From an earlier post:
Self-determination is a universal principle. But any referendum done at the point of a gun is illegitimate.
So let's look at the previous referendums that Crimea has had to get an idea of just how pro-Russian they really are.
Crimea held a referendum in January 1991 to effectively separate themselves from the collapsing USSR with 94% of the vote.
Crimea held another referendum declaring themselves an autonomous republic of Ukraine in December 1991 with 54% of the vote, officially separating themselves from the USSR and joining Ukraine.
The rest of Ukraine voted for independence with 90% of the vote.
It was the closest vote in the entire Ukraine, with a bare majority favoring joining Ukraine, but it WAS a majority. Keep in mind also that at this time most of the Tatars that were to return later had not arrived yet, and any legitimate referendum today would include their votes.
I was referring to the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR in 1954. This was accomplished by a decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet.
AFAIK, no vote by the people. Not that a vote would have been meaningful, at the time.
I’m not making any claim that this vote represents “the will of the Crimean people,” only that the process by which the region became part of Ukraine in the first place wasn’t exactly democratic either.
If I lived in Crimea, I suspect I would have voted to be part of a functioning Russia rather than a disintegrating Ukraine. Particularly since a vote for Russia ends the turmoil and uncertainty, while a win for Ukraine would have meant it continuing.