Mikola Semena
- one of the few independent journalists who remained in Crimea after his annexation and continued to work on critical articles about the Russian occupation.
- In 2016, the Russian Federal Security Service began repressing him. Semen was sentenced to suspended prison and banned from working in journalism.
- His case has been brought to the attention of the US State Department, the European Union, the OSCE, condemning the silencing of critical voices in Crimea.
- wrote the book “Crimean Reportage” with the subtitle “Chronicles of the Occupation of Crimea”. In it, he documents the political, economic and cultural downturn following the embassy.
–
–
Latvian Television: Why do you think you were tried in Crimea?
seeds: When all the events in Crimea just started after 2014, we assumed that there would still be some freedom of expression, human rights were respected. But as this did not happen, much of it began to resist. We journalists wrote about the events in Crimea as they were, but the occupation administration did not like it very much. Therefore, the Russian occupation administration began to arrest me and many other journalists and activists without cause. Many of our boys are in Russian courts today for sentences of 5, 10, 11, 15 and 18 years in prison. This is a serious violation of international law and human rights. But that is the situation.
You talk about many crises in your book Crimea. [..] It talks about the economic crisis, the crisis of freedom of expression and many other crises.
11 chapters analyze 11 crises in which the Russian Federation fell after violating international law and occupying Crimea.
So Russia itself got into a crisis?
Yes, the thing is that if Russia had not occupied Crimea, it would probably have developed a completely different path. The money that was put there would be used to the greater benefit of the Russian people, on the one hand. On the other hand, as the international community imposed very heavy sanctions on Russia and demanded a return to international law, Russia could not avoid these crises in principle. Russia’s geopolitical system is in deep crisis because what it has done is contrary to international law. The economic system entered a deep crisis due to economic sanctions, forcing it to divert huge resources to Crimea and wage war in Donbass.
The crisis of freedom of expression in Russia itself, where it is forbidden to talk about the occupation of Crimea and the presence of Russian troops in the Donbass.
This can be seen even now that a Russian court in Rostov wrote in one of its judgments that Russia supplied a very large amount of food to its soldiers who were at war in Donbass. It is an official recognition by the court that Russia is participating in the military and is escalating the situation in Donbass. In addition, Russia entered the crisis in its health care system, which is related not only to the coward, but also to the fact that huge funds had to be spent on reorganizing the health care system in Crimea. Russia also entered a diplomatic crisis, a cultural crisis, a crisis of international and international relations. Russia is trying to emerge from these crises, but not in the way it should. To get rid of all these crises, it is necessary, first of all, to deoccip Crimea and stop military activities in the Donbass. Then, to some extent, we will be able to talk about Russia returning to normal.
From this point of view, it can be said that Russia is making great sacrifices to control Crimea. Why such victims?
Russia is a country that has never stopped in front of victims. Remember at least World War II and other times when Russia did not pity its people. The main thing for it was to achieve a result, but for what means and victims – the Russian government was never interested.
It considered Russia’s human resources to be very large and unlimited, and they served Russian policy, which was very often adventurous and captivating.
Therefore, following its tradition, Russia did not stop at the victims who were accumulated for its country after the capture of Crimea and its participation in the Donbass. This is a Russian tradition. And I think it is a violation of international law – the right to a normal and peaceful life, to improve the quality of life.
Why such victims? Why does Russia need Crimea?
First of all, I think that Russia does not need Crimea. The occupation of Crimea was one of the ways in which the Kremlin leadership began to make claims to the whole world. As for the Crimea, Russia has chosen the worst path of development. In essence, in 2014, Russia had a choice of two paths – one path to the occupation of Crimea. But the other way is one that complies with international law. Namely, that Russia should negotiate an agreement with Ukraine, as well as Russia’s participation in the development of Crimea and so on.
I would say that both Crimea and Ukraine were ready to increase Russia’s involvement in the development of Crimea.
Crimea began to develop as a large international resort, very large cruise ships began to enter the Crimea. In the last years before 2014, a large number of tourists from Europe appeared in the Crimea, including Germany, France, Spain, and the Baltic States. As a counterweight to the dominance of Russian tourists, Crimea also began to develop as a European tourist center. And in the Crimea, the Russians came to them very much, they considered them their own. There was no language barrier. Therefore, Russia’s involvement in the development of Crimea was potentially very promising. But Russia chose a different path, which plunged it into these many crises.
You have been living in Kiev for two years now, you have left the Crimea. You are following what is happening there …
No doubt. I have a source of information, preparing reviews of Crimea, which is the main topic of my current work.
In 2014, Russia occupied Crimea and the war in Donbass began. There is a possibility that there will be another Russian invasion of Ukraine, at the border troops. How did you think there would be another war?
The fact of the matter is that Ukraine has become an instrument in the hands of the Kremlin to demand the strengthening of its position in the international arena. It cannot be said that the Kremlin is now at war with Ukraine. It is at war in Ukraine, but for its own interests that extend far beyond Ukraine’s borders. The Kremlin is waging war in Ukraine to demand non-enlargement of NATO in order to strengthen its position in international organizations.
But Kremlin politicians have made a big mistake.
This is because European society can only respond to these demands with uncompromising and stronger demands on Russia. Russia should act in this situation in accordance with international law, and then, as in the case of Crimea, it would be much more successful. But now Russia is on the verge of defeat.
–
