Researcher Asserts Ukraine’s Vital Need for Crimea, Annexed by Russia a Decade Ago

British researcher Keir Giles posits that Ukraine has been gradually undermining Russia’s control over Crimea, a key determinant of Ukraine’s ability to function as a normal state.

In February 2014, following the Maidan protests and the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych, Russian soldiers swiftly took control of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula. The move was followed by a controversial referendum in which most voters allegedly supported the annexation of Crimea to Russia, a stark contrast to the 1991 referendum where about 54% of Crimean voters supported Ukraine’s independence from the Soviet Union.

Shortly after the disputed referendum, President Vladimir Putin controversially confirmed that Crimea had become part of Russia. The takeover occurred with little resistance, largely due to Russia’s significant military presence in the region. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyi has since admitted that the country was unprepared for war at the time.

In the years following the annexation, Ukraine has entered into conflict, with Zelenskyi acknowledging that their initial lack of preparedness for external aggression continues to impact other European nations. Many have assumed that Ukraine’s recapture of Crimea is unrealistic, but Giles disagrees.

He asserts that the notion of treating Crimea differently from other territories seized from Ukraine is a key leverage for Russia. For Putin, reclaiming Crimea was of symbolic importance, leading him to tenaciously maintain control over the region. However, Ukraine’s Head of Military Intelligence, Kyrylo Budanov, has suggested that recapturing Crimea may be easier than regaining control over regions in Eastern Ukraine, where Russia has better supply routes.

Giles further highlights the significance of the Crimean peninsula to Ukraine’s trade and supply routes in the Black Sea. He suggests that Russian armaments in Crimea can hinder Ukraine’s access to much of the Black Sea’s sea and airspace, potentially blocking use of ports in the Sea of Azov. For Ukraine to maintain a functioning economy, and by extension its fight, it is vital that it retains access to these trade routes, Giles argues.

Despite the challenges, Ukraine has managed to keep open the transportation corridor in the Black Sea for grain exports, among other things. Giles notes that while the war events in Crimea and the Black Sea are significant, they have been overshadowed by the battles on the land front. However, he believes that Ukraine has been able to gradually loosen Russia’s grip on Crimea, weakening Russia’s position in the region while strengthening elsewhere.

Ukraine has already inflicted significant damage on Russia’s Black Sea fleet with sea drones and missiles, and even destroyed the naval headquarters in Sevastopol last September. Giles suggests that these gradual strikes against Russia’s air and sea defenses may eventually lead to wider strategic implications for the war. He adds that the Kerch Strait bridge leading to Crimea, which is under constant threat from Ukraine, is another key target.

Giles acknowledges that a successful attack on the bridge would be a significant blow to Russia, both symbolically and strategically. However, he advises that Ukraine should time the attack to maximize its impact. Despite the challenges, Ukraine continues to intensify its attacks on Crimea, with President Zelensky stating that the conflict began in Crimea and will also end there.