
(Image: rufabula.com)
Such an analysis is intriguing for at least two reasons:This “antidote to freedom and democracy,” one that generated “an abrupt degradation of society and all political life” in the Russian Federation is what “’Crimea is Ours’” means. And thus “Crimea became Putin’s anti-Maidan.”
- On the one hand, it lends weight to reports that Putin personally made all the decisions about Crimea;
- On the other, it suggests that Putin’s aggression may at least initially have been driven by domestic considerations rather than the possibility of retaking the empire.
Related:
- Chronology of the annexation of Crimea
- Three years later: Russia's suicide by Crimea
- Soviet-era punishment resurfaces in Crimea: the political abuse of psychiatry
- The Crimean Anschluss at three: 'A jubilee of stupidity and criminality'
- Hitler’s Anschluss and Putin’s: Similarities and differences
- Three years later, Crimea abandoned by both Ukraine and Russia
- Polish director Aniela Gabryel: I want to show the plight of Crimean Tatars under occupation (TRAILER)
- Moscow’s objective – gain land corridor to Crimea by seizing Mariupol, Ukrainian analyst says
- Mother of Kremlin’s hostage visits occupied Crimea to hug tortured son
- Meet Mykola Semena, the Crimean journalist prosecuted for disagreeing with Putin’s landgrab
- Remember the Crimean Tatars jailed for resisting Russian occupation