The United Nations Organization once again appealed to the Russian leadership with a call to lift the ban on the activities of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars (recognised in the Russian Federation as an extremist organisation and banned). In Russia, they were outraged by this appeal and stated that this could not even be discussed. The first, as usual, was the State Duma deputies from the Crimea.
Its call to the Russian side of the monitoring mission of the United Nations published on Facebook on the eve of 29 September – exactly three years after the decision of the Supreme Court to ban the organisation, which had previously been accepted by the Supreme Court of the Crimea.
“3 years ago, on September 29, 2016, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation upheld the decision to ban the Mejlis *, which was earlier adopted by the Supreme Court of Crimea. As a result, the Mejlis *, the representative body of the Crimean Tatars, cannot carry out its functions to this day. The situation continues, despite the decision of the ICJ … We urge the Russian Federation to comply with the decision of the court and the United Nations to lift the ban on the activities of the Mejlis *”, – stated in the faces uu GS H.
It is worth noting that this is not the first such appeal of a diplomatic organisation. In 2017, the UN International Court of Justice ruled that Russia should refrain from restricting the representative bodies of Crimean Tatars, but the situation has not changed so far.
The reaction of Russian politicians was not long in coming. The first to respond was the most ardent opponent of the Mejlis * Natalia Poklonskaya, who filed the lawsuit. In April 2016, the Crimean Supreme Court recognised the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people * as an extremist organisation and banned its activities in Russia. At that time the prosecutor of Crimea Poklonskaya was not present at any meeting during the consideration of the case but appeared only on the day the verdict was announced.
Commenting on the UN’s call, she decided to recall the “crimes of Mejilis *”, which, according to her, was expressed in the “land grab, undermining electrical support on the border of Crimea” and other “sins”.
“I would be happy to transmit all the information to the Monitoring Mission because I dealt with this issue as the prosecutor of Crimea. It would be interesting to listen to their opinions on these crimes of the Majlis * and its leaders,” Poklonskaya added.
In turn, Ruslan Balbek, who also did not miss the chance to insert his five cents, chose to accuse Western politicians of a clear anti-Russian goal. He recalled the water, food and energy blockades of the peninsula and blamed the members of the Mejlis * for all this.
Speaking about the situation, Balbek decided at the same time to “prick” Ukraine as well: “Do we need such guests? Of course not. Let them stay in Kyiv, for them there is a familiar environment of political intrigues, conflicts and hatred of dissent. ”
Also, he called Crimea the territory of peace, tranquillity, interfaith and interethnic friendship. Apparently, from the seat of the State Duma he does not see the situation in the republic well, where even pro-Russian Crimean Tatar public organisations cannot agree among themselves, consent and friendship prevail in Crimea, or not everything is so smooth in the interethnic context and the solution of the Crimean Tatar issue.
Avdet has already said that the organisation “Kyrym” and the “Council of the Crimean Tatar People” were informed about the successes achieved in the past five years in the field of interethnic relations and the rehabilitation of deported citizens. However, the Milliy Yurt movement and the Inkischaf organisation later disseminated their statement to the media, which stated that factors that negatively affect international relations and constrain the solution of the problems of the Crimean Tatar people have ripened in the public and political life of the republic. In particular, the authors of the appeal are unhappy that the persons responsible for the work carried out in the field of interethnic relations do not take sufficient rehabilitation measures do not cope with their direct responsibilities, blur the true state of affairs, dividing people into “friends and foes”, protesting their acquaintances in leadership positions.
Even such a confrontation between structures loyal to the current authorities allows us to draw appropriate conclusions and evaluate the statement of Ruslan Balbek.
Another leader who deemed it necessary or on a tip-off to comment on the UN call was the chairman of the regional “national-cultural autonomy of the Crimean Tatars” Eyvaz Umerov, known for cases of insult and his dislike of the Mejlis * since Ukrainian times. He is sure that lifting the ban on the work of the Mejlis * will lead to ethnic conflicts and chaos. What exactly he had in the form of “chaos” remains incomprehensible, but there is no doubt that ethnic conflicts exist in Crimea even without the Mejlis *.
Returning to the UN calls, one cannot but note that their activities concerning Crimea are only formal. Without taking any practical steps, the international organisation periodically makes all kinds of statements that have no real consequences. Unless they serve as a red rag for some Russian officials. All this resembles an ordinary verbal ping-pong at the interstate level.
* Extremist organisation banned in the Russian Federation