Crimean status referendum: March 16, 2014

[Хahar 🤔]

Today the scheduled referendum in Crimea and Sevastopol was moved to March 16 from March 30. There will be two questions asked, both in Russian:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The first question asks whether the Crimea should become a federal subject of the Russian Federation. The second asks whether the Crimea should remain part of Ukraine but under the annulled 1992 Constitution (which, among other things, provided for a popularly-elected President of Crimea).

Note: Please keep political invective, etc. out of this thread (and, more generally, out of this board). This thread is for discussing the forthcoming referendum. Obviously it's fine to discuss the potential political implications of the results, but discussion should be generally related to the topic at hand. There are other threads available for general discussion.

[Vega]

Since Stalin put all the Russians over there; yes, they should be part of Russia.

[Middle-aged Europe]

According to Crimea's deputy prime minister, Crimea is already a part of the Russian Federation as of today. The referendum is regarded a formality which is supposed to confirm the decision made by Crimean parliament.

[Хahar 🤔]

The result of this referendum certainly seems like a foregone conclusion, although it appears now that the impetus to hold it might be coming from Simferopol rather than from Moscow.

[StateBoiler]

Crimea, Scotland, Catalonia...got a lot coming up in Europe.

[Vega]

Crimea, Scotland, Catalonia...got a lot coming up in Europe.

The latter two should stay where they are, though.

[YL]

It looks like Refat Chubarov, the leader of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars, has called for a boycott.

Update: there's a statement by the Mejlis here.  It does indeed (and not very surprisingly) call for a boycott.

[ag]

Wrong board. This is not an election. At most, an "electoral-type event".

[Niemeyerite]

Crimea, Scotland, Catalonia...got a lot coming up in Europe.

Don't compare Catalonia to Crimea. There's no referendum happening here.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Acting President of Ukraine has "cancelled" the referendum.

I wonder how is he going to enforce this.

[Linus Van Pelt]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The first question asks whether the Crimea should become a federal subject of the Russian Federation. The second asks whether the Crimea should remain part of Ukraine but under the annulled 1992 Constitution (which, among other things, provided for a popularly-elected President of Crimea).

Are these two independent questions that could in principle both receive a yes vote, despite the contradiction, or is one somehow conditional on the other in the style of the Puerto Rican three-way referendums?

[Associate Justice PiT]

The result of this referendum certainly seems like a foregone conclusion, although it appears now that the impetus to hold it might be coming from Simferopol rather than from Moscow.

     In that case, what would the political ramifications be if it somehow fails? Would it faze the Crimean government?

[BaconBacon96]

This is an illegitimate referendum.

[Хahar 🤔]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The first question asks whether the Crimea should become a federal subject of the Russian Federation. The second asks whether the Crimea should remain part of Ukraine but under the annulled 1992 Constitution (which, among other things, provided for a popularly-elected President of Crimea).

Are these two independent questions that could in principle both receive a yes vote, despite the contradiction, or is one somehow conditional on the other in the style of the Puerto Rican three-way referendums?

It's hard to tell, but in the absence of information to the contrary we have to assume the former. It's odd that the second question is even on the ballot, really; I'd expect a straight yes-no vote on joining Russia.

The result of this referendum certainly seems like a foregone conclusion, although it appears now that the impetus to hold it might be coming from Simferopol rather than from Moscow.

     In that case, what would the political ramifications be if it somehow fails? Would it faze the Crimean government?

It's a moot point, since it won't fail. The referendum is just a formality. It's not possible to say how the Crimean electorate would vote on this question in a fair and free election, but this is not that; in addition to the powerful chilling effect that the presence of Russian troops provide, it's likely that turnout among Russians will be significantly higher than turnout among non-Russians. In the worst case, there's always what ag mentioned: this is an electoral-type event, not an election, and the results can be made to reflect that.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Anyone know what the Russian word for Anschluss is?

[Gustaf]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The first question asks whether the Crimea should become a federal subject of the Russian Federation. The second asks whether the Crimea should remain part of Ukraine but under the annulled 1992 Constitution (which, among other things, provided for a popularly-elected President of Crimea).

Are these two independent questions that could in principle both receive a yes vote, despite the contradiction, or is one somehow conditional on the other in the style of the Puerto Rican three-way referendums?

It's hard to tell, but in the absence of information to the contrary we have to assume the former. It's odd that the second question is even on the ballot, really; I'd expect a straight yes-no vote on joining Russia.

The result of this referendum certainly seems like a foregone conclusion, although it appears now that the impetus to hold it might be coming from Simferopol rather than from Moscow.

     In that case, what would the political ramifications be if it somehow fails? Would it faze the Crimean government?

It's a moot point, since it won't fail. The referendum is just a formality. It's not possible to say how the Crimean electorate would vote on this question in a fair and free election, but this is not that; in addition to the powerful chilling effect that the presence of Russian troops provide, it's likely that turnout among Russians will be significantly higher than turnout among non-Russians. In the worst case, there's always what ag mentioned: this is an electoral-type event, not an election, and the results can be made to reflect that.

And due to those reasons, Tartars seem to be calling for boycotts which of course also skews things.

How did the Anschluss referendum go, 99% in favour or something?

[Zanas]

It went 99.08% in Germany, 99.75% in Austria. I guess it won't be so high here, nearly everybody worldwide has stopped getting such results, they know it doesn't look too good. They'll arrange for 7 to 15% to vote no.

We have to ask ourselves one question though. Even if the referendum was democratic and every voter voted, wouldn't the result also be a Yes majority ? It appears something like 55-60% of Crimean citizens are "ethnic Russians", whatever that means. So why would they vote no ?

Not saying this mascarade has any legitimacy, mind you.

edit : Just found contradictory figures : some 71% of Crimean residents in 2011 said Ukraine was their motherland. Make what you want of that.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I'm sure the referendum's result will fulfull its purpose of being a glorious demonstration of the Crimeans' unwavering support for Comrade Putin and his policies.

[Krago]

Anyone know what the Russian word for Anschluss is?

According to Google Translate:  подключение

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The only real question whether enough Russians will be ferried in to make the turnout go over 100%.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The West should only reject this illegal secession if it rejects the other illegal secession it supported six years ago. Russia should also be morally consistent.

[YL]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The first question asks whether the Crimea should become a federal subject of the Russian Federation. The second asks whether the Crimea should remain part of Ukraine but under the annulled 1992 Constitution (which, among other things, provided for a popularly-elected President of Crimea).

Are these two independent questions that could in principle both receive a yes vote, despite the contradiction, or is one somehow conditional on the other in the style of the Puerto Rican three-way referendums?

They are the two options: the only way to vote against the first is to vote for the second.

Contrary to earlier reports, it appears that ballots will be printed in Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar as well as Russian.

[Cranberry]

Anyone know what the Russian word for Anschluss is?

According to Google Translate:  подключение

подключение means "Anschluss" in the sense of the connection to e.g a telephone network
The "Anschluss", the (forced) merger of one state/territory with an other, if I may say so, is присоединение, says at least my German-Russian dictionary.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The West should only reject this illegal secession if it rejects the other illegal secession it supported six years ago. Russia should also be morally consistent.

It is sorrowful, that condemning Kosovo and worshiping Milosevic has become token of progressism in modern America.

I have not done the latter. The situations in Kosovo and Crimea are clearly parallel, anyway, just switching out one rotten imperial power (the US/NATO) for another (Russia).

[Zuza]

It went 99.08% in Germany, 99.75% in Austria. I guess it won't be so high here, nearly everybody worldwide has stopped getting such results, they know it doesn't look too good.

Referendums are a different case, sometimes 99% results are possible, for example, in South Sudan 98.83% voted for independence and turnout was 97.58%.

Though in Crimea such thing can't happen (providing that results aren't rigged, of course) - not because it is impossible in principle, but because of large share of ethnic Tatar and Ukrainian population.