Who actually annexed Crimea

[DARPA]

When at various online forums in a dispute with representatives of the Ukrainian society svidomye their statements about arhidrevnosti Ukrainian state I tell them some historical "news", such that the first and most that neither is a Russian, and any which are not "proto-Ukrainian" the princes came to Kiev and Novgorod the Great, in all seriousness I wrote in response: "You fucked @ nulsya? Or read the corrected story? Actually, Kievan Rus arose before your Novgorod the Great !!! "
Well, apparently to correct the true history of Ukraine "under katsapskuyu Dumka" began in the XI century Kiev same chronicler Nestor. Other explanation for these statements is not. The "True, Ukrainians," presumably at the hands of a more serious and authoritative sources of historical truth ...

Ukrainian people over the last 24 years living in a cloud of monstrous historical lie. And this lie so deep and pervasive that even the basics were already rewritten history and introduced into the consciousness of the new svidomye format. The calculation is, of course, that no one will dig into primary sources. If young Ukrainians from kindergarten to institute a systematic tell the same version, then who are pleases to question and check the obvious, so "remarkable things" !?

To date, only deaf svidomye not repeat the conventional phrase: "Russia annexed the Ukrainian Crimea!" But with this statement and we understand today. Firstly, that the grounds on which the Crimea was Ukrainian, and secondly, whether it annexed the Russian or someone else.

Since we trumps foreign words, to start with their value. And So:
Annexation (lat. Annexio, from Lat. Annexus - Attached) - annexation State all or part of the territory of another State unilaterally. In some cases, the annexation is the creation of states with puppet governments. Under international law, annexation - a type of aggression and now attracts international responsibility.

Crimea at all worthy of the Guinness World Records in the category: "The area has undergone the greatest number of legally improper political decisions regarding their status within 60 years."
We will not investigate in detail the history of the Soviet "donation" Peninsula brotherly Ukraine, which from a legal point of view was illegitimate due to the fact that the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR did not have the authority to make such a decision, and it conflicted in force at the time of the constitution of the USSR. Suffice it to say that even then - in 1954 - was transferred to Ukraine only Crimean region. However, the hero-city of Sevastopol, 1948 was a city of republican subordination (Decree of the Presidium of the RSFSR Supreme Soviet №761 / 2 of 29 October 1948) and is an independent administrative and economic center, it has been an equal status of the Crimean region. Thus, Sevastopol have never legally transferred Ukraine - neither legally nor not legal. He was annexed to Ukraine (and this was just the annexation, according to the above definition) simply on the fact of geographical origin of the city to the peninsula, without any legal grounds for it. It should be pointed out that in the printed book "USSR. Administrative-territorial division of the Union Republics of July 1, 1967 "Set Sevastopol as a city of republican subordination of the USSR, and in the wording of the Constitution of the USSR of 1978 in Art. 77 said the city of republican subordination of the Ukrainian SSR are Kyiv and Sevastopol. However, the decision of 1948, to grant the status of Sevastopol city of republican subordination of the RSFSR, and NEVER nor anyone else has been canceled (!) Thus, the entry in the Ukrainian constitution is a legal conflict, insignificant in terms of the law. This is about how we would have today written into the Constitution of Russia, that Liverpool, Bordeaux and New York in 2015, subject to Russia. I think, we should not explain what it would mean in terms of rights without the consent of the United Kingdom, France and the United States.

Such conflicts are usually raiders, or create them deliberately. To capture after the physical building / plant / factory their actions could not be regarded as robbery or assault and therefore expelled from the security forces, they are pre-acquire "legal alibi" in the form of any judgment, somehow related capturing the subject. This may be a dispute about a lease or something else - any piece of paper with a stamp that can be present police to legitimize their presence in the territory.


A telegram sent by Russian President Boris Yeltsin in 1992,
with an expression of protest against the subordination of Sevastopol Sevastopol Kiev:

telegram


A copy of the decision of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation, issued by the Central State Archives:

The decision to Sebastopol in 1993


So, by 1991, Crimea came with a set of such collisions. Against this background, and showed increased in those years Ukrainian separatism began to threaten the collapse of the Soviet Union. And Crimeans thinking about his future. Here we should mention that the legal nihilism in the history of the Crimea is not even started in 1954, but much earlier, when all the same Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR issued a decree on 30 June 1945 abolished the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea in the RSFSR and transformed it into a the Crimean region, contrary to the constitution in force in 1936, did not give authority to the Supreme Council to abolish autonomous republics. Here at this point and began Crimea their struggle for the restoration of historical justice and legal legitimacy.

Since January 20, 1991 in Crimea was held first in the history of the Soviet Union referendum. His conduct was also the first in 46 years, making an attempt to legitimate decision on the status of Crimea, from the point of view of international law and the laws of the USSR. The vote was passed one question: "Do you support the reconstruction of the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic as a subject of the USSR and member of the Union Treaty?" Because 81.3% of Crimean residents who took part in the vote, 93.26% answered "Yes."



Thus, even in 1991, Crimea has officially declared its autonomy and had become an independent party to the treaty of alliance separately from Ukraine. The legality of the referendum has been recognized and Ukraine itself. But using the state of the general political crisis and lawlessness reigning at that time in the USSR, February 12 of the same year the Supreme Council of Ukraine adopted a law on the restoration of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, but (!) As part of the Ukrainian SSR, which directly contradicts the results of a referendum conducted. Following this, the decision was immediately enshrined in the Constitution of the USSR, where the Crimean region was transformed into the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (raiding clean water). This was the first act of annexation of the Crimea Ukraine.

August 19, 1991 in the USSR happens coup - the so-called August putsch.
Now, as they say, "watch hands" and remembers the events of February and March 2014, took place in Ukraine. Remember charges southeast of "separatism", "collapse of the country" and so on ...
Taking advantage of the anarchy in the country, August 24, 1991 a special session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR adopts a "Declaration of Independence of Ukraine", initiating the collapse of the USSR. This decision is legally supposed to be backed up by a referendum, which was held in Ukraine December 1, 1991.

Referendum_Ukraina_01.12.1991
However, under national law "On the issue related to the seceding from the USSR", Article 3: "In the Soviet Republic has in its autonomous republics, autonomous regions and autonomous regions, the referendum is held separately in each autonomous. For the peoples of the autonomous republics and autonomous entities a right to independently decide whether to remain in the USSR or in the seceding republic, as well as to raise the question of the legal status of their state. "

Should clarify that in such an autonomous republic of Crimea Ukraine was denied. It was the second act of annexation of the Crimea Ukraine.

Not put up with this kind of lawlessness and acting strictly within the law trampled Ukraine, the Supreme Council of Crimea February 26, 1992 the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic was renamed the Republic of Crimea, and 5 May 1992 adopted the Act on the proclamation of state independence of the Republic of Crimea. The next day, adopted the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea. These regulations were to come into force after the referendum, scheduled for August 2nd. But the referendum was not allowed to take place because the Supreme Council of Ukraine to recognize the decisions of the Crimean Parliament of Ukraine unconstitutional and suspended their action.

But Crimea and in this situation continued their fight for independence. Since February 4, 1994 Crimea elect the first and only president of the republic - Yury A. Meshkov. The Supreme Council of the peninsula decides to hold a referendum Crimean average 25 June 1995 on the renewal of the Constitution of Crimea, canceled unilaterally by the Supreme Council of Ukraine. All this time Crimeans hold regular acts of protests and rallies against the Ukrainian creeping occupation of the peninsula.


Crimea. Sevastopol. Unique footage of 1993. Very useful to see those who believe that Crimeans voted at gunpoint, and in Ukraine, where there is very, very Nazism, they lived remarkable:



When a mass rally starts seriously increase (up to 200 000 people.) In Sevastopol to maintain order entered part of the Ukrainian National Guard. Under pressure from the Kiev authorities to hold a referendum is canceled. Following this should be a law "On the abolition of the Constitution and the laws of some of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea", abolished the post of President of the Crimea and should reverse the renaming of the Republic of Crimea in the "Autonomous Republic of Crimea". In November 1995, the Peninsula imposed a new constitution based on the Ukrainian Law "On the division of powers between Ukraine and the Crimea." Direct decrees of President Kuchma (the one that is now "negotiator" of Ukraine in Minsk) authorities in Crimea reassigned Kiev. These actions of the Ukrainian authorities, according to all international legal norms in flagrant lawlessness became the third act of annexation of Ukraine's Crimea.

But the following year - June 28 1996 - adopted a new Constitution of Ukraine, which is in conflict with the newly imposed constitution of the Crimea, and under the pretext of the rule of law Ukrainian Kiev raises the question of the final withdrawal of the last remnants of the Crimean autonomy. Since October 21, 1998 Crimea receives basic law, which proclaims an integral part of the Crimea in Ukraine and Ukrainian laws acquire the status of the rule of law of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.
The fourth act of annexation of the Crimea Ukraine completed. Curtain.

* * *

After the reunification of the Crimea with Russia last "refuge of scoundrels" wailing that "Crimea was and remains Ukrainian territory" is a reference to the agreement "On Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between the Russian Federation and Ukraine" of 1997. In particular, Article 2 of this document states that the Parties to "respect the territorial integrity of each other and affirm the inviolability of their existing borders." However, it is worth once again indicate svidomye citizens for their exceptional selectivity in the issue of reading historical documents. Thus, in Article 6 of the treaty states: "Each of the High Contracting Parties shall refrain from participation in or support any act aimed against the other High Contracting Party, and undertakes not to conclude with third countries any treaties directed against the other Party. Neither Party will not allow also to its territory to be used to the detriment of the other Party. "

After the February revolution unconstitutional committed in Ukraine, its new "power" has openly declared its intention to expulsion Black Sea Fleet from Sevastopol and proclaimed a policy of joining NATO than directly violated the provision of the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation.

From a legal point of view, the act of reunification of the Crimea with Russia - the legal decision related to actual changes in the status of Crimea, in the last 60 years.