With Crimean Anschluss, Putin blocked Maidan from spreading to Russia, Shiropayev says

A propagandist mural of Putin in occupied Yalta, Crimea sported a hashtag "#НАШ" ( Russian for "ours") to claim that Crimea is now Russian. The graffiti by Crimean residents that quickly covered it disagreed with the Kremlin statement and expressed what they think about Putin's Crimean Anschluss. May 2015 (Image: social networks).

A propagandist mural of Putin in occupied Yalta, Crimea sported a hashtag "#НАШ" ( Russian for "ours") to claim that Crimea is now Russian. The graffiti by Crimean residents that quickly covered it disagreed with the Kremlin statement and expressed what they think about Putin's Crimean Anschluss. May 2015 (Image: social networks). 

Analysis & Opinion, Crimea, Maidan, Politics, Russia

Aleksey Shiropayev  (Image: rufabula.com)

Aleksey Shiropayev
(Image: rufabula.com)

Even though Vladimir Putin did not take part in the public commemorations of the third anniversary of his annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula, there is no question that his press secretary is right that the day he took that step remains for the Kremlin leader “a special day,” Aleksey Shiropayev says.

“Imagine for a minute that Putin had not annexed Crimea,” the Russian commentator says. “In that case the victory of the Maidan could have ‘infected’ Russia as well for the spirit of freedom is infectious especially when the countries involved are so close.” Putin had to find “an antidote”– and seizing Crimea was it.

And the Kremlin leader “perfectly well understood that the lure of freedom and dignity could be put down in Russian consciousness only by another lure – an imperial lure of greatness, a lure of chauvinist patriotism and slavish ecstasy of unity with the powers that be,” Shiropayev continues.

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.”

Such an analysis is intriguing for at least two reasons:

  • 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.

In either of those cases, backing away from Crimea or at least not seeing it as a precedent for moves elsewhere might come easier for a post-Putin Russia, although given his personal involvement in this way with Crimea, it probably precludes any movement on that issue as long as he is in office or in power.


Related:

 

Edited by: A. N.

Since you’re here – we have a favor to ask. Russia’s hybrid war against Ukraine is ongoing, but major news agencies have gone away. But we’re here to stay, and will keep on providing quality, independent, open-access information on Ukrainian reforms, Russia’s hybrid war, human rights violations, political prisoners, Ukrainian history, and more. We are a non-profit, don’t have any political sponsors, and never will. If you like what you see, please help keep us online with a donation!

Tags: , , , , , ,