the Southern steppe areas of Ukraine, and due to the fact that it was the Zaporozhian Cossacks that fought Crimea up to the khanates absorption into the Russian Empire. Also in 1954 300 year anniversary of Treaty of Pereyaslav was widely celebrated, and the Crimea transfer was the main part of the celebration.

While not explicitly mentioned in the Decree, two additional explanations are often attributed to the transfer that were most important.

First, the whole territory of the Ukrainian SSR was a battlefield during World War II under and after the war it was recovering from the war devastation. Also by the beginning of the 1950s the combatant nationalist Ukrainian Insurgent Army in Western Ukraine was finally taken into submission. However, pro-nationalist sentiments remained strong, and the transfer can be interpreted as a mark to show that Ukrainians and Russians are still loyal and friendly each to other.

Second, in 1953, following the death of Joseph Stalin, a power neiche was formed for the future control of the government and political struggle between various factions ripped through the Soviet leadership. Nikita Khrushchev, previously head of the Ukrainian Communist Party, had significant support from Ukrainian communists which proved to be critical for his eventual victory. After Khrushchev became the head of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, he found important to repay them with Crimea.

Legal issues

The transfer was executed in three steps. First, the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation proposed the transfer. Second, the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union made the decision by a Decree on April 26 1954. Third, the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR accepted the transfer by a Decree dated June 17 1954.

However, in the context of the 1950s Soviet Laws, the method of the transfer of Crimea violates the Soviet constitution. For any transfer of territory, the highest ruling body of the USSR, the Supreme Soviet, must conduct referendums in both republics, the territory in question, and the whole country. However, this was not done, thus violating the Soviet constitution, which states:

Article 15: The sovereignty of union republics is limited only by the constraints mentioned in article 14 of the constitution of the USSR. Aside from these constraints, each republic can carry out its state power independentely. The USSR defends the rights of union republics (this was not done in the case of RSFSR, thus violating its soveriegnity).
Article 18: Territory of all Union republics may not be changed without their consent.

(Source: The 1936 constitution of the USSR) Also puzzling was the rush with the transfer procedure. The whole decree was prepared in near secrecy, and the residents of Crimea found out that they were part of Ukraine only after the oblast was transferred. Moreover, the decree was prepared in thorough secrecy such that the Crimeans themselves found out that they have been transferred overnight.

The status of Sevastopol

After the liquidation of the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, Sevastopol was a city in the Crimea Oblast.

In 1948 by the Supreme Soviet of the Russian SFSR Decree it was granted the status of a separate administrative unit.

In 1954 the city was transferred with the rest of Crimea from the RSFSR to the Ukrainian SSR. The city was not specifically mentioned in the Supreme Soviet Decree on the transfer.

A controversy exists on the fate of Sevastopol.

The Russian point of view is that at the time of the transfer, Sevastopol was a city of republican subordination, thus was not a part of Crimea Oblast, and thus it was not the subject of the transfer.

The Ukrainian point of view maintains that while Sevastopol was given the status of a separate administrative unit, the city continued to be the part of Crimea Oblast, because in 1954, the status of a separate administrative unit was not exclusive of the Oblast it was a part of . Only in the Soviet and republican Constitutions of 1978 was the status of a city of republican subordinance put in a pair with Oblast status. As of the 1978 Constitution, Moscow and Saint Petersburg were given the city of republican subordinance status in the Russian SFSR, and Kiev and Sevastopol has got the status in the Ukrainian SSR.

Modern implications

The topic is still a major strain in Russo-Ukrainian relations. Today Crimea is still very pro-Russian, unlike other parts of Ukraine, Russian schools are still the most numerous, a substantial part of the population have Russian citizenship. Also Crimea, despite its status of an autonomous republic challenges Ukraine proper's official position of being a unitary state. The current political spectrum of Crimea reflects this. In the 2004 presidential election the more pro-Russian Victor Yanukovich received 81.99% (81.26% in the rerun) of the vote in Crimea and 88.97% (88.83%) in Sevastopol.

Also controversial is the status of the Russian Black Sea Fleet which is stationed in Sevastopol. Over the course of many years the Russian minority have numerously complained to political pressure from Kiev, like the fact that the mayor of Sevastopol is appointed not elected like elsewhere in Ukraine.

References

(in Russian and Ukrainian) Stanislav Kulshytsky (February 14–20, 2004). "To the fiftieth anniversary of the transfer of the Crimean Oblast to the Ukrainian SSR". Zerkalo Nedeli.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: date format (link) Russian and Ukrainian versions available online.