Crimean referendum. How good was it?

Uncategorized 0 Comments

There is a general backgrounder here from Forbes

Forbes also provided this preview on Crimea

All above gives a good intro to  the Wikipedia entry on the Crimean referendum and on the person  Sergey Aksyonov who replaced Crimea’s Prime Minister

So you have

  • a Crimean parliament that may not have voted for their new acting Prime Minister and the referendum. Remember, the parliament building was full of troops at that time. And the actual prime minister was not allowed in
  • an acting Crimean Prime Minister who came from a party that gained only 4% of the vote. ( Ukraine’s President Yanukovych was thrown out by his own party.)
  • no debates
  • media clamp-down, and propaganda in favour of a Russian vote
  • a referendum under military supervision
  • a referendum who’s choices were “Join Russia” or “Leave Ukraine”
  • a percentage turnout that implies everyone who could, must have voted. However,  many of Ukrainian and Tartar background, stayed home, so a 60% would have been more realistic.
  • a percentage who voted in favour of joining Russia, higher than any previous poll by 50% and more that double the last poll.

Oh. I am sorry. I am taking the numbers of the referendum as accurate. I forgot “The 5 Things that the Western Press is getting Wrong”. Remember, the Maidan has a free flow of information. Crimea had none.

Better to remember that Putin is ex-KGB, and they were very good at lies. So be James Bond and remember his line in Golden-Eye “Governments change… the lies stay the same.”

And nothing that comes of Crimea’s “official channels” can be trusted.