And politicians supporting the war in Chechnya, are “evaluating” the situation in the Crimea

As Volodymyr Maliborsky, chairman of the Simferopol Committee on Affairs of Religions, told journalists at a special press conference, joint efforts of the spiritual administration of the Crimea’s Muslims, the Orthodox eparchy, the government of the Crimea, SBU, and the general public, have solved the problem that had arisen because of the erection of a cross on Kamatra Hill near the village of Morskoi near Sudak, Feodosiya district. (See The Day, November 7, No. 31). In the course of several supposedly peaceful consultations with the government of the autonomous republic, Mufti of the Muslims of the Crimea Emirali Ablayev and Archbishop of Simferopol and the Crimea Lazar agreed on three points. First, the eight crosses already put up in Yevpatoriya, Feodosiya, Morskoi, the village of Mazanka near Simferopol, Saky (two), and Stary Krym (two) will remain. Second, the cross in Morskoi, where about 300 Muslim and 1000 Orthodox families live and because of which the conflict arose, will also be erected. However, it will be smaller in size that the other crosses and will be put on another hill where a Christian cemetery is located. Third, the Crimean eparchy in the future will “refrain from further activities that could infringe on the interests of other faiths in the Crimea.” Those present at the negotiations became guarantors of the accord: People’s Deputy of Ukraine Mustafa Dzhemiliov, members of the Crimean government, deputies of the peninsular parliament, representatives of the President of Ukraine in the Crimea, law enforcement functionaries. Mr. Maliborsky explained that the crosses had been erected in accordance with the UNESCO decision on preparation for the bimillennium of Christ. Mounting memorial signs was a link in the chain of commemorative events. “We could not have foreseen,” Maliborsky said, “that as a result of this the peaceful coexistence of different faiths in the Crimea that historically settled, might give way to religious conflicts.” The issue of rebuilding the cross in Morskoi was tackled in a peculiar way. While community representatives were arguing about at whose expense the cross would be put back, Borys Deich, a Crimea legislator and director of a local sanitarium, solved the problem: he proposed that he himself be mediator as a native of the peninsula and representative of the third faith, Judaism, in the name of peace and order in the region.

However, on the night from Wednesday to Thursday the week before last, a cross in the village of Mazanka near Simferopol, was torn down. According to eyewitnesses, the metallic cross made of double channel with a section of about 20 by 20 centimeters was covertly and at night sawed down at the base with a hacksaw. Volodymyr Maliborsky told journalists one should not link all these events because provocations are possible. For the time being no confession assumed responsibility for tearing down the cross at Mazanka, and Majlis representatives categorically insist that Muslims have nothing to do with it.

In the opinion of observers, such actions could continue so long forces interested in heightening tension continue to exist. For example, they think Crimean Communist leader Leonid Hrach absolutely illegally stated during the meetings in Moscow that “the Crimean authorities took a quite definite stand.” The Crimean authorities, as representatives of a secular state, should have taken not a “definite, but an unbiased stand and not to have permitted infringement of the interests of any faith.” Because of the results of the negotiations of the religious communities from the village of Morskoi and heads of the Muslim and Orthodox religions of the Crimea, had the construction of memorial the symbols been conducted openly and publicly, there would have been no conflict. The village council of Morskoi itself carried out the work of coordinating the positions of the Orthodox Christians and Muslims of the village only after the dismantling of the cross. Actually, the conflict was provoked by the slow reaction of the authorities themselves. As People’s Deputy Refat Chubarov said, “Everything that is improperly constructed has a chance of being improperly destroyed.”

People in the Crimea also think that Leonid Hrach inaccurately and in a distorted way disseminated information about developments on the peninsula during his recent visit to Moscow. One of the activists of Majlis of Crimean Tatars who wished to remain anonymous, pointed out that it is rather strange when Moscow figures who are incapable of attaining peace in the Caucasus, at Leonid Hrach’s suggestion are generously dishing out advice to Ukraine on how it should behave in the Crimea. In particular, Gennady Ziuganov, according to Interfax, spoke of “attempts by national radicals, with active foreign intervention, to organize interethnic conflicts on the peninsula.” Is the leader of Russian Communist Party aware that except for his advice, there is so far no other “active foreign intervention” in Crimean affairs? Or perhaps he also means Russian national radicals like Limonov, who try to hang out their flags now in Sevastopol, now in Baltic states, and everywhere exacerbate the situation.

INCIDENTALLY

Crimean Premier Serhiy Kunitsyn in an interview reminded journalists that all the documents about cooperation, interregional agreements included, according to the legislation in force must undergo examination by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine. “There was no such examination, and I know that the Foreign Ministry, to put it mildly, did not react quite well to what had been done,” Interfax-Ukraine quotes him. According to him, the Presidential Administration repeatedly reminded the highest officials of the autonomous republic, “The Crimea is not a state, but a constituent part of a state, and one has to be aware of what we can and what we have no right to do.”

Touching on specific provisions of the documents signed by Mr. Hrach, Kunitsyn emphasized that the Crimea is not in need of expert examinations by Russian banks concerning issues of conducting electronic settlements of accounts on the peninsula and work with the bonds of the Crimean republican internal loan of 1996. “I think this is meddling in the affairs of another state,” he said.

Commenting on the proposal of Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov that Russia’s Ministry of Property Relations and the authorities of the Crimea create a joint commission on inventory of the use of property on the peninsula, Kunitsyn pointed out that “there is no need for that.” According to him, the SPF of Ukraine and the government of the autonomous republic have all the necessary powers to do so.

In the opinion of the Crimea’s premier, one should inventory and work “with property where there is disagreement.” In particular, he recalled, this concerned unfinished and derelict Russian sanitariums located on the peninsula.

In addition, the premier criticized the statement of the peninsula’s speaker concerning manifestations of national radicalism and extremism on the peninsula in connection with the recent conflict between members of the Orthodox Church and Muslims in the village of Morskoi”. “One must understand that such acute confrontations can lead to fatal and very weighty consequences,” Kunitsyn emphasized and added that “one has to look for clues on how to solve Crimean problems, the interfaith one included, neither in Moscow, the office of the Mufti of Russia or Alexei II; one has to look for it here in the Crimea.”