INTERETHNIC RELATIONS IN UKRAINE

Text of conversation at “Public radio”, 1 April 2004.

Participants:

Kost Bondarenko – political scientist, journalist,

Lylya Budjurova – journalist,

Refat Chubarov, - first deputy head of Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people, People’s deputy of Ukraine, member of fraction “Nasha Ukraina” (Our Ukraine),

Pavlo Baulin – deputy Head of Russian bloc, People’s deputy of Ukraine of third convocation,

Mikola Shulga, People’s deputy of Ukraine, first deputy Head of Committee of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, member of Communist Party of Ukraine.

Refat Chubarov: In order to regulate a discord in Crimea, it is not enough only the Mejlis’s efforts – it is necessary clear, but understandable steps of Kyiv’s power.

Pavlo Baulin: Concerning Russian factor that I know practically there are not any conflicts in social life. If I said on Moslem radicals, I don’t want in any case, to transform it on entire Crimean Tatar people. It is, basically, a peaceful, diligent people, to whom I treat with big respect.

Mikola Shulga: National question – this is the question, which is to be constantly in field of vision of administrative bodies. We already suffered in own history and suffer up to now the consequences of a mistaken formula, that national question was solved one and for all. The national question will never be solved. And it is so dynamical that needs, firstly, attention, and secondly requires a professional approach.

Kost Bondarenko:

Good evening! On air there is a program “Topic of day”.

As always, every Thursday with you in studio is Kost Bondarenko. As always, we talk about those topics, which are discussed in our society, which causes a resonance, and generally stimulate an ambiguous appraisal.

This week a main attention was concentrated on Crimea, Crimean peninsula. And, for some reason, many persons formed such impression that there is not only a moment of everyday opposition, if one can name any opposition as everyday. Many persons state that Crimean card is able to influence not only on situation in Crimea, but on situation in Ukraine as a whole. As this year is the year of presidential election in Ukraine, that it is possible on the whole, that some Ukrainian politicians in Kyiv will try to play the Crimean card that by any way or to influence on own rating, or form a certain public opinion, or by some way to influence on placement of political forces on the eve of elections. Particularly, one does it very easy, very easy to throw a discord in our society, and our state having not so many years.

It was said a lot for last 13 years that interethnic, inter-regional conflicts are possible or regional conflicts with prospect to develop in all-Ukrainian. One wants to believe that this conflict nevertheless will not develop into something more. One wants to believe that it is only a misunderstanding. One wants believe that the provocations will be not developed.

But, about present events in Crimea, we will talk with People’s Deputy of bloc “Nasha Ukraine”, deputy Head of Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people, Refat Chubarov; deputy Head „Russian bloc”, Pavlo Baulin; and People’s deputy of Ukraine, member of fraction of communists, first deputy Head of Committee on human rights, national minorities and interethnic relations, Mykola Shulga.

Also, we have communication from Crimea with journalist Lylya Budjurova, who knows present situation in Crimea, and who constantly observes the events, which take place in Crimea for last months, and who observes over forcing of situation around conflict between Crimean Tatars and other groups in Crimea.

Good evening Lylya!

Lylya Budjurova:

Good evening.

Kost Bondarenko:

I want to ask you that you briefly tell our hearers about course of conflict.

Lylya Budjurova:

I think you set very difficult problem before me - to tell generally about whole heart of the conflict. One remark – not for a while yet this conflict developed in form of interethnic conflict – on the one hand Crimean Tatars, on the other hand – Slavic population of Crimea. Not for a while yet this conflict is between separate groups of persons, and I hope very much that it doesn’t develop in interethnic.

I think that the roots of this conflict one should find, actually, very deep. In society could not that outburst, which took place, if one would not have prerequisites for social outburst. If we will talk about one side of this conflict, though I want to say that we now simply note, Crimean Tatars…, that a majority of them for last 15 years live in conditions, which very difficult to name simply as civilized, humane…

On the other hand – they have a number of other problems, not only economical, but also the problems to have an opportunity to take part in power, opportunities to express own opinion, and to rebirth own culture. So a ground, for appearance of some radical things, was enough well prepared by non-solution of these many problems.

If we will more detailed concretize, meaning present situation that I think that Crimean authorities, first of all, law-enforcement bodies, ignores the appearance in Crimea such an institution, as skin heads. I do not presume to insist that there are in Crimea organized, so-called, skinheads with firm ideological principles. Most likely, there are not the “right” skinheads with firm ideological principles in Crimea. There are simply groups of young people, and I name them simply “dregs”, who name themselves skinheads, and took some of their attributes. I don’t think that if law-enforcement bodies will look for office with fascist symbolism in Simferopol, they find it. Most likely – no. But that the groups enough aggressive to any nationality, go openly in Simferopol, crying out some xenophobia slogans, that they sit in one certain sector at stadium, in sector for fanatics of football team “Tavria” and allow themselves on football, and also crying out xenophobia slogans, that not noting these facts – this is or criminal light-mindedness, or crime.

In one's time, a non-response of law-enforcement bodies on such demonstration of dangerous things in our society resulted to event, which took place now. At the same time, I cannot say that this group of hooligans, which organized this battle in Cotton-club, is some national heroes, who avenged bad, fascist skinheads. Actually, all are guilty. At the same time, the law-enforcement bodies are to take a big part of being guilty.

Kost Bondarenko:

Lylya, don’t you think that took place a special escalation of this tension. Somebody wanted specially to provoke this situation, this conflict before visit of George Soros in Crimea?

Lylya Budjurova:

You know, I wouldn’t draw such conclusions. One shouldn’t find malicious intent there, where this is explained by banal stupidity. I think that if someone provoked a situation, such hints at provocation are visible. Actually, yet three months ago nobody heard about “skinheads” in Crimea. George Soros has not any relation to it. If somebody in Kyiv has idea to destabilize society with scenario to implement state of emergency, which is able, by some way, to postpone elections of President, that easier it can be organized, namely, in Crimea. Taking into account, that here there are problems of Crimean Tatar people for a long time, and here easier to organize such conflict, that it would have most dangerous forms, as interethnic conflict.

Kost Bondarenko:

Thank you, Lylya. We continue our program. And I have first question to Mr. Refat Chubarov.

Say, please, for last some months take place different outbreaks of activity. At the same time, each such outbreak is accompanied by big ejection of information to Kyiv. It is roused a special interest to some openly hooligan clashes. Saying conditionally, Russian fought with Crimean Tatar, and at once in Kyiv took place an exaggeration of information, telling, that there is a conflict. At the same time, one tried several times to attract attention to Crimean Tatars and Crimean Tatar factor. First time, one says, in autumn with Tuzla and situation in Crimea. At the same time, was untwisted a question of Crimean Tatars as well. Latter, there was 50^th anniversary of joining of Crimea to Ukraine, and in that time, one started to talk about Crimean Tatar factor. Latter, you remember, there was a situation in Sudak, when also took place a conflict between local militia and Crimean Tatars. At last, present situation.

For whom is favorable a situation with Crimean Tatars? And how can the Mejlis keep Tatars from wrong reaction on provocations?

Refat Chubarov:

Firstly, I would like to agree with Mrs. Budjurova that the conflicts, which take place in Crimea, thankfully, were not developed in interethnic ones. It is truth. And thank God! I would like to say that some incidents which take place in Crimea, if they would take place in other regions of Ukraine, and I am sure, that they would be estimated otherwise.

But Crimea is Crimea – there is a specific situation and it is understandable, that these or those political forces, or journalists, which serve certain political forces, will light by own way those events, which take place in Crimea.

Really, for last months was felt a peculiar tension in Crimea. And this tension there was between Crimean Tatars and authority. Sudak – a beginning of year, land issue, and then Simeiz – land issue, and then already incident on March 23, when some beat others, then those gathered and went and did violence against others.

Why, it was happened, to my opinion? I agree that a lot depended on authority. The authority, unfortunately, it is my opinion, instead to make open, honest conversation about situation in this area, when appear any problems, especially, land ones, it, as a rule, hides this information. We don’t know the results of work of any commission from Kyiv which worked in Crimea. I, as People’s deputy, don’t know, even a part of that information, which they cleared up. Not to mention Crimean society. On the other hand, the authority, when faces enough complicated problems, instead to carry on a dialogue for solution of this problem, begin to look for anti-arguments: because other side to behave wrong. Why does it, one says, break the law. It really breaks the law, because self-acquisition of lands – is illegal. But, at the same time, the authority doesn’t want to explain to people, what is the general land situation, what kind of solution of this problem could be. In this is, to my opinion… And this is constant, consistent opposition of separate segment of Crimean society, in this case, Crimean Tatars with authority, on some stage there was attempt to turn it on interethnic basis. And, unfortunately, and Lylya here is right as well, the basis was prepared including separate Mass Media.

Today, one can say that we are able to find solution of this situation, which takes place in Crimea, but for it not enough only the Mejlis’s efforts and Crimean authority. Here necessary clear, but understandable steps of Kyiv’s authority.

Kost Bondarenko:

In Crimea live Crimean Tatars, including Ukrainians, Russians… One can divide on Russian-speaking and Crimean Tatar, and north, there are also Ukrainian-speaking territories.

What is now a position of Russian-speaking population of Crimea? Whether is in Crimea Russian factor? What is this factor?

Pavlo Baulin:

Yes, really, today in Crimea live, if I am not mistaken, under population census, each seventh citizen of Crimea – Crimean Tatar, the rest – mainly, Slavic population. Though, there are also Armenians, Germans, and Greeks and so on.

Russian factor in Crimea. Well, till recently they thought that Crimea – Russian Crimea – till 1954, when under will of N.S. Khruschev it was handed to Ukraine. Actually, there acts a powerful voluntary organization “Russian community of Crimea” and strong party organization Russian bloc, which represented also in Verkhovna Rada of Crimea.

Concerning those problems, which journalist Lylya said about, which we speak about, I think, there are several reasons. And they appear yet before establishment of independent Ukrainian state – 1990, 1991, and 1992 – return of Crimean Tatars in Crimea. Because, using certain political situation, ex-president Kravchuk and politicians invited Crimean Tatars. Kravchuk said: “Yes, I receive 400 and 500, how much necessary Crimean Tatars in Crimea”. But, the fact is that the state was absolutely not ready for it. Actually, when they arrived, nobody waited for them and established appropriate conditions. This is the main reason.

Besides, there were certain emissaries of those, I would say, Moslem radicals, who simply incited people to go to Crimea. They made a myth about some land of promise. People gave up their apartments. They deserted their homes of many years. People gave up high-paid, including intellectual jobs. And when they arrived here, they faced reality. There was such reality, that state inhabitants got in rural area, and they had such conditions, as were in Stone Age.

I would note another reason – this is absolute weakness of authorities to establish some normal relations. And I am to agree with Leonid Hrach, who says that Crimean, and also and Kyiv authority in many cases “plays” with more radical wing of Mejlis. It is really so. There are double standards: ones approach to the Slavic population, and another to Crimean Tatar. One shouldn’t try to solve problems of one group at the expense of others.

Yes, there are serious conditions, but I think that now in small cities of Donetsk or Lugansk oblasts, the living conditions of Ukrainians and Russians are not better. Actually, the authority is inactive. And now dear lady Lylya speaks about skinheads. There are not any skinheads! The authorities conjured them up. The authority thought them, to explain its own weakness.

There is, at last, another reason. I already said about some radicalism of a certain wing… Well, firstly, Mejlis itself. May be, Refat explains, in which normative-legal frames is this organization, which takes today functions of parallel authority. Regional, state mejlises are created, and so on. When leaders state that we are to establish National Crimean Tatar – this is also, as one says, not helpful.

And there is another factor, which I want to dwell on. This is the West, USA, in particular, which today does its thing to spite Russia by favorably playing a Crimean Tatar card in Crimea, separation of Crimea. Generally, Americans are stupid people, including politicians. I beg your pardon, that I say such words, but they step constantly on same rake – they established Al-Khaid to fight against USSR, Al-Khaid today them… They created modjaheds and talibs. Currently, they make such precedent to seize Crimea from Ukraine, from Slavic world. This is the main reasons because of them are kindled conflicts today.

Concerning Russian factor that I know there are not practically any conflicts at common level. I often visit Crimea. When I was a deputy, I received citizens also in Bakhchisaray region. Generally, people live in peace and friendship. If I said about Moslem radicals, I don’t want in any case, to transform it on entire Crimean Tatar people. It is mainly, a peaceful, hard-working people, to whom I treat with respect.

Kost Bondarenko:

Thank you, but I don’t understand well geopolitical interests of USA in separation of Crimea from Ukraine. But we discuss it later. Leonid Hrach, your Party member, Mr. Mikola, he criticizes constantly a position of authority and Crimean Tatar. He allegedly tries, from one hand, to criticize all, but from other hand, tries to be in a role of some third force in Crimea. But from other hand, some Mass Media accuse him that he is almost main destabilizer of situation in Crimea.

Mikola Shulga:

Concerning criticism of authority, to my opinion, there was not less criticism of my colleagues of present round-table. Actually, there is something for discussion.

The fact is that national question – this is question, which is to be constantly in field of vision of administrative bodies.

We already suffered in our history and suffer up to now the consequences of a mistaken formula, that the national question was solved once and for all. The national question never will be solved. And it is so dynamical that requires, firstly, attention, secondly, professional approach. The fact is that this is the most dangerous field of common relations. Here one can take any question, either economical, or political, and at once transform it into the area of interethnic issues and then it becomes so pointed, that it is very difficult to stop these negative processes.

I, in preparing for the meeting, looked through newest information of survey in Ukraine, which was made by Institute of Sociology of National Academy of Ukraine. This survey was made in February of 2004. As a whole, there is a normal situation of interethnic relations in Ukraine. I can give some information: “Whether was at common level for last month any conflict with people who offend other nationality, and who drive you crazy?” – only 2% said that there was such case. I decided that, may be, here Ukrainians predominate. Certainly, Ukrainians live almost 80%, and may be, because of it, there is such information.

But I decided to look as Ukrainians react on it, including Russians and other nationalities. 2% Ukrainians stated that there were such cases, Russians – 2,3%, people of other nationalities – 1,5%. That is, as a whole, a situation is normal.

But, you know, we in 2002 in Institute on Sociology noted that index of interethnic relation begins to become worse. There are not any obvious reasons. And we decided not to publish them, and to analyze carefully. Latter, we saw that really there is a certain tendency namely at level of common relations. There are a lot of problems, why it took place. In last years, particularly, in last months we faced situation…Certainly, there was aggravation not only in Crimea, also in Kyiv, concerning anti-Semitism. You know about it, and there were programs on it.

The moment that interethnic situation can aggravate, it is present in social perception – 13% of people for question “What do you think, what now people fear most of all?” answered that interethnic conflicts. And 6% think that inter-religious conflicts. Here, from one hand, at common level people didn’t face any offences – only 2%, but much more from fear.

Coming back to our subject, to my opinion, if there was more clarity in activity of authority, especially, concerning the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, where there is a specific situation in interethnic relations. This is region, where, firstly, most distinctly are ethnical non-Ukrainian groups, because a majority is Russians, each seventh in Crimea – Crimean Tatar, and other national minorities. And here is to be more clarity, all time necessary to think, what problems – social, economical, others – can be aggravated and transform in interethnic question. The main problem is the land question. It has an economical character as its basis, and then it develops into an interethnic problem. And I think that commissions which worked… And how much did commissions work recently, Refat Abdurakhmanovich?

Refat Chubarov:

For six months 4 commissions...

Mikola Shulga: Four commissions! And no one of them became clear for society and we don’t know any case, who was suffered. Except only some cases. And that is all, we don’t know more. This is, I think – is not solution of question.

Kost Bondarenko:

At the same time, it is interesting that when somebody occupied the lower terraces of Nikitskyi botanical garden, nobody absolutely was interested in it.

There is such an opinion that at one time, in 1994-1995, the Mejlis of Crimean Tatars appeared to be an active ally of official Kyiv in opposition between Meshkov and Kyiv. The Crimean Tatar Mejlis passed to the side of Kyiv and very actively assisted Kyiv in the establishment of Kyiv’s laws in Crimea. From that time, Crimean Tatars and official Kyiv were constant allies, and up to now they are political allies in Crimea.

But there is such an opinion that it was the past, one says, 10-15 years. The present generation of leaders of Mejlis will step aside from active policy. Soon will come younger and more radical people. And, it is possible, to raise a question about the separation of Crimea from Ukraine, on restoration of Crimean independence. Whether do these conflicts, which are now simple conflicts, risk being transformed into any separatist actions, which could be result to separation of Crimea from Ukraine? And whether does this opposition develop in more active, more global opposition? What is your opinion Mr. Refat?

Refat Chubarov:

If to answer very briefly, that one would take into account that future lays today.

Unfortunately, in our society many of us today use those stereotypes, which were taken into our heads for tens years of our past.

I would like very much, and I always ask my opponents go further in searches of arguments concerning situation, which is necessary to solve jointly.

I would like very much that we break yesterday, the day before yesterday arguments, because the answers on them already were given, at least, one spoke about them. So, besides that we very often speak about authority under this or other reflections, I would like that we also speak a lot about ourselves. About society.

My good relations with Mr. Baulin, in no way, prevent, to name many of those statements, which were heard, as demagogical. I said one of my opponents some years ago: “To find me at least one Tatar, who would say, that he was forced and could name concrete person, who forced him to move or return to the Motherland”. You don’t find anybody, I don’t know, why sometimes opponents cannot understand that great inclination to own land, which Crimean Tatars have!

Why cannot you to believe that, how much I remember myself, always in each family, said that we are to return to Crimea, there is our land?

Why cannot you believe that holding a high post and living in Riga, I returned to nowhere (from point of view of social conditions – Ed.)? But I knew, where I return, I return to my Motherland!

I don’t exclude that there are people, who are sorry that they returned, because they faced great problems. But I would like that we avoid such arguments that anybody turned somebody, or anybody invited somebody. Kravchuk didn’t invite, Mykola Oleksandrovich, in first years of independence was minister on nationalities, if we want to specify, who was invited by Kravchuk that he meant Germans, and he made a slip in speaking.

Now concerning your questions… We are to understand very clearly that we want today to solve jointly. If we want to liquidate, remove consequences not only deportation, but a decade of forcible keeping of Crimean Tatars, when took place great destructions and deformations and in culture, in language, and in heart of this people, that we are jointly to sit and define clearly what we solve today, what we can solve tomorrow, and what we never can solve, and it is necessary to talk about it.

But such reproaches, that for account of others, the Slavs… Call me at least one situation, when was returned that home, from which were deported Crimean Tatars, and evicted those people, who live (today-Ed.) there?

We think that those people, who now live in our homes, they are not guilty, the authority is guilty, and so, the authority is to solve something. Our land were taken away, in this connection, the authority is to solve and find those lands, and not takes away from those people, which received them, and find those lands, which are giving today those, who could simply to wait – officials from Kyiv, other places, outside the Ukraine and those Russian structures, which take this land by hundreds hectares… Why not?

And now concerning your question.

I very skeptically regard when one pins those or others labels on Crimean Tatars, that they are more pro-Ukrainian, or more pro-Russian. I wouldn’t like such labels. Crimean Tatars are simply such people, as they are, and they are consistent. Crimean Tatars understand very clearly, when they are returning, that certain changes in history took place – Crimea is a part of Ukrainian state. Crimean Tatars almost all supported independence of Ukraine, because they proceed from that further democratic development of our state is one of factors, which help to solve Crimean Tatar problem and restore rights of this people. Crimean Tatars are not such stupid, as some politicians, who state, that past 10-15 years and they raise a question on independent state. Crimea in modern conditions, whoever would like, this is attributed not only to Tatars, and Russians, and other segments of Crimean society. Crimea, in no way, can be independent territory, whoever would like it. And those problems, which have all, who live in Crimea, namely Crimea has, and Crimean Tatar people and they are to be solved in composition of Ukraine.

I am afraid that attempts to solve any problem in our society at once simultaneously are accompanied with some fear, stereotypes – “if to assist today – tomorrow they will be against”. This is not be present, because namely by this way to establish a distrust.

Mikola Shulga:

You know, Refat Abdurakhmanovich, I support what you said, concerning political and legal aspects. This is very important that from your side, who is not only as my good friend, but as a person, who represents Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people, were heard these words, which are very important.

But I said that it is important to discuss sharp questions. I think that in Crimea will be peace and harmony, when will be observed rights, and law. And this is that principle, which gives an opportunity to avoid the present problems. We more criticized the authority concerning land and other economical questions. I have a sharp question, because I already for a long time engage in problem of Crimea, problem of improvement, integration and adaptation of Crimean Tatars, but this is sensitive subject – who are indigenous – at common level one understands that this concern Crimean Tatars, but in legal area it was not solved, but this category necessary to exclude from Constitution, or to fill it by content. This is continued more ten years, and same problem remains sharp – this is a statute of Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people.

Refat Chubarov:

If an effective legislation satisfies needs of society then it would not be necessary daily to engage in development of new legislation – we with you engage in this in Parliament, and our colleague Baulin jointly with us was also engaged in this in previous convocation. The existing law is never able to regulate all problems, which are in society, and that is why it is very important to develop the law, to find such forms for solution of questions, which were not regulated, and that it satisfies or regulates all questions, which are in society.

And so, I want to answer directly to your question – why is it that the Mejlis today cannot be registered on the basis of effective legislation? I answer: namely because there is no legal regulation. And we with you as nobody, know, how much were attempts to adopt that or other laws, which were directed, in one case, on restoration of rights of people, who were deported on basis of nationality, in other case – peoples and national minorities, who were deported. Unfortunately, for years of independence, we failed to adopt these laws, and in connection, we didn’t come to establishment of such legal mechanisms, which could give legal opportunity for existence and activity of representative bodies, in particular, for those people, who outside Ukraine, do not have their own historical Motherland.

But non-registration of Mejlis doesn’t indicate that the existence of Mejlis is a violation of law, there is no such law, which would be violated by existence of such representative body of Crimean Tatars as Mejlis.

Mikola Shulga:

But, as far as I understood, that this was historical speech. And when we adopt the law on restoration of rights of deported persons, from that moment begins a legal regulation of statute of Mejlis?

Pavlo Baulin:

This is again capitulation of authority. But why nevertheless are established such structures without legal area…

Refat Chubarov:

Mr. Pavlo, where?

Pavlo Baulin:

If Russian would like to establish such body…

Refat Chubarov:

Establish. If they don’t violate laws.

Pavlo Baulin:

You undertook functions of management over entire Tatar people, and not only in Crimea, and over those, who still remain in Uzbekistan…

Refat Chubarov:

No. I say, the Russian community of Ukraine or Russian bloc… or Mejlis can “manage” over others, as much as they will have an authority…

Pavlo Baulin:

I would like to add some words about social difficulties, social problems. You know not only social problems.

Take, for example, in satisfied Europe, there is the problem of Basques, they live better than we, but there is a problem of Basques. And terrorist acts, which take place in Europe, they also are reality. Take a problem of Ireland... That is not only social questions… It seems to me that necessary to regulate a question in legal area, in field of Constitution of Ukraine. And, to my opinion, today Mejlis acts beyond frames of this Constitution. It cannot be allowed; today we face that can result to very bad consequences, there are different people…

Refat Chubarov:

Can I ask you, if one says, you would satisfy, if there is no Mejlis? What do you think there wouldn’t be Crimean Tatar problem?

Pavlo Baulin:

Let Mejlis exists, but let it register in appropriate bodies of justice. Let it works into frames of Constitution and laws.

Another thing is land. Why now raise the question that for Crimean Tatars it is necessary to allot land only on south coast of Crimea? I know that those lands, which were allotted, one should say a truth, are not good lands, they are not developed up to now. And this is fact…

Refat Chubarov:

Including my own lot, because for development it is necessary to have money. If the People’s deputy has no money, what can other people have?

Pavlo Baulin:

Well, the matter concerns that there is a blackmail of the mayor of Yalta, that it is necessary to allot lots to Crimean Tatars only on south coast of Crimea. But it doesn’t happen. You said yourself that some problems cannot be solved. We have near endangered Chernigovschina, but why there cannot be allotted lands? Kherson oblast, Nikolavskyi… It is possibly by this way to solve problem…

Refat Chubarov:

Mr.Pavlo, I ask you very much, you don’t think about Crimean Tatars as mankurts. We are patriots of Ukraine, and we have a high feeling to our land, our Motherland.

Pavlo Baulin:

Well, let’s take, for example, full cousin of my mother, Natalya Alekseyevna Nikolayeva, she is indigenous inhabitant of Yalta, she was born there, she has a family, and it means that I can also pretend on land on south coast of Crimea? She grew in Yalta…

Refat Chubarov:

If you were deported that is undoubtedly true. All deportees, not only Crimean Tatars have a right to return to those lands, from which they were deported.

Pavlo Baulin:

I understand, actually, the Crimean Tatar people suffered a tragedy. Only one thing, that I want to say, how much we are delicate, we never say, remember about reason of deportation. Americans also deported the Japanese after 1942, (settled them-Ed.) in reservation…

Refat Chubarov:

You want to repeat those reasons, which were said in known decrees, and which were signed by Beria and Stalin?

Mikola Shulga:

You know that such difficult historical questions… I think we need and generally we attend a lot to history. I think that one is to give due to history, but when we speak for 12 years about history and not say about future, growing generation, which doesn’t see its own prospects, this doesn’t give something good for society, it causes complexes, including complex of victim…

I already discussed with Refat Abdurakhmanovich, you know, discussion questions we will consider in second reading the law on rehabilitation of deportees, and there is a question on land allotment and this is very sharp question, because in Ukraine were allotted by lands only those who worked in agricultural enterprises – collective farms and sovkhozes. In draft it was fixed so that all who returned to rural area. This will be a subject of very sharp discussion.

I would like to discuss with Mr. Pavlo that in those states of West Europe, which are satisfied, there also are ethnical problems. This, I want to say that now there are such problems on border, which connected with survival of people and they interlace with ethnical, but remember, if only we begin to improve living standard, begin to live better, will be more aggravated interethnic questions, including linguistic and others.

You look what “bombs” we have. From one hand – “Do whether we have a threat of nationalism?” No is the answer of 2% people. From other hand, are the stereotypes which were made for hundreds years. So called a scale of Bagardus – chose one of positions, which is more like for you, on which we allow the representatives of this nationality, so, for comparison, it is understandable that for Ukrainians is most close ethnos Russians, when one speaks about Russians, that only “generally who would not allow come in Ukraine” – 2,7%, and concerning Crimean Tatars – 20%. And one should to solve it. We have a negative attitude to other ethnoses, for example, Gipsy – 47%.

Refat Chubarov:

I am grateful that you give all of these figures, but we now are not able to discuss everything, but there are very much factors, which influence the result of such surveys. One of them – is an existence of many forms for preservation of different stereotypes in society, or introducing of new stereotypes, in particular, this is made by electron Mass Media. When almost each evening they show films, in when ones of a single religious or ethnical group are called heroes and others are such called mean people, that we will have such surveys.

Mikola Shulga:

It is absolutely right, in survey in Kyiv; Islam takes first place among threats.

Kost Bondarenko:

Mr. Pavlo, I would like to ask you, here one said about religious factor; however I saw information in press that in Bakhchisaray a local Orthodox clergy provoked a conflict around the market, which was built almost on graves of Tatar khans. The authority supported owners of this market.

Pavlo Baulin:

It (authority – Ed.) silently watched, how was committed pogrom of monastery, pogrom of utility rooms, when was blocked entrance, the soldiers destroyed all there.

Refat Chubarov:

Mr. Pavlo, You realize that? You speak about soldiers. Were there soldiers?

Pavlo Baulin:

Well, those who had metal bludgeons… The information, which I have, is objective enough. Just, there was a provocation from hand of certain part of the Crimean Tatar people, radical part, which, undoubtedly, is minority. A pogrom was committed in monastery, now is Lent, this is a great feat, which is bearded by mockery. To commit such pogrom, and reproach mockery in something, at least, is tactless.

Refat Chubarov:

Mr. Pavlo, I would ask you nevertheless, that we speak in such days very carefully, that was taken place. You said about pogrom in monastery. There was no pogrom of monastery sorry, utility rooms, which were illegally built on arguable territory. This is other business. But in history of Crimea, in spite of all regimes, which were in Crimea, there were not any religious conflicts, and were not destroyed any religious buildings. For period of Crimean Khanate Svyato-Uspenskyi monastery prospered. If we today speak about those or other conflicts, which have appeared, I state, that there is not any religious conflict, there are other reasons, and about them we can speak separately.

Kost Bondarenko:

Mr. Mykola, I heard a lot that separate communists cooperate closely with Social-Democratic Party of Ukraine (united). In press there was information that a real requester – is not Communists, Russians, and skinheads, but they sit here in Kyiv on well-known street, that they manage by this process. Say, please, do you feel whether at least a part of the Communists, that they are used in some games and actions…?

Mikola Shulga:

If to say about our fraction, that the main guiding line, which we keep, - this is our program documents, and our goal coincides with those, who are now to agree with something, that this can be as social-democrats, as “Nasha Ukraina”, or somebody else…

Concerning that we are constantly in situation of any hostility…? I am in normal relations as with representatives of “Nasha Ukraina”, in front of me sits Refat Abdurakhmanovich, we have good relations with him, with social-democrat Gaydash, Hungarian, we submitted joint draft on migration policy, there is such cooperation with other deputies. The main thing – don’t deny our own program goals.

Kost Bondarenko:

Mr. Pavlo, you said that Crimean authority plays with radical wing of Mejlis. Who is specifically from Crimean authority – Kunitsin, Haych? Who is namely of them on the hand of radical wing?

Pavlo Baulin:

By illegal way are held meetings, blocked highways, occupied buildings. It took place not on this week, not from Sudak, and Simeiz. It was started in 1992, when Crimean Tatars stormed a building of Verkhovna Rada of Crimea. Was anyone punished for it? No. So, the fact is that it is a common tendency of authority.

Kost Bondarenko:

But for whom is it profitable? For what do Crimean Tatars need it?

Pavlo Baulin:

For political conjuncture.

Refat Chubarov:

I agree that really were not punished Tatars, who tried to storm Crimean parliament in 1992. Only because of one reason – if it was necessary to punish Crimean Tatars, then it was necessary to clarify all violators, then necessary first of all to punish authority, which drove to such situation…

Pavlo Baulin:

The only thing that is necessary – in order would be law and Constitution, and they were equal for all, there are no selected by God peoples, it was proved by history…

Refat Chubarov:

Nobody says that about it. But let’s restore a historical justice. I want your sincerity. If you were born in your own village, one says, you keep it in your heart, this is – your soul. We want to return at least some names, which are in soul of Crimean Tatars. But such people as you say: “Why do you want it?”

Pavlo Baulin:

Well, nobody always was on this land…, and before you were Greeks…

Kost Bondarenko:

I have to end our discussion on this moment.

May be, I very romantically think about policy and situation in Crimea, but I want believe that soon Russian Movement of Crimea state with initiative to publish, one says, the anthology of Crimean Tatar literature in Russian, and Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people with joint efforts states for reconstruction of museum by Voloshin in Koktebel – and take place conciliation on basis of restoration of Crimean culture.

I want believe that when the problems of 1944 will be solved, one doesn’t take an attempt to restore mistakes of 1783.

Thank our guests.

Good bye.