In recent visits to Washington, Crimean Tatar leader Mustafa Dzhemilev and other Crimean activists have reminded us of the precarious situation that exists on the Russian-occupied Ukrainian peninsula. Human Rights Watch has called Crimea a black hole where human rights are in freefall and warned that, without international support, Crimean Tatars and others arrested on unfounded charges will be left in the dark. Indeed, a climate of fear pervades the peninsula.
With the focus on the simmering war in the Donbas, it is sometimes easy to put Crimea on the backburner. After all, the ongoing aggression of Russia and its proxies continues to result in military and civilian loss of life and in a humanitarian crisis that affects millions. Active efforts by the United States and the European Union continue to attempt to compel Russia to leave. As incredibly challenging as that would be, achieving Crimean de-occupation would be even more difficult and most likely will not happen any time soon. But that does not mean we should give up.
In the latest of many moves designed to cement Russian control over Crimea, Vladimir Putin last month opened a newly built bridge from the Russian mainland to the annexed Crimean peninsula. This is only the latest in a series of serious breaches of international law and numerous agreements such as the Helsinki Final Act since Russia’s forcible and illegal occupation in February and March 2014 – a flagrant land-grab the likes of which had not been seen in Europe for a long time.
Russia’s occupation of Crimea continues to have a toxic impact on human rights and fundamental freedoms. Disappearances, abductions, torture and other forms of violence, including punitive psychiatric incarceration, arbitrary arrest and detention are all part and parcel of current Crimean realities. Violations of civil, political, social, economic, cultural and religious rights (except for the Russian Orthodox Church, of course) are widespread. Those who peacefully oppose Russian occupation are subject to especially severe treatment. Every day seems to bring new reports of instances of repression. According to Ukraine’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, Russia holds 64 Ukrainian political prisoners – 24 in Russia and 40 in occupied Crimea. And some of those imprisoned in Russia were detained in Crimea.
Particularly hard-hit are Crimean Tatars, with their demands for Crimea’s return to Ukrainian sovereignty. A people that settled Crimea in the 14th century, the Crimean Tatars have suffered considerably under Moscow’s rule. Deported by Stalin in 1944 from their Crimean homeland – a genocide that cost tens of thousands lives – they were slowly starting to rebuild their lives and community after returning to an independent Ukraine from their nearly five-decade-long Central Asian exile. The Russian occupation and suppression of the Crimean Tatar people and attempts to eradicate their cultural, linguistic and religious identity represents the latest chapter in Moscow’s inhumane policies.
Ukrainian identity also is being eradicated in Crimea. Ukrainian language instruction in schools, for instance, has ceased to exist. Pro-Ukrainian activists are also detained and imprisoned on specious – sometimes ridiculous – charges.
The improvements in the standard of living that local supporters of the annexation had hoped for have not come to fruition. The economic situation is difficult, with tourism, for instance, taking a big hit. Many in Crimea are unwilling to give up their Ukrainian citizenship and are obtaining new Ukrainian biometric passports, infuriating Russian occupation authorities. Reportedly, teachers in Crimea are demanding information from parents as to whether their children have Russian citizenship. Many among the hundreds of thousands resettled from Russia who expected the good life in sunny Crimea have reportedly become disillusioned. Occupied Crimea has also seen environmental degradation and a deteriorating demographic situation.
At the same time, with Russia’s militarization of the peninsula, the security situation in the surrounding Black Sea region has become increasingly perilous – a subject in and of itself.
U.S. policy concerning the annexation has been clear-cut – as a matter of policy, the U.S. simply does not recognize it. There have been numerous statements by the State Department that make it amply clear that Washington does not and will never recognize the forcible incorporation of Crimea by Russia and considers it to be Ukrainian sovereign territory, including in statements delivered almost weekly by the U.S. Mission to the 57-country Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna. The United States has also often called upon Russia to release Ukrainian political prisoners from Crimea, such as Oleh Sentsov and Volodymyr Balukh.
Congress also has paid attention to Crimea. The Russian occupation has often come up in Congressional hearings and statements, although there should be more public events exclusively devoted to Crimea. While still at the Helsinki Commission, I organized several congressional public briefings devoted to human rights and security issues in Crimea to focus attention. (They can be found on the commission’s website: www.csce.gov). More Congressional hearings, briefings, resolutions and other actions are needed to keep highlighting and pressing Moscow to cease its violations and abuses.
More significantly, our laws, including the seminal CAATSA (Countering Russia’s Aggression Through Sanctions Act of 2017), articulate a policy of non-recognition of Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea. Indeed, both the administration and Congress have addressed Crimea in various ways, most notably through personal, sectoral and other sanction against Russia, including those that specifically target Crimea. These sanctions were initiated shortly after the invasion of “the little green men” in early March 2014 and have significantly expanded since then. The United States government has repeatedly asserted that Crimea-related sanctions on Russia will remain in place until Russia returns full control of the peninsula to Ukraine. It is important to reiterate this message in every engagement with Russia.
There is also room for a further ratcheting up and tightening of Crimea-related sanctions, including increased personal sanctions not only on those implementing the occupation of Crimea, but those directing it – namely, Mr. Putin and his cronies. This should include the builders of the new Kerch bridge and sectoral sanctions in the construction and maritime sectors. And the U.S. should take punitive measures against those who violate sanctions. The U.S. should also support Ukraine’s legal compensation claims against Russia related to Crimea. And Washington should keep working with its democratic allies who have also instituted sanctions.
Not only governments, but all people who care about the rules-based international order and human rights need to keep shining the light on Crimea.