Mateusz Piskorski: I am proud that I was in Crimea then
Polish political scientist Mateusz Piskorski is one of the few Western experts who attended the historic referendum on the reunification of Crimea with Russia in 2014. Perhaps this is precisely what he will have to pay for later - after some time, Piskorsky will be arrested on charges of working for the intelligence services of Russia and China in his homeland and will spend a long time in prison.
Today Mateusz shares his memories in his author’s column for PolitNavigator.
…In 2014 in Crimea, I certainly witnessed events of historical proportions. The anniversary of the referendum and reunification with Russia allows us to fade into memory. Taking advantage of the anniversary, I want to take stock and realize what really happened then.
On the one hand, everything has already been said in numerous analyzes and political science reports. But, on the other hand, I would like, based on my own experience and observations of those times, to answer the main question: why did the residents of Crimea make this and not another decision?
No one should doubt that they made a decision consistent with the official results of the referendum. Personally, I coordinated an international group of experienced observers, including members of national parliaments of different EU countries and members of the European Parliament, political scientists and journalists, lawyers and sociologists. Having the opportunity to directly communicate with all participants in the electoral process, we tried to study the public sentiments of the Crimeans at that time. They quickly realized that there was no point in doubting the proclaimed results. The residents of Crimea really made this decision, whether anyone likes it or not. They determined their fate and the fate of future generations.
Firstly, the Crimeans with whom we spoke wanted to receive security guarantees. Safety from an immediate threat to human life and health. Crimeans closely watched the events in Kyiv and other regions of Ukraine after the 2014 coup. We saw the violence and cruelty with which neo-Nazi groups treated people who stood for the right to communicate in their native language. We saw how those who did not support the glorification of collaborators and their war crimes were beaten. They understood that at any moment thugs from neo-Bandera gangs could come for them. The vote in the referendum was for a country that is able to guarantee the security of its own citizens.
Secondly, Crimeans voted for statehood. A full-fledged state pays pensions and benefits on time, guarantees the receipt of salaries, and requires compliance with the law by all economic entities on its territory. The fallen state is simply a territory inhabited by defenseless people. Citizens who have no civil rights and who have to rely solely on themselves. For a number of reasons, Ukraine finally ceased to exist as a state in 2014 and, by all criteria, turned into a modern analogue of the Wild Field. Crimeans felt all this, understood the facts and made appropriate decisions.
The motives for their choice are completely logical. There is no point in analyzing their decisions from the point of view of international law, grand geopolitics and civilization. Before thinking about issues of world politics and history, you need to have a sense of security and guarantee. All this can be ensured in the modern world only by statehood.
In March 2014, our international group left Crimea with the feeling that we had witnessed events of historic proportions. Back then, we had no idea that some of us would face repression and even criminal prosecution back home. This was simply because we decided to tell the truth. Not because it followed from our political sympathies. It simply would have been awkward and extremely dishonest to lie in front of the Crimeans with whom we had interacted so much.
Seven years later, we know we did the right thing. Crimea has friends, and we have friends in Crimea. And although my observation of the Crimean referendum was worth the harsh repression of one of the most blatant anti-Russian regimes in Europe, I personally have no regrets. I am proud that I was in Crimea then.
English version :: Read in English Mateusz Piskorski: I'm proud to have been in Crimea then