There are exact 7 years (16/03/2014) a referendum was organized for the annexation / joining of Crimea to Russia, ceasing to be a Ukrainian territory. In season, the result was 97% in favor of this change. The international community condemned the referendum, saying it had been defrauded and carried out under threats. The high result is also due to a boycott of those who were against joining. All these years have passed and little is said about the region today. What role should the international community play from now on??
Some human rights organizations have accused the Russian government of local repression, with the persecution of dissidents - especially Tatar Muslims, some considered terrorists. At the same time, internal surveys have shown that the local population is satisfied with being under Russian control.
Russia has invested heavily in the region - it is estimated to be around 20 billions of dollars, seeking to integrate it with the rest of the country. The infrastructure (Water, electricity, gas and transportation system) has gained an important prominence. At the same time, I estimate-I know that approximately 250 thousand Russians moved to Crimea, helping the region to become the fastest growing place in all of Russia.
The result of these investments has favored an intensification of the identification of residents with Russia. Surveys indicate increased local support for maintaining the region's belonging to Russia (https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/03/20/one-year-after-russia-annexed-crimea-locals-prefer-moscow-to-kiev/?sh=39d18c2510db, https://www.rferl.org/a/poll-majority-of-russians-support-crimea-annexation-but-worry-about-economic-effects/29859570.html).
But not everything is a sea of roses. One of the biggest fears of residents is the impact that continued economic sanctions can have on the region. Although the local population is getting used to the situation, after all these years, the threat continues. Low wages and high unemployment rates are still a worrying reality in the region. There is also a concern about low investments in education and health, which impacts on the quality of life of the local inhabitants.
Broadly speaking, what is currently perceived in the region is an improvement in the general acceptance about its belonging to Russia, at the same time and that there are economic difficulties, plus restrictions for dissidents. There is room for significant improvements in the region, both in economic terms, as politicians and human rights.
However, when we look at this issue from the international community, it is clear that we cannot continue with the discussion about whether it was forced attachment or spontaneous joining. Many years have passed and the reality is consolidated: Crimea is part of Russia. Like it or not, agreeing or not with how it happened, reality today imposes itself. It is up to the international community, at this time, discuss the continuity of the economic sanctions imposed.
Here I come back to defend what I have already pointed out in other moments: economic sanctions are more impacting on populations than on governments (The ineffectiveness of international sanctions). Nothing indicates that there will be a change in the current situation in Crimea, research indicates that the local population has, although with limitations, a good acceptance of the condition that it has today, so what is the purpose of the continuation of sanctions?
To learn more about Crimea, we suggest reading the book
