Oleg Sentsov is the face of Crimea today. A year ago, the Ukrainian filmmaker put his next film on hold to participate in AutoMaidan, bringing food to Ukrainian soldiers under siege during Russia’s take-over of the peninsula. Soon after, he was kidnapped by FSB agents and brought to Moscow. Following a practice prevalent during Stalin’s purges, Sentsov endured torture, beatings and threats of rape for refusing to confess to Kremlin charges of terrorism.
In the past year of Russian occupation, Crimea has become a hot spot of human rights abuses. A 37-page report by Human Rights Watch describes how dangerous life has become for those who, like Sentsov, oppose Russian rule. According to this and other reports, the list of state-sanctioned crimes includes kidnappings, torture, violence against journalists, murder, widespread theft and extortion. One AP investigation cites that around 4,000 businesses in Crimea have been “nationalized”—meaning stolen by the despotic mafia that rules with impunity.
A culture of fear has imprisoned Crimea. Militias break-up demonstrations and a law restricting freedom of speech, freedom of the internet resembles the neo-Soviet nightmare that has taken over Russia. Around 20,000 people have fled to Ukraine, and those who remain risk persecution for speaking Ukrainian or displaying the blue and yellow of the Ukrainian flag. Following the annexation, Crimeans were automatically made Russian citizens, and those who wanted to file paperwork to hold on to their Ukrainian citizenship were given only four weeks to brave Kafka-esque bureaucracy, which included a mental health assessment. And then they’re considered foreigners, their rights limited.
Crimea is a gangster regime
“One must understand that in Crimea, in essence, a gangster regime has been established under the protection of Moscow,” Sergei Mitrokhin, a Russian opposition leader in the pro-democracy Yabloko party, told the AP. “Former criminals have come to power, and have started to carve up the property.”
Not only did Crimeans vote under a gun, they now live under a gun. In this climate of mafia corruption and paramilitary violence, Crimeans are reportedly afraid to talk about reunification with Ukraine. Yet Forbes contributor Kenneth Rapoza recently held up two Western polls as proof that Crimeans made their choice and are happy with their “vote.” “A year ago this week, 83% of Crimeans went to the polling stations and almost 97% expressed support for reunification with their former Soviet parent,” Rapoza writes. The first alarm is that he treats the so-called referendum in Crimea last March as legitimate when many abstained from the hastily organized event, tens of thousands dared to protest it, and there was no time for open debate. What’s more, independent sources back up Putin’s claim that Putin orchestrated the Crimean take-over. Those “little green men” that we all thought were Russian soldiers? They were Russian soldiers. The Kremlin had its sights on Crimea; the revolution in Ukraine that toppled Putin’s ally, deposed Ukrainian president Victor Yanukovych, was only an excuse to pull the trigger.
Polls overlook the obvious
The presentation of these two separate polls—by Gallup and the German polling firm GfK—as clear-cut signs that Crimeans enjoy life under Russia overlooks the obvious. “…Few people are likely to be brave enough to condemn the annexation on the phone, especially when the caller is a stranger,” Bloomberg columnist Leonid Bershidsky writes of the GfK survey. “In Russia itself, polls show 85 percent support for Putin, but it’s hard to calculate how much of that is motivated by caution: it’s best to treat those numbers as an indication that most people are willing to acquiesce rather than to protest.” As Kremlinology expert Lilia Shevtsova points out, despite Putin’s whopping 85% approval rating, when he uncharacteristically disappeared for 10 days and was presumed overthrown, Russians didn’t take to the streets to demand his return.
The disillusionment in Crimea was communicated in a similar fashion when only sparse crowds bothered to show up to mark the one year anniversary of Russia’s annexation. At the same time, over in Moscow, state-sponsored pageantry gave a good effort then sputtered out, with the BBC reporting that the crowds drifted away before the rally officially ended.
People attend a rally and a concert by the Kremlin Wall in central Moscow on March 18, marking the one year anniversary of the annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula. (Photo by Anastasiya Karagodina/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images)
The economy is faltering
And more telling than any poll, of course, is the adage: It’s the economy, stupid. With the collapse of the ruble, Crimeans are seeing their pensions halved and the cost of their mortgages doubled. The peninsula is undergoing a brain drain, losing businesses and entrepreneurs. With the Kremlin reducing its funding by 30% to the peninsula things aren’t likely to turn around soon. A stronger economic indicator: Ukrainians, who make up the bulk of Crimea’s tourism, have stopped coming. Guardian reporter Shaun Walker recently posted on Twitter an offer from a Moscow travel agent that reeks of desperation: 7 nights in Crimea, flight included, all for under $200. Surf, sun and political repression.
“Since Russia annexed Crimea, the de facto authorities are using a vast array of bully boy tactics to crack down on dissent,” John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International’s Director for Europe and Central Asia, told Reuters.
A survey is not accurate if it expects people living under repressive regimes to give answers that may put them in danger. Orwell’s observation applies to Western pollsters: To many in the West, “totalitarianism is completely incomprehensible.” We cannot begin to imagine what life is like for those in Crimea, especially the Tatar community which suffered forced deportation under Stalin and now suffers kidnappings, murders, and extortion under Putin. Even generations later, survivors of Stalin’s terror can find it difficult—even unthinkable—to speak of the horrors they endured. Satisfaction polls cannot convey the psychology of repression.