Posted on 03/16/2014 1:50:53 PM PDT by goldstategop
SIMFEROPOL, March 16. /ITAR-TASS/. A total of 93% of participants in the referendum in Crimea have voted for the accession to Russia, according to an exit poll conducted by the Crimean Institute for Political and Sociological Studies.
A total of 7% of participants in the referendum prefer Crimea to preserve its status.
The exit poll’s data were made public after polling stations had closed closed.
The exit poll was conducted at over 200 polling stations of Crimea, including 50 polling stations in Sevastopol.
People were asked the question: do you vote for Crimea’s accession to Russia as a constituent entity or do you vote for restoring the 1992 Constitution of Crimea as part of Ukraine.
Totally, 59,111 people were polled.
Crimean vice-premier Rustam Temirgaliev said the exit poll data proved Crimea’s victory.
Observers said the referendum had been held in an undisturbed atmosphere and members of the international observers mission, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation and Russia's Federal Assembly were expected to offer their assessments shortly.
Referendum in Crimea on the future status of the region fully met international standards and stood in line with democratic procedures, Mateusz Piskorski, the chief of the international observer mission said after the closure of the polling stations Sunday. Extremely high turnout
CrimeaInform news agency says the voters' activity was twice as intensive as in the last parliamentary election in October 2012.
The turnout at the referendum currently in Crimea is was very high. Crimean Information Minister Dmitry Polonsky said on Sunday, that it could exceed 80%.
“Data proves that the turnout exceeds 70%,” the minister said, adding that the joint efforts allowed the authorities to organize the referendum within the shortest period of time. “The team, which is taking the lead in Crimea, has been created recently. It involved young and ambitious politicians.”
The turnout at the referendum in Sevastopol on Crimea's accession to Russia exceeded 85%, head of the city election commission Valery Medvedev said.
"I've received data after the closure of polling stations. It proves that the turnout exceeds 85%," the city election commission head said.
"Data gathering has not been completed yet," he added.
The polling stations in Sevastopol were closed at 22:00 Moscow time.
At present, polling stations continue to calculate votes.
Accession to Russia
Under the Constitution of the Russian Federation the initiative of joining the Russian Federation is the prerogative of the applicant state (or of its part). The Russian president notifies the parliament and government of the Russian Federation of such a request. After the signing of an international treaty the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation examines it for legality and compliance with the Constitution. The document undergoes ratification. The name of the new territory of the Russian Federation, its borders and transitional period are determined. The newly-admitted territory is granted the status of a republic, territory, autonomous area or autonomous district. Next, the rules are established of granting Russian citizenship, and the status of the property assets and liabilities of the entering state and the period of the new member’s integration with the Russian system are determined.
On March 11 the legislature of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea adopted a declaration of independence. If the referendum produces a decision to the effect the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol should enter Russia, Crimea will be proclaimed as a sovereign state with a republican form of government.
“Today’s referendum made Crimea a sovereign state”
No, the faked referendum did not make the “Crimea a sovereign state.” Crimea is the territory of the Ukraine under illegal occupation by the armed forces of Russia. This illegal occupation and conquest of the Crimea is no more lawful or recognized under international law than the illegal conquest and annexations of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia by the Soviet Union in 1940.
Surprise! Surprise!
None of those countries had populations that voluntarily wanted to join the Soviet Union - which was a dictatorship. That made it illegitimate and the resulting Soviet annexations were never recognized by the West. As you pointed out, not only did they contravene international law, they flouted the principle of national self-determination as well.
Every case is different. And that is true here.
Uh, 80% of Crimeans voted for Yanukovich in 2010. They are not going to accept rule from Banderists who shot their way to power in Kiev and immediately banned the Russian language.
The solution is: (1) Finlandization, i.e., Ukraine will be neutral and not join NATO, and (2) Federalization, giving regions some autonomy, respect for minorities and languages.
Well, at least if he did that the Putinistas would oppose him and stop praising him.
Of course I would! Its hard to oppose a country with a 13% flat income tax.
I wish they had it here.
Yup and they did not vote for the rabble revolution that happened in Kiev.
Of course we are not interested in the will of the people despite our yammering to the contrary. We are just upset that we picked stooges to back in the revolution that cannot govern.
Do you think of yourself as a follower of Putin with loyalty to him?
I told you already, they did not ban the Russian language. There was a bill that would remove Russian from state documents...and it failed to pass into law.
And 80% of Crimeans voting for Yanukovych means only that they lean towards Russia. Being compelled to join in this way is very different.
Just think Quebec, where every election until recently had the Parti Quebecois (pro Independence Party) sweeping every election in a landslide. But when push came to shove, and the party that vowed to push a independence referendum actually did it, people ultimately chose to remain in Canada. (twice)
“Every case is different. And that is true here.”
You are trying to promote the false propaganda and disinformation that there was some kind of self-determination in the Crimea by means of this referendum. Since this referendum was a blatant fraud and offered the Crimeans no opportunity whatsoever to self determine their association with the Ukraine, the Russian conquest of the Crimea offered the Crimeans no more opportunity for self determination and self-rule than the Russians of the Soviet Union offered the people of the Baltic Republics. The referendum was a fraud, and the Russian occupation and annexation of the Crimea is a fraud staged by Putin’s Russian regime.
What is this “international law”? Without someone to enforce it, it is only a joke.
And given the jokers that are the UN, Obama and the EU, who exactly is going to do anything about it?
When it comes to international relations, the “law of the jungle” is the only “international law” that applies.
“What is this “international law”? Without someone to enforce it, it is only a joke.”
If that were true, then Russia has no basis in right to occupy or annex the Crimea. Unfortunately for your theory, Russia is subject to the Kellogg-briand Pact which they have breached in a major way by their invasion and occupation of the Crimea. If you choose to disregard such international law and resort to the law of the jungle, then the world has the right to do so as well and hold Russia accountable by every available diplomatic, economic, and miltary means.
Wow that’s like the black vote in Philadelphia.
Wish I could vote to join the 1791 United States of America.
“Uh, 80% of Crimeans voted for Yanukovich in 2010.”
Yanukovych consistently rigged the elections, which is why the people of the Ukraine lost faith in their government’s ability to stop such subversions of their powers to self-determine their representation in the goverment.
“They are not going to accept rule from Banderists who shot their way to power in Kiev and immediately banned the Russian language.”
You are repeating almost verbatim the obscenely false propaganda coming from Putin’s Russian regime. The political leaders holding positions of power in the Ukranian goverment are overwhelmingly ethnic Russians, and the “Banderists” have no representation in the Ukrainian government. Your usage of such blatantly false propaganda from Putin’s Russian regime raises the suspicion you are either one of Putin’s propagandists trying to influence public opinion on the blogs or someone hopelessly self-deluded.
Funny they'd try that. Between Russian and Ukrainian, the difference is that people other than historians will still be speaking Russian in 2040.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
