Russia, Ukraine, and the Crimean Cultural Overlap

Note: It has been brought to my attention that the use of the phrase "the Ukraine", with a definite article before the country's name, may be interpreted as an affront to Ukrainian sovereignty--it essentially is referring to the country as "the borderland", a geographic region, rather than a distinct, sovereign state. I have corrected this in my article, to address the country only as "Ukraine". Thank you to the gentleman who corrected me, and for all who are curious about the background, see this article from Business Insider.

The headlines are buzzing about Ukraine, finally giving it extensive coverage due first to civil unrest and now to the mobilization of Russian military forces. Russia's invasion, however, isn't all it's cracked up to be--what's happened bears very little resemblance to the Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008, nor to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, or even the American invasion of Iraq in 2003. In fact, this is hardly an act of international aggression at all, but more an act of passive aggression. Most important to recognize is that the Crimean Peninsula--in Ukraine's far south, jutting into the Black Sea--is inhabited by an ethnically Russian majority, and only in a vague sense has any political bonds to Kiev.

A map illustrating the particularly Russian character of Crimea, as well as other parts of southeastern Ukraine

The linguistic divisions of Ukraine are one thing, and can easily be simplified on a map such as that above--showing a generally gradient part of Russian influence the further southeast one moves. However, this does not tell the whole story--in fact, among several Ukrainian regions, there is a high level of preference for Russian language in larger cities, with more use of Ukrainian in more rural areas. Without any in depth study, this could suggest several things--a tendency for ethnic Russians to be more urban, more successful due to choice of language, or a dominance of Russian language in administrative and business centers. Overall, it also demonstrates that there is not always a consistent grouping of Russian or Ukrainian speakers on a micro scale, as on the macro level suggested in the map above.

For a series of photos that mock the idea of Russian occupation of Crimea being called "shocking", see this album on imgur.com. Indeed, the Russian troops are being welcomed by some. This is certainly no armed conflict or struggle.

The lack of Ukrainian culture in the Crimea has often left its inhabitants considering themselves to be Russian, as well as leaving Russians considering Crimea an extension of their own country--not far fetched, considering it has been so before. Indeed, the Russian Black Sea Fleet is based out of the city of Sevastopol, and has been for many years; Russian military presence there is nothing new on it's own. Award-winning journalist Michael Totten, visiting Crimea in 2009, described its quite Russian character in his book Where the West Ends:

In Sevastopol, once again, I found myself forgetting I wasn’t in Russia. The overwhelming majority of people who live there are Russians. The language they speak is Russian. Actual Russian soldiers and sailors were all over the place.

Totten expanded on the significance of Crimea in Russian and Soviet history, providing a satisfying answer to what many of us may be asking when told that Crimea is essentially a part of Russia already, making its occupation by Russian troops less than shocking. Totten explains:

Crimea is a de-facto independent Russian-speaking republic, but if it weren’t for Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev it would still be part of Russia. In 1954 he moved an internal Russian border around and placed Crimea in Ukraine. It didn’t seem like a fateful decision at the time, one no more significant than giving Idaho a slice of Montana. He had no idea any part of Ukraine, let alone all of it, would ever break loose from Moscow. He should have known it was possible since it had happened before, but he did not see it coming, or at any rate didn’t care, so this Russian-majority region is marooned outside of Russia.

The main difference now is that Russian troops are moving freely throughout the peninsula, controlling highways, airports, and even surrounding a Ukrainian military post and demanding that the Ukrainians lay down their arms and submit to the overtly pro-Russian local authorities.  According to many in the media, this move by the Russian military has the potential to be a stepping-stone for Russian intervention further into Ukraine, in a move to exacerbate the destabilization of a pro-EU, pro-Western government. While the American government threatens vague consequences, and others--such as Poland--staunchly assert their support to Ukraine, it is not likely a full-scale invasion that looms over Ukraine.

While the past two American led coalitions in the Middle East and Central Asian have seen full fledged occupations of entire countries, that is not the game plan in every major power's agenda. For Russian, taking advantage of chaos in Ukraine to make a land grab in the Crimea may be all the gain they required; the installation of a pro-Russia government in Ukraine is certainly another desired outcome, but not something that will beg a major military campaign to accomplish. Very probably, Crimea will remain under Russian control, possibly resulting in a new border, but the rest of Ukraine will remain autonomous on the political map and exist only under the shadow of Russian influence. Though perhaps the unpredictable will occur, it seems an actual war between Ukraine and the heavyweight neighbor to its east is not about to happen.