By Elena Artibani, Academy Analyst Assistant at UNPO
Introduction
The right to self-determination guarantees that all peoples can freely determine their political future and shape their economic, social, and cultural development. Closely linked to this are the rights to land and environment, which are fundamental for preserving a community’s identity. Together, these rights form the foundation of collective autonomy and long-term survival. Ensuring their respect is both a matter of justice for the communities directly affected and a cornerstone for stability and sustainable development in the wider world.
Yet, when they collide with the strategic ambitions of external powers, these rights are systematically eroded. The exploitation of land for military, economic or political purposes often results in the degradation of ecosystems and the suppression of cultural identity. Nowhere is this tension more evident than in the case of the Crimean Tatars, who have been subjected to systematic repression, cultural erasure and political disenfranchisement under Moscow’s policies.
The Crimean Tatars’ struggle exemplifies how the geopolitical pursuit of dominance, particularly over strategic territories, can override fundamental rights. Their experience reveals the dangers of neocolonial practices in modern international relations and the urgent need to reinforce the international community’s commitment to the protection of self-determination and environmental integrity.
Historical Background and the Violation of Crimean Tatars’ Fundamental Rights
The Crimean Tatars are a Turkic-speaking Muslim people indigenous to the Crimean Peninsula, their history is marked by cycles of persecution and resilience. Following the Russian Empire’s annexation of Crimea in 1783, the Tatars faced waves of forced displacement, culminating in the 1944 deportation ordered by Joseph Stalin, during which nearly 200,000 Crimean Tatars were deported to Central Asia under false accusations of collaboration with Nazi Germany. Tens of thousands perished during this brutal operation, and survivors were prohibited from returning to their homeland until the late 1980s, during the final years of the Soviet Union.
After Ukraine gained independence in 1991, many Crimean Tatars returned to their ancestral lands, rebuilding their communities and establishing the Mejlis, a representative body advocating for their political, cultural and social rights. The Milli Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People has been a member of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) since 1991, actively promoting international awareness of their struggle for self-determination and the protection of their indigenous rights. However, this brief period of reconstruction and political participation was violently interrupted by Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014.
Since then, the Crimean Tatars have been systematically voiceless and stripped of political representation. The Russian authorities’ ban on the Mejlis has effectively silenced their primary means of political expression, leaving them without a legitimate platform to advocate for their rights. This exclusion has been marked by harassment, imprisonment and forced disappearances, forming part of a broader strategy to erase the Crimean Tatars’ cultural and political presence.
Human rights organizations, including the United Nations, UNPO, Crimea SOS and Human Rights Watch among many others, have documented systematic abuses: arbitrary detentions, religious persecution, restrictions on cultural expression and the destruction of historical heritage sites. Furthermore, the Russian administration has imposed environmental and territorial transformations, including land confiscations and military expansion, that directly undermine the Tatars’ connection to their homeland and disrupt the ecological balance of the peninsula. These actions violate both the individual and collective rights of the Crimean Tatars and go against international principles protecting their sovereignty, environment, culture and identity.
The Annexation of Crimea: Neo-Colonialism and Russia’s Strategic Imperatives
The annexation of Crimea cannot be understood solely through ethnic or historical narratives, it must be analyzed within the broader framework of Russia’s geopolitical strategy and its centuries-long pursuit of warm-water ports.
Control of the seas has always defined global powers. Ports on warm-water seas, and especially control over strategic straits, represent today one of the most powerful instruments of soft power, and Russia could not afford to remain outside this competition. Being the largest country in the world and having access only to the non-navigable waters of the Arctic is not enough; to compete with other powers, Moscow also needs naval bases along key international trade routes.
Russia’s long-term objective has always been access to ports along the Mediterranean trade routes, which, through the strategic straits, provide a gateway to all continents. This explains the annexation of Crimea, securing the port of Sevastopol, where Russia currently maintains approximately 12,000 troops, and the ongoing interest in Odessa, one of the largest ports on the Black Sea. Sevastopol provides not only access to the Black Sea but also a gateway to the Dardanelles Strait, the only route to the Mediterranean sea and oceans. Without this access, Russia would be isolated from international maritime trade routes to Europe, Asia and Africa.
The Dardanelles, part of the Bosporus Strait, are under Turkish sovereignty and their passage is regulated by the Montreux Convention. Under this agreement, only commercial vessels are allowed unrestricted transit, while military ships, particularly from countries outside the Black Sea, face significant restrictions. The Convention grants Turkey full control over these strategic waterways, a power that can be exercised differently depending on whether the country is at peace or at war. For instance, in February 2022, Turkey invoked the Convention to restrict the transit of Russian ships in response to the war in Ukraine. For Moscow, this makes relations with Ankara crucial. Economically, the strait is vital for Russia, but from a military perspective, it remains an obstacle. In addition, Turkey’s status as a NATO member means that NATO bases along the Bosporus further prevent any potential Russian naval movements.
For this reason, Russia seeks to secure ports in other strategic regions, such as the Horn of Africa, Syria, Libya and Iran where it can compete with other global powers and expand its influence. The port of Sevastopol, therefore, was never the final objective, but rather a checkpoint within a much larger, decades-long project that Moscow has been pursuing, a long-term plan to establish strategic naval access and extend its geopolitical reach.
Thus, the annexation of Crimea was not an isolated event, but part of a broader neocolonial and expansionist agenda aimed at restoring Russia’s global influence through maritime control and regional dominance. This long-term plan extends beyond the Black Sea region, encompassing the invasion of Ukraine, Russia’s growing presence in Africa and the Middle East, and its efforts to promote an alternative world order founded on alliances among authoritarian powers. In this emerging system, human rights and the rights of peoples to self-determination hold little or no place within political agendas. Instead, geopolitical influence, access to strategic resources and the projection of military power form the cornerstones of Moscow’s global strategy, a vision that challenges the very foundations of the international order.
Why These Struggles Matter for Everyone
The Crimean Tatars’ plight is not a local or isolated issue, it is a test of the international community’s commitment to justice and protection of people rights.
Respecting the Crimean Tatars’ right to self-determination would empower them to protect their land and identity while contributing to the stability and development of Crimea. Recognizing their autonomy would uphold the principles of human rights and democracy, and reinforce international norms regarding the protection of unrepresented peoples, setting a positive precedent for other endangered communities worldwide.
The persecution and systematic silencing of the Crimean Tatars illustrates the persistence of neocolonial dynamics in contemporary geopolitics. Russia’s actions reflect a pansoviet logic seeking to restore influence over the post-Soviet space and maintain a sphere of control reminiscent of imperial expansion.
Russia is often portrayed as a fragile giant, weakened by sanctions, isolation and economic difficulties. Yet its history demonstrates extraordinary resilience: the ability to endure deep crises, reorganize and ultimately rise again. This resilience lies at the core of Russian political philosophy, often compared to the matryoshka philosophy. This metaphor represents Russia’s vision of power and security as a system of concentric layers. At the center lies historic Russia, the political and identity core of the country. Surrounding it are immediate neighbors, former Soviet republics and regions such as the Caucasus and Central Asia, considered essential buffer zones. The next layer includes Eastern Europe and parts of the Middle East, which Moscow seeks to keep under its influence or at least in a neutral position. The outermost layer corresponds to the international system, where Russia claims a role as a great power alongside the United States and China.
This layered logic applies also to the internal structure of the state: the leader at the center, followed by the elite, institutions and finally society. The loss of any of these layers, territory, allies or internal stability, is perceived as an existential threat. This explains why the Kremlin reacts so strongly to neighboring countries’ attempts to move closer to NATO or the European Union.
It is also essential to highlight the concept of time in Russian thought and culture, and its contrast with Western philosophy. In Russian political culture, time is a strategic tool: patience and the ability to wait allow positions to be consolidated and opponents to be gradually weakened. Russia prioritizes long-term objectives, even at the cost of present sacrifices. By contrast, the West, conditioned by short electoral cycles and economic pressures, tends to seek immediate results. This perspective explains why Moscow does not feel the need to achieve its objectives immediately, instead pursuing a strategy that unfolds gradually over decades.
The story of the Crimean Tatars encapsulates the complex intersection between geopolitical ambition and the suppression of fundamental human rights. Their exclusion from political representation, cultural repression and environmental degradation are symptoms of a larger pattern of imperial continuity and disregard for the rights of unrepresented peoples.
Defending the Crimean Tatars’ right to self-determination is thus not only a moral imperative but also a geopolitical necessity. It challenges the normalization of neocolonial control, reaffirms international law and reinforces the global commitment to justice and human dignity. Ensuring their rights means defending the broader principles upon which peaceful coexistence and multilateral diplomacy depend.
UNPO Insight
The plight of the Crimean Tatars stands as one of the most emblematic cases of how geopolitical interests can erase the fundamental rights of peoples. Since the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, the Crimean Tatar people have faced systematic repression, political exclusion and cultural erasure, becoming a symbol of the dangers posed by power politics to the principles of self-determination and human dignity.
The Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO) has consistently stood in solidarity with the Crimean Tatar people and worked to amplify their voices on the international stage. The Milli Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, a member of UNPO since 1991, serves as the principal representative body of the Crimean Tatars within the Organization, holding voting rights at the General Assembly and engaging actively in UNPO’s advocacy efforts.
UNPO urges the international community to strongly condemn Russia’s ongoing legislative and repressive measures, which continue to violate international human rights norms and the principles of justice. UNPO calls upon Russia to immediately reverse oppressive legislation, release political prisoners and guarantee their right to family life and humane treatment in accordance with international law.
The struggle of the Crimean Tatars for survival and self-determination continues to embody the enduring relevance of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples and the pressing need for renewed international solidarity in the face of systematic oppression. Their story is a reminder that the integrity of the global human rights system depends on our collective willingness to defend the most vulnerable communities against domination, erasure and silence.