That seems like an unusual perspective.
If by "bloodless" you mean "lots of people died, but nowhere near as many as a world war" though, then sure.
For the "actively supported", where are you getting that information? My impression (from friends in Kiev) is that it's universally condemned.
I think you are trying to confuse others with numbers describing the Donbas conflict, not the "annexation" as implied in your message. A really low effort fallacy I must say.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Ru...
Wow. So, you going to claim this isn't relevant or somehow correct then either?
>For the "actively supported", where are you getting that information?
Directly from Crimeans. I have visited Crimea last year as a tourist and talked with them personally (in Massandra and Alushta, btw the wine is really great, recommend trying it). Try watching 2014 videos, for example this one is before Russian forces have became active:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atm0W5wA2y4
If you don't trust my anecdotal experience, then how about "The Crimea conundrum: legitimacy and public opinion after annexation" published in the Eurasian Geography and Economics journal? Or how about "To Russia With Love" article published in Foreign Affairs? They both confirm strong local support in favor of the transfer.
>My impression (from friends in Kiev) is that it's universally condemned.
I hope you understand that your friend quite probably is really biased regarding this issue, right? Always try looking outside of the media narrative (one may call it soft propaganda), usually world issues are far more complex than the version painted by media.
The irony is strong with this one.
Whereas in Taiwan, recent survey shows only 4% identified as Chinese and 90% are willing to defend Taiwan if "China uses force against Taiwan for unification"
Small nitpick: has US invaded Syria in your opinion?
Yes, Russia obviously supports Donbas republics, but most of those republics military consists of Ukrainian citizens. In a way it's similar to how US supports Kurds and "moderate opposition". Such situation is really common for civil wars, but I don't think "invasion" is a correct word to use here.
Russia literally claimed Ukrainian territory. How is "invasion" in any way the wrong word?
First time I hear this. Source?
Per latest census not under Russia control, it was 60% for Russians, and rest were Ukranians and Tatars. It is not overwhelmingly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea#Ethnici...
I am more than certain that if Russian language was a second official language in Ukraine and rights of minorities were properly respected, then Crimea would have been still part of Ukraine and war in Donbas wouldn't have happened.
Plus note, that a significant number of people in Crimea (and in Ukraine) are of mixed blood, so they can easily change their ethnicity based on the current political situation.
Russia does not want to lose its warm-water ports, or to be bordered by hostile countries. If Mexico made serious noises about joining an alliance with China, we'd see regime change before the week were out.
I think protests and exodus were result of TV propaganda, amount of disinformation was tremendeus, though Crimeans probably got better life within richer Russia.
And even before that, Ukraine is a country in which 30% consider Russian a native language (according to the official census, so I consider it a lower bound) and more than 80% prefer to use it in daily live (the numbers should be lower now for obvious reasons, but the point still stands). It's simply ridiculous to not have Russian as an official language in such conditions. For comparison in Canada only 20% know French and still it's a full-fledged official language.
> It's simply ridiculous to not have Russian as an official language in such conditions.
They allowed Russian to be official regional language in regions where more than 10% population speaks Russian. Sounds reasonable to me.
Window of opportunity was caused by messed up government in Ukraine, which couldn't produce any resistance against Russia's military invasion.
It's exactly the same day when active protests in Crimea and Donbas have started. Yes, technically the law was still active, but it was just a delay due to the powerful backlash and people understood well intention of those who came into power.
>Sounds reasonable to me.
Wow... I guess let's agree to disagree here. Because for me a situation in which 80% people speak a language in daily life, but it's not an official one, looks more suitable for an occupation, than for a normal state. Can you name any other world country with a similar situation? (IIRC only Baltic states come somewhat close)
And let's be honest, "regional language status" was just breadcrumbs. Russian was systematically discriminated as a matter of state policy starting from TV and ending with schools, with situation only worsening over time.
>Window of opportunity was caused by messed up government in Ukraine, which couldn't produce any resistance against Russia's military invasion.
Don't forget about heavily demoralized military (and the protests have played a major part here), which didn't believe in the new government, and most of which accepted Russian terms and got integrated into its military. Also some say that the new government has intentionally allowed the situation around Crimea and Donbas to degrade, so a lot of pro-Russian electorate would be cut off from elections. But I guess gross incompetence is usually a better explanation.
Pure speculation.
> in which 80% people speak a language in daily life,
Citation needed.
> Don't forget about heavily demoralized military (and the protests have played a major part here), which didn't believe in the new government, and most of which accepted Russian terms and got integrated into its military.
Pure speculation.
> Citation needed.
According to Wikipedia, in May 2013 82% of respondents spoke Russian at home.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Crimea#Ethnici...
Revoking of what? Russian language is protected by Constitution of Ukraine, as language of minority. Did you read what you posted?
> looks more suitable for an occupation, than for a normal state.
You are right, Crimea was occupied by Russian Empire and USSR. Natives (Tatars, Goths, Greeks, Italians, Turks, Ukrainians) are exhaled or exterminated.
> Don't forget about heavily demoralized military (and the protests have played a major part here)
Russian propaganda, in Russian language, played major role. Russian Federation planned to attack Ukraine since 2008, preparing for occupation of Crimea and creation of "Newrussia". As former officer of intelligence, I knew about planned protests controlled by RF (AKA "Шатун") in 2012.
It was so forceful, that it was effectively bloodless and an overwhelming portion of the "annexed" populace has actively supported it.
Meanwhile situation in Taiwan is drastically different. Pro-mainland faction is really weak and can not be used to provide sufficient support for quiet absorption. And since Taiwan has deep military connections with USA for many decades, any military intervention will inevitably escalate into a major military conflict.
The only scenario in which something like that can happen is civil-war-level turmoil in USA. Probability of which, worryingly, is noticeably bigger than zero.