March 18, 2014
The Kremlin, Moscow
Address by President of the Russian Federation.
Vladimir Putin addressed State Duma deputies, Federation
Council members, heads of Russian regions and civil society representatives in
the Kremlin.
PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN:
Federation Council members, State Duma deputies, good
afternoon.
Representatives
of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol are here among us, citizens of Russia,
residents of Crimea and Sevastopol!
Dear friends, we have gathered here today in connection with
an issue that is of vital, historic significance to all of us.
A referendum was held in Crimea on March
16 in full compliance with democratic procedures and international norms.
More than 82 percent of the electorate took part in the
vote. Over 96 percent of them spoke out in favour of reuniting with Russia.
These numbers speak for themselves.
To understand the reason behind such a choice it is enough
to know the history of Crimea and what Russia and Crimea have always meant for
each other.
Everything in Crimea speaks of our shared history and pride.
This is the location of ancient Khersones, where Prince
Vladimir was baptised. His spiritual feat of adopting Orthodoxy predetermined
the overall basis of the culture, civilisation and human values that unite the
peoples of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. The graves of Russian soldiers whose
bravery brought Crimea into the Russian empire are also in Crimea.
This is also Sevastopol – a
legendary city with an outstanding history, a fortress that serves as the
birthplace of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet.
Crimea is Balaklava and Kerch, Malakhov Kurgan and Sapun Ridge.
Each one of these places is dear to our hearts, symbolising Russian military
glory and outstanding valour.
Crimea is a unique blend of
different peoples’ cultures and traditions. This makes it similar to Russia as
a whole, where not a single ethnic group has been lost over the centuries.
Russians and Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars and people of other
ethnic groups have lived side by side in Crimea, retaining their own identity,
traditions, languages and faith.
Incidentally, the total population of the Crimean Peninsula
today is 2.2 million people, of whom almost 1.5 million are Russians, 350,000
are Ukrainians who predominantly consider Russian their native language, and
about 290,000-300,000 are Crimean Tatars, who, as the referendum has shown,
also lean towards Russia.
True, there was a time when Crimean
Tatars were treated unfairly, just as a number of other peoples in the USSR.
There is only one thing I can say here: millions of people of various ethnicities suffered during
those repressions, and primarily Russians.
Crimean Tatars returned to their homeland. I believe we
should make all the necessary political and legislative decisions to finalise
the rehabilitation of Crimean Tatars, restore them in their rights and clear
their good name.
We have great respect for people of all the ethnic groups
living in Crimea.
This is their common home, their motherland, and it would be
right – I know the local population supports this – for Crimea to have three equal national languages: Russian, Ukrainian and
Tatar.
Colleagues,
In people’s hearts and minds, Crimea has always been an
inseparable part of Russia. This firm conviction is based on truth and justice
and was passed from generation to generation, over time, under any
circumstances, despite all the dramatic changes our
country went through during the entire 20th century.
After the revolution, the
Bolsheviks, for a number of reasons – may God judge them – added large
sections of the historical South of Russia to the Republic of Ukraine.
This was done with no consideration for the ethnic make-up
of the population, and today these areas form the southeast of Ukraine.
Then, in 1954, a decision was made
to transfer Crimean Region to Ukraine, along with Sevastopol, despite
the fact that it was a federal city.
This was the personal initiative of
the Communist Party head Nikita Khrushchev.
What stood behind this decision of
his – a desire to win the support of the Ukrainian political
establishment
or to atone for the mass repressions of
the 1930’s in Ukraine –
is for historians to figure out.
What matters now is that this decision was made in clear
violation of the constitutional norms that were in place even then. The
decision was made behind the scenes.
Naturally, in a totalitarian state
nobody bothered to ask the citizens of Crimea and Sevastopol.
They were faced with the fact. People, of course, wondered
why all of a sudden Crimea became part of Ukraine.
But on the whole – and we must state this clearly, we all
know it – this decision was treated as a formality of sorts because the territory was transferred within the boundaries of a
single state.
Back then, it was impossible to
imagine that Ukraine and Russia may split up and become two separate states.
However, this has happened.
UNFORTUNATELY, WHAT SEEMED
IMPOSSIBLE BECAME A REALITY.
THE
USSR FELL APART.
Things developed so swiftly that few people realised how
truly dramatic those events and their consequences would be.
Many people both in Russia and in Ukraine, as well as in
other republics hoped that the Commonwealth of Independent
States that was created at the time would become
the new common form of statehood.
They were told that there would be a
single currency, a single economic space, joint armed forces;
however, all this remained empty
promises, while the big country was gone.
IT WAS ONLY WHEN CRIMEA ENDED UP AS
PART OF A DIFFERENT COUNTRY THAT RUSSIA REALISED THAT IT WAS NOT SIMPLY ROBBED,
IT WAS PLUNDERED.
At the same time, we have to admit
that by launching the SOVEREIGNTY PARADE Russia itself aided in the collapse of
the Soviet Union.
And as this collapse was legalised,
everyone forgot about Crimea and Sevastopol – the main base of the Black Sea
Fleet.
Millions of people went to bed in
one country and awoke in different ones, overnight becoming ethnic minorities
in former Union republics, while the Russian nation became one of the biggest,
if not the biggest ethnic group in the world to be divided by borders.
Now, many years later, I heard residents of Crimea say that
back in 1991 they were handed over like a sack of potatoes.
This is hard to disagree with.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE RUSSIAN STATE?
WHAT ABOUT RUSSIA?
It humbly accepted the situation.
This country was going through such
hard times then that realistically it was incapable of protecting its interests.
However, the people could not reconcile themselves to this
outrageous historical injustice.
All these years, citizens and many public figures came back
to this issue, saying that Crimea is historically Russian land and Sevastopol
is a Russian city.
Yes, we all knew this in our hearts and minds, but we had to proceed from the existing reality and build our
good-neighbourly relations with independent Ukraine on a new basis.
Meanwhile, our relations with Ukraine, with the fraternal
Ukrainian people have always been and will remain of foremost importance for
us.
Today we can speak about it openly,
and I would like to share with you some details of the negotiations that took
place in the early 2000s.
The then President of Ukraine Mr
Kuchma asked me to expedite the process of delimiting the
Russian-Ukrainian border.
At that time, the process was practically at a
standstill.
Russia seemed to have recognised Crimea as part of Ukraine,
but there were no negotiations on delimiting the borders.
Despite the complexity of the situation, I immediately
issued instructions to Russian government agencies to speed up their work to
document the borders, so that everyone had a clear
understanding that by agreeing to delimit the border we admitted de facto and
de jure that Crimea was Ukrainian territory, thereby closing the issue.
We accommodated Ukraine not only regarding Crimea, but also
on such a complicated matter as the maritime boundary in the Sea of Azov and
the Kerch Strait.
What we proceeded from back then was that good relations
with Ukraine matter most for us and they should not fall hostage to deadlock
territorial disputes.
However, we expected Ukraine to
remain our good neighbour, we hoped that Russian citizens and Russian
speakers in Ukraine, especially its southeast and Crimea, would live in a
friendly, democratic and civilised state that would protect their rights in line
with the norms of international law.
However, this is not how the situation developed.
Time and time again attempts were
made to deprive Russians of their historical memory, even of their language and
to subject them to forced assimilation.
Moreover, Russians, just as other citizens of Ukraine are
suffering from the constant political and state crisis that has been rocking
the country for over 20 years.
I understand why Ukrainian people wanted change.
They have had enough of the authorities in power during the
years of Ukraine’s independence.
Presidents, prime ministers and parliamentarians changed,
but their attitude to the country and its people remained the same.
They milked the country,
fought among themselves for power, assets and cash flows and did not care much
about the ordinary people.
They did not wonder why it was that
millions of Ukrainian citizens saw no prospects at home and went to other
countries to work as day labourers.
I would like to stress this: it was
not some Silicon Valley they fled to, but to become day labourers.
Last year alone almost 3 million people found such jobs in
Russia.
According to some sources, in 2013 their earnings in Russia
totalled over $20 billion, which is about 12% of Ukraine’s GDP.
I would like to reiterate that I
understand those who came out on Maidan with peaceful slogans against
corruption, inefficient state management and poverty.
The right to peaceful protest,
democratic procedures and elections exist for the sole purpose of replacing the
authorities that do not satisfy the people.
However, those who stood behind the
latest events in Ukraine had a different agenda:
they were preparing yet another government takeover;
they wanted to seize power and would
stop short of nothing.
They resorted to terror, murder and
riots.
Nationalists, neo-Nazis, Russophobes and anti-Semites
executed this coup.
They continue to set the tone in Ukraine to this day.
The new so-called authorities began
by introducing a draft law to revise the language policy, which was a
direct infringement on the rights of ethnic minorities.
However, they were immediately ‘disciplined’
by the foreign sponsors of these so-called politicians.
One has to admit that the mentors of these current
authorities are smart and know well what such attempts to build a purely
Ukrainian state may lead to.
The draft law was set aside, but clearly reserved for the
future.
Hardly any mention is made of this attempt now, probably on
the presumption that people have a short memory.
Nevertheless, we can all clearly see
the intentions of these ideological
heirs of Bandera, Hitler’s accomplice during World War II.
It is also obvious that there is no legitimate executive
authority in Ukraine now, nobody to talk to.
Many government agencies have been taken over by the
impostors, but they do not have any control in the country, while they
themselves – and I would like to stress this – are often controlled by
radicals.
In some cases, you need a special
permit from the militants on Maidan to meet with certain ministers of
the current government. This is not a joke – this is reality.
Those who opposed the coup were
immediately threatened with repression.
Naturally, the first in line here was Crimea, the
Russian-speaking Crimea.
In view of this, the residents of Crimea and Sevastopol
turned to Russia for help in defending their rights and lives, in preventing
the events that were unfolding and are still underway in Kiev, Donetsk, Kharkov
and other Ukrainian cities.
Naturally, we could not leave this plea unheeded; we could not abandon Crimea and its residents in distress.
This would have been betrayal on our part.
First, we had to help create
conditions so that the residents of Crimea for the first time in history were
able to peacefully express their free will regarding their own future.
However, what do we hear from our
colleagues in Western Europe and North America?
THEY SAY WE ARE VIOLATING NORMS OF
INTERNATIONAL LAW.
Firstly, it’s a good thing that they
at least remember that there exists such a thing as international law – better
late than never.
Secondly, and most importantly – what exactly are we
violating?
True, the President of the Russian
Federation received permission from the Upper House of Parliament to use the
Armed Forces in Ukraine.
However, strictly speaking, nobody has acted on this
permission yet.
Russia’s Armed Forces never entered
Crimea; they were there already in line with an international agreement.
True, we did enhance our forces
there; however – this is something I would like everyone to hear and
know – we did not exceed the personnel limit of our
Armed Forces in Crimea, which is set at 25,000, because there was no need to do
so.
Next. As it declared independence
and decided to hold a referendum, the Supreme Council of Crimea referred to the
United Nations Charter, which speaks of the right of nations to
self-determination.
Incidentally, I would like to remind
you that when Ukraine seceded from the USSR it did exactly the same thing, almost
word for word.
Ukraine used this right, yet the
residents of Crimea are denied it. Why
is that?
Moreover, the Crimean authorities
referred to the well-known Kosovo precedent
– a precedent our western colleagues
created with their own hands in a very similar situation,
when they agreed that the unilateral separation of Kosovo
from Serbia, exactly what Crimea is doing now, was legitimate and did not
require any permission from the country’s central authorities.
Pursuant to Article 2, Chapter 1 of the United Nations
Charter, the UN International Court agreed with this approach and made the
following comment in its ruling of July 22, 2010, and I quote:
“No general prohibition may be inferred from the practice of
the Security Council with regard to declarations of independence,”
and
“General international law contains no prohibition on
declarations of independence.”
Crystal clear, as they say.
I do not like to resort to quotes, but in this case, I
cannot help it. Here is a quote from another official document:
the Written Statement of the United
States America of April 17, 2009, submitted to the same UN International
Court in connection with the hearings on Kosovo. Again, I quote:
“DECLARATIONS OF INDEPENDENCE MAY,
AND OFTEN DO, VIOLATE DOMESTIC LEGISLATION. HOWEVER, THIS DOES NOT MAKE THEM
VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.”
End of quote.
They wrote this, disseminated it all
over the world, had everyone agree and now they are outraged. Over what?
The actions of Crimean people completely fit in with these
instructions, as it were.
For some reason, things that Kosovo Albanians (and we have
full respect for them) were permitted to do, Russians, Ukrainians and Crimean
Tatars in Crimea are not allowed.
Again, one wonders why.
We keep hearing from the United
States and Western Europe that Kosovo is some special case.
What makes it so special in the eyes of our colleagues?
It turns out that it is the fact that the conflict in Kosovo
resulted in so many human casualties.
Is this a legal argument? The ruling of the International
Court says nothing about this.
THIS IS NOT EVEN DOUBLE STANDARDS;
THIS IS AMAZING, PRIMITIVE, BLUNT CYNICISM.
One should not try so crudely to make everything suit their
interests, calling the same thing white today and black tomorrow.
According to this logic, we have to
make sure every conflict leads to human losses.
I will state clearly - if the Crimean local self-defence
units had not taken the situation under control, there could have been
casualties as well.
Fortunately this did not happen. There was not a single
armed confrontation in Crimea and no casualties.
Why do you think this was so? The answer is simple: because
it is very difficult, practically impossible to fight against the will of the
people.
Here I would like to thank the
Ukrainian military – and this is 22,000 fully armed servicemen. I would like to
thank those Ukrainian service members who refrained from bloodshed and did not
smear their uniforms in blood.
Other thoughts come to mind in this connection.
They keep talking of some Russian
intervention in Crimea, some sort of aggression.
This is strange to hear. I cannot recall a single case in
history of an intervention without a single shot being fired and with no human
casualties.
Colleagues,
Like a mirror, the situation in
Ukraine reflects what is going on and what has been happening in the world over
the past several decades.
AFTER THE DISSOLUTION OF BIPOLARITY
ON THE PLANET, WE NO LONGER HAVE STABILITY.
Key international institutions are not getting any stronger;
on the contrary, in many cases, they are sadly degrading.
OUR WESTERN PARTNERS, LED BY THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PREFER NOT TO BE GUIDED BY INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THEIR
PRACTICAL POLICIES, BUT BY THE RULE OF THE GUN.
They have come to believe in their exclusivity
and exceptionalism, that they can decide the
destinies of the world, that only they can ever be right.
They act as they please:
here and there, they use force against sovereign states,
building coalitions based on the principle “If you are not
with us, you are against us.”
To make this aggression look
legitimate, they force the necessary resolutions from international
organisations,
and if for some reason this does not
work, they simply ignore the UN Security Council and the UN overall.
This happened in Yugoslavia; we
remember 1999 very well.
It was hard to believe, even seeing it with my own eyes,
that at the end of the 20th century, one of Europe’s
capitals, Belgrade, was under missile attack for several weeks, and then
came the real intervention.
Was there a UN Security Council
resolution on this matter, allowing for these actions? Nothing of the
sort.
And then, they hit Afghanistan,
Iraq, and frankly violated the UN Security Council resolution on Libya,
WHEN INSTEAD OF IMPOSING THE
SO-CALLED NO-FLY ZONE OVER IT THEY STARTED BOMBING IT TOO.
THERE WAS A WHOLE SERIES OF
CONTROLLED “COLOUR” REVOLUTIONS.
Clearly, the people in those nations, where these events
took place, were sick of tyranny and poverty, of their lack of prospects;
but these feelings were taken advantage of cynically.
Standards were imposed on these nations that did not in any
way correspond to their way of life, traditions, or these peoples’ cultures.
As a result, instead of democracy and freedom, there was
chaos, outbreaks in violence and a series of upheavals.
THE ARAB SPRING TURNED INTO THE ARAB
WINTER.
A similar situation unfolded in
Ukraine.
In 2004, to push the necessary candidate through at the
presidential elections, they thought up some sort of third round that was not
stipulated by the law. It was absurd and a mockery of the constitution.
And now, they have thrown in an
organised and well-equipped army of militants.
We
understand what is happening; we understand that
these actions were aimed against Ukraine and Russia and against Eurasian
integration.
And all this while Russia strived to engage in dialogue with
our colleagues in the West. We are constantly proposing cooperation on all key
issues; we want to strengthen our level of trust and for our relations to be
equal, open and fair.
But we saw no reciprocal steps.
On the contrary, they have lied to
us many times, made decisions behind our backs, placed us before an
accomplished fact.
This happened with NATO’s expansion
to the East,
as
well as the deployment of military infrastructure at our borders.
They kept telling us the same thing: “Well, this does not
concern you.” That’s easy to say.
It
happened with the deployment of a missile defence system.
In spite of all our apprehensions, the project is working
and moving forward.
It happened with the endless
foot-dragging in the talks on visa issues, promises
of fair competition and free access to global markets.
Today, we are being threatened with
sanctions, but we already experience many limitations, ones that are
quite significant for us, our economy and our nation.
For example, still during the times
of the Cold War, the US and subsequently other nations restricted a large list
of technologies and equipment from being sold to the USSR, creating the
Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls list.
Today, they have formally been eliminated, but only
formally; and in reality, many limitations are still in effect.
In short, we have every reason to
assume that the infamous
policy of containment, led in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries,
continues today.
They are constantly trying to sweep us into a corner because
we have an independent position, because we maintain it and because we call
things like they are and do not engage in hypocrisy.
But there is a limit to everything.
And with Ukraine, our western
partners have crossed the line, playing the bear and acting
irresponsibly and unprofessionally.
After all, they were fully aware that there are millions of
Russians living in Ukraine and in Crimea.
They must have really lacked
political instinct and common sense not to foresee all the consequences
of their actions.
Russia found itself in a position it could not retreat from.
If you compress the spring all the
way to its limit, it will snap back hard.
You must always remember this.
Today, it is imperative to end this hysteria, to refute the rhetoric of the cold war and to accept the
obvious fact:
Russia
is an independent, active participant in international affairs;
like other countries,
it has its own national interests that need to be taken into account and
respected.
At the same time, we are grateful to all those who
understood our actions in Crimea;
we are grateful to the people of
China, whose leaders have always considered the situation in Ukraine and
Crimea taking into account the full historical and political context, and
greatly appreciate India’s reserve and objectivity.
Today, I would like to address the people of the United
States of America, the people who, since the foundation of their nation and
adoption of the Declaration of Independence, have been proud to hold freedom
above all else.
Isn’t the desire of Crimea’s residents to freely choose
their fate such a value?
Please understand us.
I believe that the Europeans, first and foremost, the Germans, will also understand me.
Let me remind you that in the course
of political consultations on the unification of East and West Germany,
at the expert, though very high level, some nations
that were then and are now Germany’s allies did not support the idea of
unification.
Our nation, however, unequivocally supported the sincere,
unstoppable desire of the Germans for national unity.
I am confident that you have not forgotten this, and I
expect that the citizens of Germany will also support the aspiration of the
Russians, of historical Russia, to restore unity.
I also want to address the people of Ukraine.
I sincerely want you to understand us: we do not want to
harm you in any way, or to hurt your national feelings.
We have always respected the
territorial integrity of the Ukrainian state, incidentally, unlike those
who sacrificed Ukraine’s unity for their political ambitions.
They flaunt slogans about Ukraine’s greatness, but they are
the ones who did everything to divide the nation.
Today’s civil standoff is entirely on their conscience.
I want you to hear me, my dear friends. Do not believe those
who want you to fear Russia, shouting that other regions will follow Crimea.
We do not want to divide Ukraine; we
do not need that. As for Crimea, it was and remains a Russian, Ukrainian, and
Crimean-Tatar land.
I repeat, just as it has been for centuries, it will be a
home to all the peoples living there.
What it will never be and do is
follow in Bandera’s footsteps!
Crimea is our common historical legacy and a very important
factor in regional stability.
And this strategic territory should
be part of a strong and stable sovereignty, which today can only be Russian.
Otherwise, dear friends (I am
addressing both Ukraine and Russia), you and we – the
Russians and the Ukrainians – could lose Crimea completely, and that
could happen in the near historical perspective. Please think about it.
Let me note too that we have already heard declarations from Kiev about Ukraine soon joining NATO.
What would this have meant for
Crimea and Sevastopol in the future?
It would have meant that NATO’s navy
would be right there in this city of Russia’s military glory, and this
would create not an illusory but a perfectly real threat to the whole of
southern Russia.
These are things that could have become reality were it not
for the choice the Crimean people made, and I want to say thank you to them for
this.
But let me say too that we are not opposed to cooperation
with NATO, for this is certainly not the case.
For all the internal processes within the organisation, NATO
remains a military alliance,
and we are against having a military
alliance making itself at home right in our backyard or in our historic
territory.
I simply cannot imagine that we
would travel to Sevastopol to visit NATO sailors.
Of course, most of them are wonderful guys, but it would be better to have them come and visit us, be our
guests, rather than the other way round.
Let me say quite frankly that it pains our hearts to see
what is happening in Ukraine at the moment, see the people’s suffering and
their uncertainty about how to get through today and what awaits them tomorrow.
Our concerns are understandable because we are not simply
close neighbours but, as I have said many times already, we are one people.
Kiev is the mother of Russian cities. Ancient Rus is our
common source and we cannot live without each other.
Let me say one other thing too.
Millions of Russians and Russian-speaking people live in
Ukraine and will continue to do so.
Russia will always defend their interests using political,
diplomatic and legal means.
But it should be above all in Ukraine’s own interest to
ensure that these people’s rights and interests are fully protected.
This is the guarantee of Ukraine’s
state stability and territorial integrity.
We want to be friends with Ukraine and we want Ukraine to be
a strong, sovereign and self-sufficient country.
Ukraine is one of our biggest partners after all.
We have many joint projects and I believe in their success
no matter what the current difficulties.
Most importantly, we want peace and harmony to reign in
Ukraine, and we are ready to work together with other countries to do
everything possible to facilitate and support this.
But as I said, only Ukraine’s own
people can put their own house in order.
Residents of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, the whole of
Russia admired your courage, dignity and bravery.
It was you who decided Crimea’s future.
We were closer than ever over these days, supporting each
other. These were sincere feelings of solidarity. It is at historic turning
points such as these that a nation demonstrates its maturity and strength of
spirit. The Russian people showed this maturity and strength through their
united support for their compatriots.
Russia’s foreign policy position on this matter drew its
firmness from the will of millions of our people, our national unity and the
support of our country’s main political and public forces.
I want to thank everyone for this patriotic spirit, everyone
without exception. Now, we need to continue and maintain this kind of
consolidation so as to resolve the tasks our country faces on its road
ahead.
Obviously, we will encounter
external opposition, but this is a decision that we need to make for
ourselves.
Are we ready to consistently defend
our national interests, or will we forever give in, retreat to who knows
where?
Some Western politicians are already
threatening us with not just sanctions but also the prospect of increasingly
serious problems on the domestic front.
I would like to know what it is they
have in mind exactly:
action by a fifth column,
this disparate bunch of ‘national traitors’,
or are they hoping to put us in a
worsening social and economic situation so as to provoke public discontent?
We consider such statements
irresponsible and clearly aggressive in tone, and we will respond to them
accordingly.
At the same time, we will never seek confrontation with our
partners, whether in the East or the West, but on the contrary, will do
everything we can to build civilised and good-neighbourly relations as one is
supposed to in the modern world.
Colleagues,
I understand the people of Crimea, who put the question in
the clearest possible terms in the referendum: should Crimea be with Ukraine or
with Russia?
We can be sure in saying that the authorities in Crimea and
Sevastopol, the legislative authorities, when they formulated the question, set
aside group and political interests and made the people’s fundamental interests
alone the cornerstone of their work.
The particular historic, population, political and economic
circumstances of Crimea would have made any other proposed option - however
tempting it could be at the first glance - only temporary and fragile and would
have inevitably led to further worsening of the situation there, which would
have had disastrous effects on people’s lives.
The people of Crimea thus decided to put the question in
firm and uncompromising form, with no grey areas.
The referendum was fair and transparent, and the people of
Crimea clearly and convincingly expressed their will and stated that they want
to be with Russia.
Russia will also have to make a difficult decision now,
taking into account the various domestic and external considerations.
What do people here in Russia think?
Here, like in any democratic country, people have different
points of view, but I want to make the point that the absolute majority of our
people clearly do support what is happening.
The most recent public opinion surveys conducted here in
Russia show that 95 percent of people think that Russia should protect the
interests of Russians and members of other ethnic groups living in Crimea – 95
percent of our citizens.
More than 83 percent think that Russia
should do this even if it will complicate our relations with some other
countries.
A total of 86 percent of our people see Crimea as still
being Russian territory and part of our country’s lands.
And one particularly important figure, which corresponds
exactly with the result in Crimea’s referendum: almost 92 percent of our people
support Crimea’s reunification with Russia.
Thus we see that the overwhelming
majority of people in Crimea and the absolute majority of the Russian
Federation’s people support the reunification of the Republic of Crimea and the
city of Sevastopol with Russia.
Now this is a matter for Russia’s own political decision,
and any decision here can be based only on the people’s will, because the
people is the ultimate source of all authority.
Members of the Federation Council, deputies of the State
Duma, citizens of Russia, residents of Crimea and Sevastopol, today, in
accordance with the people’s will, I submit to the
Federal Assembly a request to consider a Constitutional Law on the creation of
two new constituent entities within the Russian Federation: the Republic of
Crimea and the city of Sevastopol,
and to ratify the treaty on admitting to the Russian
Federation Crimea and Sevastopol, which is already ready for signing.
I stand assured of your support.
*
MEETING IN SUPPORT OF CRIMEA’S ACCESSION
TO THE RUSSIAN
FEDERATION “WE ARE TOGETHER!”
March 18, 2014
Moscow
Vladimir Putin spoke at a meeting in Moscow titled “We are
together!” in support of the accession of the Republic of Crimea to the Russian
Federation.
PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN:
Dear friends,
This is a very joyful and happy day for us!
Citizens of Russia, residents of Crimea and Sevastopol!
After a long, hard and exhausting voyage, Crimea and Sevastopol
are returning to their harbour, to their native shores, to their home port, to
Russia!
I would like to thank the residents of Crimea and Sevastopol
for their consistent and decisive stance and for their clearly expressed will
to be with Russia. We all felt for them, and Russia gave them its warmth,
turned towards them and opened up its heart to them.
We are gravely concerned over the
developments in Ukraine. But I believe that Ukraine will overcome all
the hardships.
We are not just neighbours, we are
family and our future success depends on both of us, Russia and Ukraine.
I would again like to thank the residents of Crimea and
Sevastopol for their courage and persistence, for staying true to the memory of
their heroic ancestors and for carrying their love for our motherland, for
Russia over decades.
Together we have done a lot, but a lot more remains to be
done, more tasks to resolve. However, I am certain that we will overcome all
the problems, and we will do it because we are together.
Long live Russia!
*
MEETING OF THE SUPREME EURASIAN ECONOMIC COUNCIL
March 5, 2014
Novo-Ogaryovo, Moscow Region
«Our common goal is to reach a new, higher level of
cooperation and, as we agreed, have the Eurasian Economic Union in place by the
start of 2015.»
Vladimir Putin, President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko
and President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev held a meeting of the Supreme
Eurasian Economic Council.
The three presidents discussed key areas in integration
cooperation, the functioning of the Customs Union and Common Economic Space
functioning, progress on the drafting of the agreement to establish the
Eurasian Economic Union as from January 1, 2015, and the possibility of
drafting an agreement on Armenia’s accession to the future union.
(…)
*
PUTIN'S SPEECH ANALYSED
CRIMEA CRISIS: RUSSIAN PRESIDENT PUTIN'S SPEECH ANNOTATED
PRESIDENT PUTIN SAID THE CRIMEA VOTE NUMBERS "SPEAK FOR
THEMSELVES"
Here, BBC diplomatic correspondent Bridget Kendall analyses
key moments from Mr Putin's historic speech.
19 March 2014
*
UKRAINE MAPS CHART CRIMEA'S TROUBLED PAST
Bridget Kendall
Diplomatic correspondent, BBC News
Photos by Emma Lynch
Maps courtesy of the British Library in London, which has
one of the world's greatest collections of maps and cartographic materials.
13 March 2014
If Crimea were to join Russia after the planned referendum
on 16 March, it would be the latest of many changes to the map of Ukraine
during the country's troubled past.
*
Images
Armoiries de la Fédération de Russie.
Images
Armoiries de la Fédération de Russie.
