putin – Houghton STAR

A referendum on the status of Crimea, formerly a subdivision of Ukraine, is to be held on this Sunday in which Crimeans will decide whether to join the Russian Federation or set a course for independence.

The move comes after Russian infiltration on the Black Sea peninsula. In seemingly effortless political stagecraft, Russia was able to gain control of Crimea in late February–all without firing a single shot. The crisis began to unfold following the uprisings in Ukraine’s capital of Kiev with the ouster of then pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych. With its interests threatened following Yanukovych’s flight, Russia was able to gain considerable political leverage over the new Ukrainian government by sending unidentifiable (no insignia or indication of national origin) soldiers to gradually take over the peninsula of Crimea. According to the Russian government, the intent was to protect the majority of ethnic-speaking Russians in Crimea who, the Kremlin claimed, were under threat from Ukrainian nationalist extremists in the new Ukrainian government.

After Russian soldiers took control of the airports, roads, and other major infrastructures, armed gunmen seized the main Crimean assembly building and presided over the election of Sergei Aksyonov (a high-profile advocate for Crimean unity with Russia) as prime minister of Crimea. Since the election of Aksyonov, the government of Crimea has set referendum for Sunday to decide whether Crimea joins Russia as a federal subject or becomes an independent state. (Additionally, the government voted ahead of the referendum to declare its intentions as independent should voters approve the split from Ukraine.)

A key question surrounding the Crimean referendum is its legality, something that the United States, along with other major world powers, have refused to recognize. In a statement to the press, President Obama claimed that the proposed referendum “would violate the Ukrainian constitution and violate international law,” citing that any discussion on the future of Crimea had to include the “legitimate government of Ukraine.” Said Obama, “In 2014, we are well beyond the days when borders can be redrawn over the heads of democratic leaders.”

Likewise, a statement released from the G7 (a group of developed world powers, including the US) on Wednesday condemned the referendum and said that such a measure “would have no legal effect.” The G7 leaders voiced their concerns over the hastiness of the referendum, as well as “the intimidating presence of Russian troops” which could influence the vote. According to the G7, “In addition to its impact on the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, the annexation of Crimea could have grave implications for the legal order that protects the unity and sovereignty of all states.”

The Russian government, however, claims that the referendum is perfectly legal and within the bounds of international law. Citing the case of Kosovo and other international laws, President Vladimir Putin claimed that the Crimean referendum was nothing more than an expression of the right of self-determination. (One wonders, however, if Mr. Putin would feel the same if Chechnya were also presented with this same right.)

In response the crisis in Crimea, a new executive order issued by Obama authorized sanctions and travels bans against those found to be causing or benefiting from the crisis. Worldwide, other countries are following the same measures. In addition to sanctions and other penalties, the United States has also pledged to issue a $1 billion loan package to support Ukraine, while the EU has put together a $15 billion package. Though the US and other international bodies have promised harsher penalities on Russia, exactly what the international response will be following the referendum on Sunday remains to be seen.

Last summer, on June 30, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed into a law a piece of legislation banning the “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations” in regions or areas exposed to minors. Article 6.21 reads as follows:

“Propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations among minors: 1. Propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations among minors expressed in distribution of information that is aimed at the formation among minors of nontraditional sexual attitudes, attractiveness of nontraditional sexual relations, misperceptions of the social equivalence of traditional and nontraditional sexual relations, or enforcing information about nontraditional sexual relations that evokes interest to such relations, if these actions do not constitute a criminal offence, – is punishable by an administrative fine for citizens in the amount of four thousand to five thousand rubles.”

This move sparked an outcry from activists and organizations both inside and outside of Russia. In the United States in particular, many urban bars and clubs began refusing to sell Russian vodka as a protest against the discrimination happening on the other side of the world. More public figures–Tilda Swinton, Cher, Madonna, Lady Gaga, Stephen Fry, and others–raised their voices in protest of Russia hosting an Olympic event meant to “unite the world.”

After calls for a boycott of the Sochi games seemed to fade into the background, attention turned instead to the Obama administration and whether or not the United States would make a statement regarding President Putin’s anti-LGBTQ stance. Months later President Obama’s office published the list of his hand-selected delegation to be sent to Sochi to represent the United State’s government. Topping the list were former Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, Ambassador Michael McFaul, White House aide Rob Nabors, and two openly gay American Olympic Champions – two-time ice-hockey gold medalist Caitlin Cahow, and 1988 figure skating gold medalist Brian Boitano. In a recent interview Boitano informed USA Today, “Everyone knows why we’re here. We’ve made it obvious and quite public as to why Caitlin and I are supporting the delegation and are here. I think Russians know that and I think Americans know that and we’re proud to come from a country who supports tolerance and diversity and we stand strong.”

Since the Olympic Games began last week, other international athletes have voiced their opinions about Putin’s continued stance against gay rights in the face of Western opposition. “Homosexuality is not propaganda,” writes New Zealand Olympian Blake Skjellerup, “Anyone, no matter their sexuality, religion, or race, can play sports. One facet of who you are does not make you a weaker athlete. Being proud of who you are, and representing that makes you a stronger athlete, and the Olympic Games should be actioned in a place that provides that safety and opportunity.”

Putin, however, staunchly continues to defend the law he signed into effect. In his State of the Nation address this past December, two months before the opening ceremony in Sochi, Putin attacked the “norms of morality” of the West. “This destruction of traditional values from above not only entails negative consequences for society, but is also inherently anti-democratic because it is based on an abstract notion and runs counter to the will of the majority of people,” he said. As the games continue to unfold, it is predicted that athletes of multiple countries will pursue gestures of tolerance, bearing little regard for Putin’s disdain.