>There was something else still: the population of Crimea was mostly Russian. Like, really Russian. Using only Russian language, calling hryvnas rubles, and in general feeling Russian. Many of these people actually liked the idea of Crimea being a part of Russia (at least before the invasion - things changed a bit since then)

We do not know what people of Crimea wanted. Nobody during military occupation of Crimea asked their opinion.

I don't know about people in general, but those I spoke to a few years before the invasion told me on numerous occasion that they would prefer that Crimea belonged to Russia, and that they would be much better off then. of course, this doesn't mean they supported the invasion in any way, it was just an opinion.

After the invasion cam ethe period of disillusionment. It turned out the situation only changed for worse. But nobody should be surprised there was practically no opposition when Russians took over Crimea.

I had briefly mentioned this in the "P.S." section of my original comment, but I appreciate you adding more concrete and specific examples.

The Tatar minority in Crimea, on the other hand, did not like the idea of being Russian subjects much at all.

https://newrepublic.com/article/116814/crimean-tatars-primer...

So a minority should dictate international relations? A minority that aren't even indigenous and whose only history of statehood was being a vassal of the Ottomans that captured and sold Slavs as slaves... Why should they dictate what happens between Ukraine or Russia?

The US has a lot of people whose history of statehood traces back to slavery. They still get a right to vote on their future.

Yes, they do. But the Crimean Tatars are what, 15% at most? Some people are acting like they should decide for everyone.

More than 15% of Ukrainians opposed Maidan (including Crimeans). Yet they were subjected to it.

No one from people not Ukrainians, not Tatars and not Russians had option to decide there future during the occupation process. There were just occupied by Russian military. It was military operation not decision of local population.

And also yes minority have there rights.

I do not understand why that message was down voted. Tatars are really the oldest owner of Crimea and they do not support Russia. They remember many bad from Russia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_the_Crimean_Tat... And now too nobody asked them if they want to be part of Russia or not.

Crimea is occupated and this is reality. All other talks about how much Crimea is more Russian sounds like a Russian propaganda.

Semi-related (not trying to detract from your point): interestingly enough, there is a whole Tatar state within Russia that many people might not be aware of (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatarstan).

>Crimea is occupated and this is reality. All other talks about how much Crimea is more Russian sounds like a Russian propaganda.

While I am very opposed to the capture of Crimea by RF, I feel you are being disingenuous when you say that. According to the latest census, russians make up 67.9% of Crimean population, while tatars make up just 12.6% [1]. Those numbers seem to support the point that Crimea is indeed majority russian, with tatars being outnumbered by almost a factor of 6.

1.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea#Ethnici...

>Semi-related (not trying to detract from your point): interestingly enough, there is a whole Tatar state within Russia that many people might not be aware of (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatarstan).

Tatars from Tatarstan and Tatars from Crimea share only name, they are different nationalities.

>While I am very opposed to the capture of Crimea by RF, I feel you are being disingenuous when you say that. According to the latest census, russians make up 67.9% of Crimean population, while tatars make up just 12.6% [1]. Those numbers seem to support the point that Crimea is indeed majority russian, with tatars being outnumbered by almost a factor of 6.

This logic is totally misleading. If there are more Russians it does not make Crimea Russian.

It might be misleading, but not totally. You're totally right that nobody had anything to say, Putin made the decision for them. But the share of population isn't insignificant. Would you see it differentley if 99% of Crimeans were Russians? 100%? If so, where is the borderline? If not, how would it be different from a colony (that I hope all agree is an embarassing relic of the past)?

>> Tatars are really the oldest owner of Crimea and they do not support Russia...

Tatars are not the oldest owner of Crimea. 2500 years ago Crimea was a Greek colony, then it was part of a Persian Empire, then Roman Empire, then Byzantine Empire [1] Mongols conquered Crimea only in 13th century.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Ancient_history

Oldest that are living in that territory. No people from Persian Empire, then Roman Empire, then Byzantine Empire and Mongols at the moment living in Crimea.

The Greeks were around a for a millenia prior to the tatars, the majority were resettled to modern day Ukraine under the Russian Empire.

>The Greeks were around a for a millenia prior to the tatars, the majority were resettled to modern day Ukraine under the Russian Empire. Oldest that are living in that territory. No Greeks at the moment at Crimea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea#Ethnici...