Why «Crimea is Russian»: analysis of the justification of Crimea joining Russia in the speeches of V.V. Putin and Russian MFA representatives

This article presents the results of the analysis of justification of annexation of Crimea to Russia in speeches of president Putin and ministry of foreign affairs representatives. The annexation of Crimea in 2014 was an indicator of foreign policy change, which needed an official justification at domestic and foreign arenas. It proved to be quite successful inside Russia, but abroad. By using the instruments of strategic narratives theory, this articles reveals how the president and MFA representatives provided justification of the annexation of Crimea; why it was legitimized domestically; and what the goal for the justification at international level was analyzed. The actors’ main justification strategies were defined as ‘defense’ and ‘counter-attack’; they appealed to historical memory; defense of Russian culture; defense of the Crimean people’s rights. Simultaneously, a negative image of the West was constructed. Such a justification could help domestic legitimation, but did not consider the cultural features of the international audience. The justification could ledlead to a reduction of interest in the Crimean Spring internationally. The empirical base of the study was 46 transcripts of V.V. Putin and MFA representatives from 2014 to 2018, as well as 2 documentaries containing V.V. Putin’s interviews.

1. Власов А.А., Брега А.В. Крым и политика легитимности в международных отношениях // Вестник МГИМО-Университета. 2018. № 1. С. 26-41. DOI: 10.24833/2071-8160-2018-1-58-26-41 EDN: XNHOUP

2. Карпович О.Г. Анализ Косовского и Крымского прецедентов в контексте реализации права народов на самоопределение // Международные отношения. 2015. № 4. С. 377-384. EDN: VBDFYF

3. Марков Е.А. Истоки конфронтации со странами Запада и мюнхенская речь Владимира Путина // Вестник Балтийского федерального университета им. И. Канта. 2019. № 1. С. 104-113. EDN: ZDFJSH

4. Мясников С.А. Легитимация и обоснование политики: анализ концептуальных разграничений // Политическая наука. 2019. № 3. C. 222-235. DOI: 10.31249/poln/2019.03.12 EDN: JGESRX

5. Пархитько Н.П., Мартыненко Е.В. Геополитические аспекты речи В.В. Путина на 43-й мюнхенской конференции по безопасности. К 10-й годовщине с момента события // Вестник РУДН. Серия Политология. 2018. Т. 20, № 1. C. 7-20. DOI: 10.22363/2313-1438-2018-20-1-7-20 EDN: VZTAKL

6. Почепцов Г.Г. Теория коммуникации. М.: Рефл-бук: К. Ваклер, 2001. 656 c.

7. Томсинов В.А. "Крымское право", или Юридические основания для воссоединения Крыма с Россией // Вестник Московского университета. Серия Право. 2014. № 5. С. 3-31. EDN: RGFMBW

8. Широкалова Г.С. Парадокс современной России: высокий рейтинг президента на фоне отчуждения от государства // Конфликтология. 2016. № 3. C. 80-91. EDN: XAAJGV

9. Allison R. Russian ‘deniable' intervention in Ukraine: how and why Russia broke the rules // International affairs. 2014. Vol. 90, N 6. P. 1255-1297. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2346.12170

10. Baranovsky V. From Kosovo to Crimea // The international spectator. 2015. Vol. 50, N 4. P. 275-281. DOI: 10.1080/03932729.2015.1092677 EDN: YUYFID

11. Bebier A. Crimea and the Russian-Ukrainian conflict // Romanian journal of European affairs. 2015. Vol. 15, N 1. P. 35-54.

12. Faizullaev A., Cornut J. Narrative practice in international politics and diplomacy: the case of the Crimean crisis // Journal of the international relations and development. 2017. Vol. 20, N 3. P. 578-604. DOI: 10.1057/jird.2016.6 EDN: XNCENL

13. Geiss R. Russia's annexation of Crimea: The mills of international law grind slowly but they do grind // International law studies. 2015. Vol. 91, N 1. P. 426-447.

14. Grant T.D. Annexation of Crimea // American journal of international law. 2015. Vol. 109, N 1. P. 68-95. DOI: 10.5305/amerjintelaw.109.1.0068

15. Hutchings S., Szostek J. Dominant narratives in Russian political and media discourse during the Ukraine crisis // Ukraine and Russia: people, politics, propaganda, perspectives / S. McGlinchey, M. Karakoulaki, R. Oprisko (eds). Bristol:E-international relations, 2015. P. 183-196.

16. Mankoff J. Russia's latest land grab: How Putin won Crimea and lost Ukraine // Foreign affairs. 2014. Vol. 93, N 3. P. 60-68. EDN: SKRDBF

17. Marxsen C. The Crimea crisis the international law perspective // Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht. 2014. Vol. 74, N 2. P. 367-391.

18. Miskimmon A., O'Loughlin B., Roselle L. Strategic narratives: Communication power and the new world order. New York: Routledge, 2013. 240 p.

19. Nye J. Soft power: the means to success the world politics. N.Y.: Public Affairs, 2009. 208 p.

20. Roselle L., Miskimmon A., O'Loughlin B. Strategic narrative: A new means to understand soft power // Media, war & conflict. 2014. Vol. 7, N 1. P. 70-84. DOI: 10.1177/1750635213516696