Osservatorio Balcani e Caucaso Transeuropa is an Italian-based think tank specializing in Southeast Europe, Turkey, Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, as well as EU policies on media freedom, civil society, enlargement and convergence. With the permission of the OBCT editorial board, we are publishing an interview conducted by journalist Francesco Brusa with Ayshegül Aydıngün, a professor of sociology and researcher of Crimean Tatar communities in Ukraine. The original in Italian is available here.

Since the Russian occupation of Crimea in 2014, the life of the Crimean Tatars, the indigenous population of the peninsula, has become much more difficult. Having survived colonization, forced deportations, and the current suppression of their linguistic and cultural identity, the Crimean Tatar population cannot help but see a continuity in Russian policy.  

Crimea was first an independent khanate under the protection of the Ottoman Empire, then part of the Russian Empire, balanced between autonomy and belonging to the Russian and Ukrainian republics during the Soviet period, became part of Ukraine after 1991, and was finally illegally annexed by the Kremlin in 2014.  “It seems that the interests of Moscow's leadership have not changed over the centuries,” Ayshegül Aydıngün, a professor of sociology at the Middle East Technical University of Ankara, Turkey, and a researcher of the Crimean Tatar communities in Ukraine, as well as the Meskhetian people (a Turkic-speaking ethnic group living in the southern territories of Georgia), tells us. Ten years ago, Aydıngün visited Crimea as part of a Turkish delegation to check on the human rights situation of Crimean Tatars. This delegation was the last one to gather information on the ground. On the anniversary of the annexation, while the most recent reports continue to report a “tragic chain of events and measures” characterized by “prolonged suffering” of the indigenous population of the peninsula, we reminisced with her about that trip and reflected on the possible future of the region.

‍- Can you tell us about the work of the delegation ten years ago? Did you encounter any willingness to cooperate on the part of the de facto authorities in Crimea?

- Our delegation consisted of six people: three law professors specializing in human rights, one historian - a young specialist who had worked in Ukraine for a long time and spoke perfect Russian - and me, a sociologist who had already been to Crimea many times and conducted research there. To get to the peninsula, we, of course, had to coordinate the route: first we flew to Moscow, then to Kyiv, and finally arrived in Simferopol.  

I must say right away that our report revealed numerous human rights violations against the Crimean Tatar population. Immediately upon arrival, we were met by a group of Crimean Tatar representatives who had been cooperating with the Russian authorities. These people were completely implausible in their stories about a rosy and extremely positive situation. Even for a person without deep knowledge of the region and the methods of the Russian leadership, it was obvious that this was a staging.  

That's why we decided to split into two groups: one part of the delegation followed the program prepared in advance by the authorities, and the other (including me) was able to hold more frank meetings thanks to the contacts I had previously made. I cannot deny that it was a powerful and emotionally difficult experience: in the eyes of the Crimean Tatars I spoke with, I saw a complete loss of hope, fear that followed the Russian annexation, and, most importantly, I felt the specter of a new “deportation” looming over them, this time in the form of forced migration.  

- So for the Crimean Tatars, the annexation was a sharp contrast to the previous period under Ukrainian sovereignty?

- After Stalin's deportation in 1944, the Crimean Tatar community still managed to preserve its identity and constantly demand the right to return to Crimea. This is despite the harsh repression of the Soviet period and the fact that many intellectuals and wealthy people were killed. In particular, under the leadership of Mustafa Dzhemilev, they created a movement for self-determination, national in nature, but with a universalist approach based on respect for human rights.  

This allowed for the return (which began in 1989, shortly before the collapse of the USSR) to be carried out as a peaceful process, with respect for the Russian population that had settled in Crimea during this time. In addition, we should not forget that many Russians also fell victim to Soviet policies and were forced to move to other regions. This is not to say that there was not mistrust or difficulties, and, indeed, since the 1990s, the Russian government and local pro-Russian politicians have looked down on the return of Tatars to the peninsula.  

Nevertheless, thanks to the support of the Ukrainian authorities (which, although not immediately recognizing Tatars as the indigenous people of Crimea and often experiencing periods of instability that prevented deep engagement in such issues, were open to dialogue), the return continued until 2014. The Crimean Tatar community was able to revive its culture and language, restore some of its tangible (monuments, etc.) and intangible heritage, and establish schools and media in the Crimean Tatar language. It was a slow and gradual process, but it was happening.  

With the Russian annexation, the pressure increased significantly. National schools and media were closed, textbooks were banned, and property of Crimean Tatar foundations was confiscated. In general, the Russian legal system has become an instrument of assimilation: people are forced to take Russian citizenship to access basic services and rights. Those who advocate for Crimean Tatar self-determination are declared “extremists” and subjected to interrogation or detention.

- Do you see any prospects for the further return of Crimean Tatars to Crimea?

- Unfortunately, I think that the issue is already beyond the peninsula annexed by Russia and concerns the entire global system, which, starting with Crimea in 2014, entered an extremely dangerous phase of anomie, lack of order. Europe perceived these events as something marginal, something that only affected minorities, but it was the beginning of the destruction of the entire security architecture, which is now happening at an incredible speed.