Why did Nikita Khrushchev Give Crimea to Ukraine?

[@josecano9210]

Fun fact: around the same time as the Crimea transfer, the USSR also tried to give the Kaliningrad oblast (East Prussia) to either Lithuania or Poland but both refused as the majority there was Russian since all the Germans who previously lived in the area were kicked out and the Poles who were there were also likely forced out as well and neither country wanted the headache of having an area with a Russian majority in their Lithuanian or Polish borders

[@Anyo92]

They might not have a NATO membership if they accepted.

[@A.staris]

Only the northern part of East Prussia was annexed to the USSR/RSFSR. The southern part had already been made part of sovereign Poland in 1945 while Memel (Klaipěda) had been annexed to the USSR/Lithuanian SSR.

[@Ethan-qo9rx]

that is a myth. Poland has 40m people, and how many russians are there? There would be no fear of having a 'russian majority' or whatever. Lithuania was part of the USSR, the official language was russian, it was one country. They (meaning the communist regional chairman) would have accepted it gladly as it would give new land.

[@A.staris]

Unlike communist Poland, the Lithuanian SSR was part of the USSR and the determination of internal USSR administrative borders was carried out centrally in Moscow. As for transferring the northern part of ex-East Prussia from the USSR to Poland, almost a decade after Poland had already received the southern part in 1945, the story sounds a little far-fetched. Kaliningrad (ex-Königsberg) was an extremely important strategic ice-free port acquistion for the Russians and I am deliberately writing Russians, not Soviets, because there was always the possibility that the three Baltic republics would strive for restoration of their 1918-1939 independence, as was the case abroad throughout their Soviet period, and indeed occurred in 1991. The USSR made a huge effort to repopulate the territory of northern ex-East Prussia with Russians and renamed all the German place names with Russian ones. Klapěda (Memel) had already been restored to "Lithuania" (as the USSR republic Lithuanian SSR) in 1945. Huge areas of eastern Poland had also been transferred to the USSR (and incorporated in the Belarusian & Ukrainian SSRs) in Yalta/Potsdam. So the story sounds unlikely.

[@TurbidSugar19]

Russian took big chunk of Poland and increased Belarussian SSR by 50%, but sudenly felt guilty and wanted to sweeten the deal by giving Poland Keninsberg. I dont find it belivable

[@davidjordan2336]

My take on this has been that Ukraine was Khrushchev's power base, since he had spent his entire career as head of the Ukrainian Communist Party, which means he was functionally the President of Ukraine. So by transferring a strategically important asset (the video fails to mention that Russia's largest naval base is located there) to "his" people, he was strengthening his position relative to his rivals. Another possibility is that he was attempting to weaken the Russian SSR relative to the other SSR's, given the obvious numeric dominance of the former. This is essentially the opposite of what the video suggests, as the video makes the presumption that Russia and USSR were equivalent, and non-Russian Soviets were captives of the Russians. In reality, Communist doctrine was very anti-nationalist, and it was something that they took seriously. They wanted Russians to think of themselves as Soviets, not as Russians, and they didn't want the Russians dominating the other nationalities. And let's not forget that Stalin was Georgian rather than Russian, and he's the one who set most of this up. The boundaries of the various SSR's were drawn somewhat arbitrarily, and I suspect that they deliberately put large numbers of Russians within other SSR's boundaries in order to balance out the sizes. Yugoslavia did something very similar to lessen the dominance of the Serb population. Anyway, it's possible that Khrushchev was just doing more of that with this transfer.

[@donaldmackerer9032]

In a weird way this makes sense. Ideologically I could see the Soviet Union doing this. It seems like it would fit in with the communist ideology at the time. Now how things worked out in reality and practically i'm not sure right now. But this does seem a plausible hypothesis. However a hypothesis nonetheless for the time being.

[@ЕкатеринаАнатольевна-л8у]

Acctually USSR was being very anti -Russian and fought Russian shauvinism since day one the USSR establishment after Bolshevik revolution giving that the vast of majority of the Bolsheviks were Jewish and other minorities of the former Russian Empire like ( ethnic Georgians, Latvians, Estonians, Ukrainians)

[@apapa5495]

Did the khazars have something to do with the whole story?! They are and were everywhere where money talks, business talks etc

[@zeldan4165]

​@Екатерина Анатольевна pretty interesting to say that that USSR was anti-russian while the political center was still located in russia, Stalin made many russofication policies towards other republics and in the whole other world soviets were called russians and till this day associated mainly with russia.

[@donaldmackerer9032]

@Zeldan Yeah that kind of seems to be the case. If I remember correctly, I think the the russian Bolsheviks and the Ukrainian bolshevicks waged war against one another. The Russian bolsheviks eventually won because of better leadership and organization in large part due to the efforts of Leon Trotsky. Correct me if i'm wrong on that part.

[@timothygibney159]

It was to resolve the issue of the Dnieper aqueduct system. It was easier to have one government dictating the water usage to Crimea

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

Another interesting reason but that alone doesn't seem convincing IMO. Sure it would help the aqueduct matter but it alone would be comparatively minor issue to justify a transfer. They could simply have a state-owned enterprise run the system cross border and solve any administrative hassle. They were both part of the USSR, so there isn't any issues with having a unified agency handling it since its just cross province/state borders and not another country.

[@timothygibney159]

@@neurofiedyamato8763 But were still separate entities. Look at the fight over the Lake Mead as the 500 year drought is causing the Hoover dam to fail? Ukraine wants water for its own uses and so does Crimea for its dry climate and poor farmers? The only way to get Ukraine to give it's water or pay to build and maintain is if Ukraine has to answer for Crimean farmers and the reservoirs/maintenance on the Crimean side. Also Crimea is a lot smaller and poorer and probably the poorest in the Soviet Union while Ukraine has coal, metal works, and large fertile land for it's tax base

[@sunnyjim1355]

​@@timothygibney159"Look at the fight over the Lake Mead as the 500 year drought is causing the Hoover dam to fail" One of the most ridiculous 'false analogy' I've ever heard.

[@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714]

So it was simpler logistics.

[@timothygibney159]

@@baltulielkungsgunarsmiezis9714 very expensive and no one wanted to pay for it. Crimea can't afford it and needs it and Ukraine is more interested in its own people. By making Crimean Ukrainian it would now be in their interests to pay, support, and provide water and reservoirs to Crimea

[@makar1854]

The Holodomor is only part of the mass famine in the USSR and not a separate event, there was also a famine in the Kazakh ASSR, the regions of the Central Black Earth Region, the North Caucasus, the Urals, the Volga region, the South Urals, and South Siberia.

[@Avealua]

How does it change the fact that it was man made by Russia?

[@tylerdurden3722]

​You completely lost the plot. It's not a difficult concept to understand. The question is: "Why did Nikita give Crimea to Ukraine?" One of the proposed possibilities by the narrator, is that Ukraine was targeted by Stalin with a horrible famine. The problem with this hypothesis, that tries to answer why Nikita gave Crimea to Ukraine, is that Stalin targeted several regions during this one event. In other words, other regions like Khazakstan would have also received an "apology" in the form of a gift if this was an an apology in the form of a gift. Meaning, that Ukraine was likely not given Crimea as an apology. You understand now? When it comes to your question, it's filled with ignorance on the subject. It's like if I asked, why do cows hunt and eat exclusively lions? This is an example of a question that displays ignorance on the subject. A dumb question. Here's the part you're ignorant about. 1. USSR was a country made up of many states just like the US, Germany, etc...a federal republic.. E.g. Georgia, was part of the USSR. 2. Stalin was born in Georgia, was ethnically Georgian, grew up there and everything. He was the Leader of the USSR. A totalitarian dictator who wielded an extremely centralized form of control. And he was ruthless, killing millions upon millions of his own countrymen. He was already bad, but when his wife died, he became stone cold, saying this: "This warm creature was able to soften my heart of stone. Now she is gone, and with her my only warm feelings for humans. I trust no one, not even myself." 2. The Key founders of the USSR were from various regions. Stalin from Georgia, Lenin from Finland, Trotski from Russia, etc.

[@makar1854]

@@tylerdurden3722 ,,In other words, other regions like Khazakstan would have also received an "apology" in the form of a gift if this was an an apology in the form of a gift.,, but did not receive, this argument is meaningless

[@makar1854]

​@@Avealuaby USSR, it’s just that this reason is far-fetched, why then no “offerings” were made to other regions

[@monaliza3334]

Holido.ore was everywhere over a planet I 30s. What's your point?

[@MBP1918]

It was to make the map look nicer obviously.

[@spectre1849]

Of course

[@revolter7094]

So was the Russian invasion.

[@clouds-rb9xt]

...Maybe. I think it looks more aesthetically pleasing the other way (BUT I DON'T SUPPORT RUSSIA)

[@megarboh790]

hoi4 moment

[@ffff7164]

@@clouds-rb9xtReally? Ignoring the politics, Crimea doesn’t have land connection with Russia. It sticks out like a sore thumb like Kaliningrad or Northern Ireland.

[@MrSupernova111]

I didn't realize there was so much mystery behind the Crimean region. Thanks!

[@georgewilson9121]

populated with 95 percent russians , theres no mystery what country it should be a part of.

[@stever2583]

There isn't... it's all about Russian thugs!

[@MarjorieLoquet]

YOULL LESRN MORE IF YO PURCHASE MILKAIL SHISKINS BOOK FOR £18.00 HE;LL SHOW YOU EVERYTHING ABOUT RUSSIA

[@MarjorieLoquet]

HE IS ALSO A CRITIC OF PUTIN AND HIS MOTHER WAS UKRAINIAN HIS FATHER RUSSIAN AND HE CANT GO HOME HE HAS A DUAL PASSPORT RUSSIAN./SWISS

[@paulgrieve7031]

Not mystery, history. Yes history is interesting.

[@SOP83]

One thing I found interesting was that Crimea was, essentially, the last autonomous greek colony to survive. They persisted well into the roman empire's existence.

[@-BlackMamba-]

Nah not the last one , the kingdom of bactrian was the last one which was in the area of today's Pakistan

[@hanswust6972]

Not Crimea but some town-sized colonies on the Black Sea shore, probably no more than 1% of the peninsula. The Goths occupied a far greater chunk of it.

[@-BlackMamba-]

@@hanswust6972 bruh these cities , had control over Crimea and a little side of Russia which is next to Crimea

[@amcespana2150]

It was the expulsion of the Greek population from the Crimea by the Tatars in the 1770s that precipitated the Russian intervention to oust Ottoman-Tataro power from the Crimea. These Greeks settled in the actual Donetsk region and founded cities like Mariupol and others.

[@JL-tm3rc]

​@@amcespana2150fun fact the greek name for a peninsula is khersonessos which is also the name of a greek settlement in crimea. Which is also the origin name of kherson in ukraine

[@rathersane]

I’ve heard that the transfer was intended to make the massive Kakhovka Dam/Crimean Canal project more bureaucratically simple, i.e., coordinated by one SSR rather than between two S(F)SRs.

[@gengis737]

I don't think that fondness or guilt are convincing reasons to be attributed to a Soviet leader. More probably, Khrushchev saw Ukraine and Russia as indefectibly tied in the same political entity, USSR, with little difference to be made managing both population, as he himself experimented as local representative of soviet power. So joining Crimea to Ukraine solved a lot of complication, when managing the waterways, the road net, the armed forces, and so on. At the peak of USSR, none of the soviet leaders could have imagined something like an independent, even hostile Ukraine. Same for the Donbass, which experimented a massive industrial development and Russian workers settlement under Stalin, yet nobody considered transferring this strategical region from Eastern Ukraine into southern Russia, in case the two countries would separate.

[@TomasFunes-rt8rd]

AND he just happened to be a Ukrainian himself....

[@dzonikg]

@@TomasFunes-rt8rd WHy Tito gived almost all Adriatic coast and all islands to Croatia in Yugoslavia ,maybe becase he was Croat

[@renemagritte8237]

@@TomasFunes-rt8rd He wasn't. However there are attempts of Russian propaganda to make him one, especially after 2014. His parents were Russians, he was born as Russian and after being 1st secretary of USSR for several years he didn't learn Ukrainian, let alone considered it his maternal language. Unbelievable how easy some people repeat every fairy tale of Russian propaganda without checking facts.

[@Pajdas610]

@@dzonikg Because most of the Adriatic coast had been Croatian and Italian for hundreds of years, and Tito was certainly not going to give it to the Italians.

[@teresaolszanka112]

The Republic of Ukraine was not a separate legal entity. It was part of Russia. Created arbitrarily in 1920-22 on Russian turf and had nothing to do with ethnic lines. The majority of population was Russian - Ukraine is in name only. Before 1920, Ukrajina was the name given to lands on the border with Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth that's where the name of the republic comes from. Ukrajina means the outermost boundary/edge. Addition of Crimea to Ukraine Republic didn't change anything because it was still the same country. You are dead wrong about Donbass which was part of the Russian Empire and Russian people lived there. Donbass industrial complex was founded by a Welsh industrialist John Hughes in 1868 well BEFORE October Revolution and has NOTHING to do with Stalin. From Wikipedia "In 1868, the Millwall Iron Works Company received an order from the Imperial Russian Government for the plating of a naval fortress being built at Kronstadt on the Baltic Sea". Russians didn't need to be brought to work in the complex except more workers needed to be brought in as the project grew. John Hughes LEASED the land for his project from th Russian Empire which is named as LESSOR in lease documents. Ethnic Ukrainians lived in Donbas region and engaged in farming mostly. Russians and the Welsh worked together on the project and developed a bond. The Welsh are fondly remembered till today by the people of Donbass. A village or a small town was named Husofka after John Hughes. Over the years it became Yuzofka. Hughes also bought a piece of land near Azov Sea from Russian statesman Sergei Kochubey. He formed New Russia Company Ltd and moved to Russia. After the revolution his Iron Works were nationalized but Hughes remained in Russia until his death. So to reinforce: Donbas region was a Russian Empire territory.

[@utube321piotr]

Khrushchev gave Crimea under the control of Ukrainians to simply restart the agriculture of the peninsula, which was in shambles. Khrushchev was very keenly aware of food production and agriculture as key element of the country itself. Ukrainians were known as effective farmers and Ukraine was a breadbasket before modern agriculture methodology and technology was developed.

[@maxfreedom774]

since ancient wars, Ukrainians have defended Russians from the invasion of the Turks from the Crimea! He is rather Turkish, but he should never be with Russians! Where are the Russians, there is chaos!

[@justacommonman5935]

That Bald head Corn lovers just making another Starvation,he's not trying Started another farm...if its so,How the f ckin hell he could making another starvation if he trying re-started farming campaign (of course its corn)

[@Vladimir-ui3ij]

what you said is chauvinism, which, with the help of Western "partners", inevitably spilled over into Nazism, with the subsequent SVO, and as a result, the completion of the existence of Ukraine as a state.

[@jeccentric9952]

it was a theft, pure and simple. the whole of Ukraine in made out by illegal land grabs from other countries and people.

[@ИльяМуромец-е5ш]

Известная сказка о "пустынном" Крыме и о том, как трудолюбивые украинцы превратили его из пустыни в цветущий сад ))))))

[@geoapostol]

I think people miss the most obvious explanation. After USSR occupied Moldova in 1944, Stalin gave the north and south of Moldova to Ukraine while taking transdnistria away from Ukraine and gave it to Moldova. Why do such a seemingly nonsensical thing? Simple. In case Moldova ever reunited with Romania, the two will inherit an unsolvable problem that reflected neither history, nor geography or ethnic representation. The same was done with Russia and Ukraine to ensure the two can never truly and peacefully separate. As we can see, this was indeed very successful. Never underestimate the deviant mind of a dictator.

[@jolotschka]

British did this with India on same intent 😮. We had a teacher which said the whole USSR is a russian colonial realm. So it might had been intended by mixing up to make separation impossible.

[@punished4890]

Basserabia had a big population of ukranians in Bucovina and the south region, due to colonisation of the Russian Empire. Once Basserabia was annexed two delegations, one moldovan and one ukranian, were given a short amount of time to think of a way to transfer the ukrainian regions to ukraine, and the Moldovan region (Transnistria) to Moldova. Stalin didn't just do this by himself. Transistria was later flooded with Russian workers, Transnistria was devoleped more than Basserabia, when the USSR collapsed, the Russians in Transistria declared autonomy, then Independence, following the civil war. This rupture in the integrity of Moldova is stopping us from uniting with Romania, although, I dont think the majority of Moldovans want to join Romania, and the fact that Romania's constitution, makes Romania an undivisable country, we cant unite with Romania. While the transfer of land between Moldova and Ukraine in 1940, generally affected us, it is the fact that Transistria was colonised with Russians that fcked us over, which doesnt really make your argument true.

[@churblefurbles]

Its telling that the west does this to itself now.

[@roxylius7550]

not limited to dictator lol the so called democratic england, france and others did this to countless region in Africa and The Middle East

[@sellogregory6089]

Russia pushed out German Occupation!

[@brianrusher3617]

The largest city in Crimea is Sevastopol (now over a half million people) and it was founded in 1783 by decree of Catherine the Great.

[@achatcueilleur5746]

Fictional Catherine the Great. never existed.

[@SaorAlba1970]

actually Sevastopol was founded by rear Admiral Thomas McKenzie , the hills/mountains around the city are named after him he founded the naval base and city for Catherine the great and and up until 1922 it was connected to Russian territory until Lenin gave away South West Russia to Ukraine as it had no heavy industry and that is why south east Ukraine from Kharkov to Odessa is pro Russian, Ukraine was the big winner of the former Soviet Union not only did it get vast Russian territory, it also got a big chunk of Poland, and chunks of land from Romania, Hungary and Slovakia, Russia was the big loser it lost vast territories to Ukraine and had to pay all of the former Soviet Unions debt

[@terryhoath1983]

@@SaorAlba1970 Apart from what you say about Thomas McKenzie, you ranalysis is up the creek. Most of the changes were ethnic and the populations in the territories that became Ukraine in 1945 were majority Ukrainian speaking. The inter-war Polish Empire of Józef Piłsudski, a military conquest of anti-Bolshevik idealism covered nearly all of the territory of the Belarussian speaking people, and large areas of Ukrainian speakers, many of the later only too grateful that they were not in Bolshevik controlled Ukraine. There are stories of Stalin in 1945, causing mass migrations of Poles westwards to a smaller Poland and mass movement of Germans to a smaller East Germany. The only part of THAT that is true was the expulsion of Germans to a smaller Germany as punishment for the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941. There was no MASS movement of Poles westwards. In 1939 the area of the Polish Empire that was seized by Stalin was Belarussian speaking using the Belorussian Cyrillic alphabet. There were less than 150,000 Poles living in that territory. Most of the Belarussians were not best pleased because although they hated the Poles, they hated the Russians more. The last remaining Poles in Belaruusia were kicked out but there weren't many of them left in 1945. As for your claim about Slovakia. the Ultra Roman Catholic theocracy of Jozef Tiso had collapsed with Slovenské národné povstanie (Slovak National Uprising) and the German invasion in the Autumn of 1944. Tiso was nothing more than a Nazi figurehead thereafter (His neck was stretched in 1947). The Czechoslovak Government based in London never recognised a state of Slovakia. .Inter-war Czechoslovakia included the land of the Rusyns in the Far East. This territory was included in Czechoslovakia because the Polish advances Eastward just to the North made it possible for the Prague regime to establish control in what we call Ruthenia. The language, however, was and is more closely related to Ukrainian than Slovak. Ukrainian and Slovak are so closely related that, with my knowledge of Slovak I can get the jist of what Ukrainians on war videos are saying. Perhaps the most telling points are, however, the land is geographically part of the Ukraine more than Czechoslovakia and the Ukrainian Cyrillic alphabet was and is used. There was a logic that if Ruthenia was not to gain independence, it was more logically part of Ukraine. Stalin wasn't interested in the entity of Ukraine per se. He was a psychopathic megalomaniac who would do just about anything to increase his control of more and more of the World and to maintain personal control over that area by any means at his disposal including mass murder. Ukraine was just a suitable drawer into which to store Ruthenia. Remember, Stalin created more misery in Ukraine than in the whole of the rest of the Soviet Union put together. Stalin wasn't a communist, he was a Georgian recreation of Ivan the Terrible. As for Hungary, the borders of Hungary were determined by the Treaty of Trianon (Trianon is in France) in 1921, the Hungarians as a people were punished for centuries of swaggering around, and, under the auspices of the Austro-Hungarian Empire causing untold misery in the surrounding lands. Viktor Orbán is frequently seen wearing the scarf of a Budapest football team which depicts "Greater Hungary". This includes all of Slovakia which they call to this very day, "Upper Hungary" and Romanian Transylvania. As you may imagine, neither the Slovaks nor the Romanians are best pleased about this. On my travels between Britain and Slovakia via Budapest Airport (For me it is a shorter journey than Stansted-Bratislava), I have come across nice and open Hungarians but there is a popular sentiment among many Hungarians that, one day, they will "take back" Upper Hungary (Slovakia) and help the half monkey Slovaks to evolve into human beings by teaching them Hungarian (Hungarian is a totally alien Uralic language originating in Siberia). In short, it was not Ukraine that benefited from this administrative enlargement, it was purely a matter of tidiness for the psychopathic Georgian. As for Ukraine getting chunks of Romania, that is also nonsense. It is true that Stalin took a chunk of Romania, an area which speaks a very closely related language to Romanian, some say it so closely related, it is a no more than a dialect of Romanian BUT IT DIDN'T GO TO UKRAINE. It became the separate Soviet Socialist Republic of Moldova, the official languages being Moldovan and Russian. Stalin moved Russians in there to queer the pitch for any pro-Romanian sentiment hence we have the problem of the wild west criminal entity on the east bank of the Dniester , its' main industry being to force local girls into prostitution, and through crime networks, sell them to Western European organised crime. AS FOR CRIMEA, it was not Nikita's decision. The decision had already been made whilst Stalin was still alive. Nikita may have been very happy to rubber stamp the proposal. Of course, politics were involved and to increase the Russian minority in Ukraine may have been seen as a good idea, the purpose of Stalin being to oppress the Ukrainians but the decisive matter was the construction of the Kokhovka Dam, preparatory work already under way. Production of electricity was a side benefit. Far more electricity would eventually come from the doomsday machines at Enerhodar, the so.called Zaporizhzhia nuclear menace. The main purpose was to irrigate a vast area of semi desert in Southern Ukraine AND VIA THE NORTH CRIMEA CANAL a vast area of semi desert in NORTH CRIMEA. This above all, made the transfer completely logical. As stated in the video, at that time, the break up of the Soviet Union was unimaginable. It came down to who was to be responsible for the public conveniences (they didn't have many) and who would empty the dustbins.

[@greengarden657]

​@@terryhoath1983your reply is a fantastic piece of history for this area of Europe, the most accurate that I have seen. Thank you.

[@j.dragon651]

@@terryhoath1983 My turn to teach you music theory lol. I am too lazy to fact check you but thank you for the post.

[@renemartin5729]

Sevastopol has been a Russian naval port for 240 years: "The construction of the port started in 1772, while the Russo-Turkish War (1768-1774) was still ongoing, and was finished in 1783, following the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Empire. On 13 May 1783, the first eleven ships of the Imperial Russian Navy reached the Sevastopol Bay."

[@MoreAwsomeMetal]

Basically all the cities, towns, ports, mines, industrial complexes, roads, railway tracks and airports located in eastern and south Ukraine have been Russian, built and developed by Russian, and populated with Russians since the times of Peter the Great and Catherine of Russia... When Crutchev gave Crimea to the Soviet of Ukraine, he'd never thought that Ukraine and Russia would be one day 2 separate countries...

[@redbear1935]

It doesn't matter now , Ukraine will get what they want and Russia will be shit hole for 50 years paying for all damages.

[@ronramsay8587]

@@MoreAwsomeMetal Do you really think that Crutchev was incapable of imagining the collapse of the Russian Federation? Even he knew that corrupt empires eventually fail.

[@MoreAwsomeMetal]

@@ronramsay8587 Maybe we was able to imagine that someday, in the following up of the decolonial movement striking the European colonial empires at this this, that Central Asia Republics, or Caucasian Republics , or even the Baltic states could take their independence in a more distant future. I'm quite sure that for a Russian of the 50's it was however inconcevable that Belarus or Ukraine would be separated from Russia (and probably the same for an Ukrainian or a Belarussian). I mean those regions are core regions to the roots and history of the Russian world...

[@ronramsay8587]

@@MoreAwsomeMetal Your 'ruski mir' is not the only perspective.

[@OptimusMonk01]

This video could have been 1 minute long and still had all the information in it. Never have so many words been said about something with so little to say about it.

[@holgerkruse6035]

I had exactly the same thought after watching the video.

[@andriesterpstra8796]

Completely agree. Waste of time, no answers given, lot of speculations.

[@TheDavidlloydjones]

@@andriesterpstra8796 And lots of S's in USS-SSR.

[@erynn9968]

Well half of youtube education is like this :)

[@TheRobGuard]

The transfer of the Crimean oblast in the Soviet Union in 1954 was an administrative action of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet that transferred the government of Crimea from the Russian SFSR to the Ukrainian SSR.

[@mickpalade8331]

Please also have a look into when Kruschev transferred the coastal regions of Moldova and the northern side of Bucovina also to Ukraine. What were the reasons for this?

[@thebutcher7541]

Frr

[@professionalshitposter9436]

For ethnic reasons (they were populated mainly by Ukrainians)

[@antonioishere4201]

No^

[@antonioishere4201]

The main reason behind giving Crimea to Ukraine and removing North Bukovina & Bugeac from Moldova was to destabilize the culture and identity of those nations, by giving Moldova Transnistria and Crimea to Ukraine they basically added Russian-ethnic lands to different cultures to promote russification

[@antonioishere4201]

Transnistria isn’t Moldova and Crimea isn’t Ukraine and they have never been

[@59Gretsch]

I believe that Nikita Khrushchev was either born we lived in Ukraine for a while. I doubt it had anything to do with the famine because there were many famines all across Russia too and even at the same time.

[@louisecorchevolle9241]

an Kazakstan even worse than ukraine

[@georgesbv1]

Holodomor (1932-1933) and Molodan famine (1946-1947) were not real famines. They were caused by the unrealistic quota claims from the farmers in order to get them inline with collectivization (stealing their goods).

[@teresaolszanka112]

He was born in the territory that became Ukraine Republic in 1920. Before that, it was Russian Empire territory. His nationality is listed as Russian as is the nationality of his parents. Most people from east Ukraine see themselves as Russian. About 70% of the population of the republic was ethnic Russian or those who felt culturally Russian. The name of the republic, Ukraine is not representative of the dominant ethnicity. The Republic was named after the name given to lands on the border with Poland - Ukrajina. Ukraine Republic borders Poland. Ukrajina in Russian and Polish means "at the outermost edge". On the west side of the border, there was a Polish province named Ukrajina for the same reason.

[@catpers1000]

I read it was to appease his wife who was Ukrainian.

[@azkorzh]

In fact, the problem of territorial transfers inside ussr is not unique to Ukraine only. Central asian countries faced much more, which still is an unsolved problem that lead to local conflicts.

[@uasite]

Yes, but you forgot that Ukraine also gifted Belgorod and Taganrog TO Russia

[@Bike_Lion]

@@uasite - In what year was Belgorod part of Ukraine?...The only time that I'm aware of is a brief period during the first world war (a few months in 1918), during German occupation, when some local Ukrainian allies of the Germans claimed it as part of their "independent state."

[@uasite]

@@Bike_Lion yes, it was part of Ukrainian republic for short period of time. But it was even CAPITAL of Soviet Ukrainian republic - so it wa part of Ukraine not only during Skoropadsky rule. Moreover, you should look on Russian Empire nationality or language chart and you'll find that it was populated by ukrainians. And about Taganrog you know everything yourself, right?

[@KalkHampel-i1l]

All conflicts have been instigated - as ever - by the slimy West. Sic transit fascist gloria mundi.

[@ValeriusB]

@@Bike_Lion not to mention that whole modern Ukraine was a part of Russia, and only thanks to German occupation in WWI the state "Ukraine" was created as a tool to fight against the rest of Russia. The vast majority of Ukranians back then were ethnic Russians, and modern day Ukranians by the vast majority are also Russians who got 100 years of brainwashing propaganda to believe that they are not Russians and have nothing to do with Russia, unbelievable. It's like Bavarians claiming they are not Germans.

[@christiancolossus5165]

Khrushchev's wife probably had a lot more to do with it than people know. It's amazing what a person's significant other can get them to do against that person's better judgement.

[@johnyricco1220]

He himself was born on the border of Ukraine, a product of the melting pot of Russian and Ukrainian identities.

[@tryingtodogood]

Can you Explain

[@darthparallax5207]

Was she Ukrainian born?

[@tryingtodogood]

@@darthparallax5207 okay so from wiki, Nina Petrovna was Polish born, studied in Odessa, and was close to Khrushchev from early 1920s. She accompanied him in foreign meetings, and had full control over his private affairs. She had more power than any other previous first ladies.

[@jannakovalenko2788]

Ukraine coming to USSR without Cramia, without Donna's and Lugansk territory. That's all.

[@ricardocontreras94]

I think it was Nikita's love for Ukraine. You have to remember that it was him who was the one who gave Budjak and Bukovina from Moldolva to Ukraine SSR after Stalin took Moldova from Romania.

[@ОлегДобрый-л7х]

Нет... Я думаю это была любовь русских царей к румынам. Надо напомнить, что именно Россия освободила румынию и восстановила суверинитет после того как Османская империя оттрахала все балканы.. Все эти страны - проходной двор для оказания интимных услуг и лучшее, что есть для этих стран, это быть нейтральными - как минимум и помалкивать не привлекая внимания Ивана.

[@louisecorchevolle9241]

he was ukrainian analcoolic

[@andrewstepanoff5091]

Никто никому ничего не отдавал. Посмотрите дореволюционную карту России. Россия после революции большевиков 1917 года только уменьшилась в своих границах и ничего не преобрела. Откуда же взялись все эти так называемые "республики"? А были они созданы искусственно большевиками. Все границы были начертаны формально. Всё это земли России. А Румыния вообще молодое государство.

[@alexandersergienko1098]

@@ОлегДобрый-л7х Another empty account with "analytics". Проспись, Ваня.

[@dmytro_glory_ukraine]

​@@andrewstepanoff5091 lets look on map of 1015 year - russia (moscovia) does not exists - it means that some russia's lends today must belong to successor of Kyivan Rus - Ukraine (Kyiv) - it means that so colled russia (moscovia) was created artificially and this state (russia) should not exists at all.

[@DS-ud6ys]

For Khrushchev it was just the “furniture” being rearranged. He had no idea about the consequences of this decision. In the USSR and later in Russia they’d changed, reshuffle, merge and divide administrative borders between many different regions all the time. Often seems like for no reason just to keep some bureaucrats busy.

[@erynn9968]

That’s it! No need to search for a reason, there was none. When you shut yourself from the rest of the world, you then just need to entertain yourself somehow (look at n-korea now).

[@monaliza3334]

His wife was Bandera supporter, she was from Poland.

[@benediktmorak4409]

@@monaliza3334 I never knew that. And for obvious reasons, it was also never mentioned,neither here or anywhere else.

[@teresaolszanka112]

In 1954, he could not have anticipated that the Soviet Union would be dismantled. With the process done really badly. Gorbachev was naive and had no idea why the West was pushing for "tearing down this wall". The wall, by the way, that the West put up. Russia was isolated on purpose. The fall of the Soviet Union did not happen without "assistance".

[@Ciech_mate]

But at the end of the day, at the end of the day.

[@kumakohai7499]

I thought that was just my dumb brain malfunctioning, but this confirms it, I am not hearing things.

[@davethomas8748]

I honestly thought I misclicked something

[@dougcox4310]

Would love to see one of these on the history of the state of Texas

[@KalkHampel-i1l]

So it is - dear lad. Texas belongs to Mexico as ever since 1848 and before that.

[@margaretcaine4219]

Yes, that beacon of freedom and democracy otherwise known as the USA, was very fond of starting wars on flimsy pretexts, in order to win territory and expand.

[@hillside21]

. . . Or Indian Territory and Oklahoma.

[@celticman1909]

I thought the reason was that the Crimea is not self-sufficient. The necessities of modern life, for the numbers of a modern population, foodstuffs, electricity, water must come from the land mass to the North, Ukraine. Putin supplied Crimea as best he could since 2014, but could not replace the water from Ukraine's River sources needed for agricultural, commercial, and household/ drinking. The first thing Russian Army units did in Kherson Oblast was to open the canal and aquifers to Crimea.

[@rodionamerkhanov4621]

You failed to mention (or I missed it) that Khrushchev (was appointed by Stalin) governned Ukraine prior to becoming leader of USSR after Stalin’s death …

[@davidlisovtsev6607]

Well another reason is the Crimean canal, planning begun in 1950 but construction begun in 1960, there were many problems by building this project in two republics, transferring the l Crimea to Ukraine solved much of those problems

[@solracer66]

Didn’t construction begun in 1957? At least that’s what Wikipedia says.

[@johnsch1988]

Russia was the only republic of the USSR that gave more than it received from the general budget. All these channels were built with Russian money .😊

[@canucanu9098]

@@johnsch1988 After you've robbed all the neighbors, give them chewing gum too! Bleahh!!! Don't you really wonder why others don't want to sit next to you?!Robbery and rape, the height of feelings!

[@user-pq1fu9jj6j]

Город Севастополь административно подчинялСЯ напремую Москве! И не входил в состав Упкраины. Это была военноморская база ВМФ СССР.

[@KalkHampel-i1l]

Nonsense - dear lad. The SU didn't know any kind of division. Only Moscow gave the orders. On the other hand - Khrushchev remained a hypocritical Trotskyist and traitor at heart and just looked for his own Kiev Rus ambition of rancid times against Stalin´s former politics.

[@ramisgreenful]

Pretty important historical facts about Crimea peninsula, Rússia and Ukraine. It looks like a fight to conquer a little valuable piece of land rich in natural resources and minerals. Thanks for uploading that video with greetings from the Brazilian rainforest in Manaus South America 🌻🌻💕

[@Stranger-rs1sj]

Don't forget about it's naval ports.

[@mercurial382]

It's strategic position is the most important thing, (on a naval level that is)

[@arianhrodkeltoi8104]

But Crimea needs water supply from the Dnipro river in Crimea. Without such water it becomes quite unproductive. Also strategic to enclose the Azov Sea, and control over the Black Sea, that's why Sevastopol military base has been so important. All Russia still needs, is to grab Türkye in order to control the Bosphorus Strait, and Greece, for the Summer houses 🙄 Türkye knows Russia has an eye on them for 300 years, and has attempted to invade Türkye in the past. That's why Türkye joined NATO so early, almost a founding member.

[@tonyp8995]

and a russian holiday resort where russian rats could feel safe.

[@MrKlipstar]

Crimea is historical,turistic and strategical Russian peninsula.Krutchev had favoured his own republic in detriment of the historical Russian presence in 1954.Was Russian the millions of lives lost by the 19th to 21th Centuries Wars;Crimean Wars,WWI,WW2,Rus-Ukrainian War in the present day over Donbass Regions.

[@ryanwatkins7924]

But at the end of the day. But at the end of the day.

[@michaelflores2509]

Thank you for noticing that. You changed my life. You gave me hope, love and reason to love again Thank you.

[@ryanwatkins7924]

@@michaelflores2509 You're welcome! You're welcome!

[@margbarmk2293]

@@ryanwatkins7924 , what do u mean?

[@jayakadark3]

but at the end of the day, History Is obsessed.

[@gabrielfranco8994]

Crimea belongs to ukraine

[@jaystrickland4151]

You left out the most likely reason. The Northern Crimea Canal construction began just before the transfer was announced. It was most likely done to prevent conflict over water between the two republics as they were both going to have significant agricultural sectors to the economy.

[@ВосточныйСлавянин]

1. It was Stalin's plan to build The Northern Crimea Canal project of late 1940, Stalin never planned to assign Crimea to Ukraine. 2. The head of Crimea in 1954 - Pavel Titov was fired for opposing Khrushchev decision to assign Crimea to Ukraine. 3. There could not be any "conflict over water between the two republics" - it was one country, with the government in Moscow.

[@LyubomirIko]

"conflict over water between the two republics" - LOL You have to be kidding. You have absolutely no clue how the USSR function, why you comment even?

[@jaystrickland4151]

@@LyubomirIko Political conflicts within the Soviet union between Republics are well documented. Water in particular was an issue due to the rivers moved between Republics. Feel free to comment again after you finish high school.

[@ВосточныйСлавянин]

@@jaystrickland4151 Two people already pointed you, that you are telling nonsense. There could not be any conflicts between republics, political system itself could not allow that to happen. These were not republics like states or countries, rather like counties or regions within one state.

[@lucapieralisi]

Very good with a remark about the Holodomor which is how the famine went down in history in Ukraine, but the famine was not restricted to Ukraine but was widespread to several soviets republics first and foremost Kazakhstan (where it went down in history as Asharshylyk but it is not so well known as the Holomodor) where there famine caused the death of half the population. Beside that famine caused devastation and death in the soviet Russia too. The point here is that if Stalin / soviet government was trying to kill people, they were not restricting their deadly intentions to Ukraine only but to a large swath of areas and republics within the USSR.

[@s.b.6010]

Ukraine was robbed of their grain by the collectors the most followed by Kazakhstan. I read a book called “Red Famine” and it went into great detail on this intentional Starvation of Ukrainians ordered by Moscow. Very tragic.

[@lucapieralisi]

@@s.b.6010 Yes true but the soviets, ie Stalin if he was really looking for a kill it was not limited to Ukraine but this killing spree was widespread throughout the Soviet Union and if the soviet government was stealing corn and grain was not in Ukraine only but in Ukraine, Kazakhstan and even Russia.

[@alexk6745]

​@@s.b.6010Hey, stop saying Russians did it. Just for your info Stalin was Georgian not Russian. My great grand father was Ukrainian as his ancestors came from Ukraine. In 1932-33 the whole USSR suffered from 2 things: 1. Communists sent to Siberia all kulaks(people who actually worked well and had farms). 2 1932-33 it was dry years and bad harvest. My grand father used to live in Volograd region. He was saying It was terrible times in Volograd region and the whole USSR. So, stop saying that Russians did it on purpose against Ukrainian. It was a common problem of the whole USSR.

[@laktqiere]

Exactly. Somebody with the real history. Famine was in all the territory.

[@laktqiere]

@@alexk6745 it’s the discurse I don’t know why somebody want to put in our minds. Famine was in all the territories, not only Ukraine. It is part of the washing brain program and propaganda

[@player276]

Love the video quality, but it's so littered with historical inconsistencies that I don't even know where to begin. There are many historians even here on youtube who explain these topics in correct context and provide sources, so it's puzzling that someone didn't bother to go through them. Simple example on the first point of economics. This was right around the time that Crimean Canal was beginning it's construction. Crimea being part of Ukraine made things much easier both in terms of construction and then farmer settlement from Southern Ukraine. Now this is only 1 factor, but many consider it to be the biggest. Strange that it didn't even get mentioned, while tourism, virtually a non-existent industry back then being talked about. Also, while it was very briefly mentioned, Crimea was transferred before Khrushchev centralized his own power. At no point of his career could he make a decision this monumental on his own. Like many others, this would have been debated and talked about behind closed doors and then presented as we saw as a "United decision". That's simply how the Soviet Union worked, even when Stalin was in charge.

[@VajrahahaShunyata]

Im a published writer and know the history well. Youtuub is not the place for a history education unless you want to be stupid....

[@johannespfurti2900]

But kruschtjew was Not Stalin!

[@billybigballs5776]

@@johannespfurti2900gossips are that Khrushchev and boys assassinated Stalin,so they can gain power.

[@Uzair_Of_Babylon465]

Fantastic video keep it up you're doing amazing things 😁👍

[@ntraha]

Quote : " The Holodomor is only part of the mass famine in the USSR and not a separate event, there was also a famine in the Kazakh ASSR, the regions of the Central Black Earth Region, the North Caucasus, the Urals, the Volga region, the South Urals, and South Siberia."

[@happyhobo2217]

Famine isn’t the right word it was man made and better described as a genocide because communism rocks 🤘

[@danutahanyga4834]

This is correct.

[@petracastro6021]

Is there a specific reason why this mass famine occured? Can you explain?

[@Nikita-fy1hj]

That massive famine is, first of all, the tragedy and sorrow of the Russian people. Organized by communists and Bolsheviks who hated Russia, they artificially cut the country into many parts and “republics” they invented, creating the USSR. They carried out forced de-Russification in all the “republics”, inventing new peoples, banning and discriminating against everything Russian. They carried out a total genocide of the Russian people. This fact must be learned and realized. To understand everything that happened after 1917.

[@Nikita-fy1hj]

That massive famine is, first of all, the tragedy and sorrow of the Russian people! Organized by communists and Bolsheviks who hated Russia, they artificially cut the country into many parts and “republics” they invented, creating the USSR. They carried out forced de-Russification in all the “republics”, inventing new peoples, banning and discriminating against everything Russian. They carried out a total genocide of the Russian people. This fact must be learned and realized.!To understand everything that happened after 1917.

[@ДмитрийСоколов-о8в1б]

The issue of the city of Sevastopole with Russian Black Sea Naval Base has not been explored cause formaly the decree of transfer Crimea from Russia to Ukraine did not aply to Sevastopole as it was a separate administrative entity of the Russian Republic within the USSR distinct from Crimea and subordinated in administrative sense directly to Moscow.

[@donaldmackerer9032]

I have to agree that that is an issue that needs to be explored and you brought up a valid point. The last thing I'd heard about the naval base at Sevastopol, was that Ukraine renewed the lease on the Russian navel base there to 2042 before the invasion of 2014. It's A shame if that was the main issue of the naval base because that would have made the invasion unnecessary. Now for the rest of it I still have a lot of research to do about Sevestopol.

[@ДмитрийСоколов-о8в1б]

@@donaldmackerer9032 In 2007 Ukraine under pro-western Yuschenko boasted that it will not prolong the Naval Base Rent Contract with Russia in 2017 when it was due to expire. Under pro-Russian Yanukovich this rent contract might have been renewd before 2014 but since the Maidan Coup has happened in Kiev and anti Russian forces seased power Russia could not trust that it's use of the Sevastopol Naval Base will be secured in the future.

[@renemartin5729]

Sevastopol has been a Russian naval for 240 years: "The construction of the port started in 1772, while the Russo-Turkish War (1768-1774) was still ongoing, and was finished in 1783, following the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Empire. On 13 May 1783, the first eleven ships of the Imperial Russian Navy reached the Sevastopol Bay."

[@renemartin5729]

@@donaldmackerer9032 Shortly after the US-financed coup in 2014, some in the newly installed regime suggested to terminate the lease. Russia held a referendum and annexed Crimea a few weeks after that.

[@paulgrieve7031]

Cheers

[@adetunde6652]

Thanks for your good works, advice and enlightment. Blessings

[@ogalleon]

Video Suggestion: Cisplatine War⚔ War between the Brazilian Empire🇧🇷 and the Reign of the River Plate (Argentina🇦🇷) over the territory of Cisplatina ( now Uruguay🇺🇾) The war between the 2🇧🇷🇦🇷was indefinite, as neither managed to annex the eastern platinum territory as it was called due to the intervention of the British Empire Your video would be interesting🤩

[@Slaktrax]

ManyRussians also died during the same period of the Holodomor. It was not just about Ukraine. Stalin, a Georgian by birth, was also heartless towards Russian people.

[@nx3696]

Stalin was after Kulaks, medium size farmers that were a threat to Socialism. Ukraine was not singled out - private property was. All fir the Common Good of course. Socialism at its best

[@Capcarap333]

1) Many means how many ? 2) no other regions were raided by communist soldiers policeman’s all kinds services or barbarians and took forcibly any food Ukrainian people had and left them to die. Only in Ukraine this atrociticies happened, and only in Ukraine at the time 1932-1933 harvest was plentiful, but communists dogs took it away with violence, that’s why HOLODOMOR was only in Ukraine with perished 4 - 10 millions of population. Most often track of number of dead was not kept or even hidden. Kazakhstan also suffered tremendously, loosing about half of their population.

[@fainitesbarley2245]

The Holodomor hit hardest the areas that were more successful farmers and had shown a desire for autonomy. Obviously Ukraine was a prime target but there were others. Regarding care for people - to both Soviet’s and Tsars, the people are basically ants. And Putin. The only reason why they are softer on the Russian heartlands round Moscow and St Petersburg us fear of being replaced. Not because they give a toss about the people.

[@Capcarap333]

@@Slaktrax but only Ukrainians had their food forcibly taken away from them , left to die from hunger, like nowhere else, eventhough the harvest was abundant. Only in Ukraine the hunger was artificial not from lack of food but their food was stolen from them, left to die millions of people. Forced hunger has a name what is HOLODOR,. Means forced death by food withdrawal, or food denied to them.

[@NickAndriadze]

He was also heartless towards Georgian people! Him giving autonomy to Abkhazia, Adjara and making Samachablo an autonomous oblast caused so many horrible problems today, and while they were managed fairly well during the Soviet times, during the tension-packed times of immediate soviet collapse of the early 90s, the dam broke and unleashed a flood of conflict.

[@vadymdegtyar1831]

Khruschev grew up and finished school (1908-1914, then was drafted to the army) in Donetsk, at that time Yuzovka. Returned in 1920 and got higher education/worked till 1929. I.e. lived 15 years in Ukraine,

[@crabluva]

Interesting video but why is the Belarussian SSR and other SSRs not shown on the map 11:10? It gives the impression that there was the USSR/Russia and then the Ukrainian SSR.

[@laktqiere]

Washing brain program

[@FoxhoundAK74]

The problem with the Holodomor theory is that a ton of Russians also died from it, and the previous famine before it.

[@robertcottam8824]

So the equivalence is...?

[@FoxhoundAK74]

@@robertcottam8824 The soviets owe a huge apology to the Russians as well for it.

[@robertcottam8824]

@@FoxhoundAK74 Who are the 'soviets' ?

[@Patop2002]

​@@robertcottam8824Georgians, since Stalin was Georgian.

[@robertcottam8824]

@@Patop2002 You know that to be silly. So why write it?

[@princexl33840]

Beautifully presented unbiased video.

[@danutahanyga4834]

Very much biased and factually inaccurate. Ukraine was an integral part of USSR. Moving Crimea to the Council of Ukraine did not change any more than shifting boundaries of administrative councils/voivodeship - the state remains the same. It happens all the time in every country. The Russian word Soviet means Council in English. To prove the point, part of the suburb I love in was moved to the boundaries of a different council. The country is the same - Australia, the city is the same.

[@bigfreshdeal]

I will tell you why Krutchev gave Crimea to Ukraine: he was partying his wife’s birthday he found out he did not buy her any present and he decided to give her Crimea the Jewell of Black Sea

[@ivanprelog1196]

and bypassed DUMA!

[@ibrahimvestin1901]

It has to be said Krusjtjev was from Belgorod Russia proper. His wife was from adjacent city Kharkov, Ukraine.

[@nyyotam4057]

Just to be clear, the people of Crimea had voted freely in 1991 to join Ukraine.

[@reedschrichte800]

True, but by the smallest margin of all the provinces (oblasts) at 53%, including Donetsk and Luhansk which were in the mid-80's%.

[@totenkopfgrgdfhb1336]

And also in 2014

[@xxisecolo9584]

Just to be clear, the people of Crimea had voted freely in 2014 to join Russia.

[@mmohanoha]

@@reedschrichte800stop lying

[@nyyotam4057]

@@xxisecolo9584 Yeah yeah, in a 178% landslide vote..

[@torbenlarsen331]

Nikita Kruschows first wife was born in Ukraine 🇺🇦 I think that was a great gift to give to her homeland.

[@frankg897]

The Lozovsky committee proposed to Stalin that the Crimean Tartars should be deported and Crimea made into a Jewish Soviet Republic within the Soviet Union. Stalin believed that the committee members were agents of American Zionists trying to create a Jewish state to eventually wrest away from the Soviet Union. Stalin had most of the committee executed or exiled starting with Lozovsky. - "Khrushchev Remembers" Page 260 Khrushchev also presided over the arrest, imprisonment, or deportation to Siberia of practically the whole of the middle and lower-middle classes of Western Ukraine. This was part of the annexation of formerly eastern Poland that Khrushchev called an act of liberation. - "Khrushchev Remembers" Introduction Page xviii Khrushchev has a long an conflicted history with Ukraine. Was its annexation from Russia a gift, or guilt?

[@adipop]

That why !!

[@gabry1346]

Homeland of nazi Ukraine now come back to Stone Age 😂

[@renemartin5729]

Didn't you hear the narrator say he was Russian by birth? "Khrushchev was born in 1894 in a village in western Russia. "

[@renemartin5729]

@@adipop DYOR: "Khrushchev was born in 1894 in a village in western Russia."

[@rosszografov614]

Nikita K. didn't know that Kiev will end up controlled by the US. Henceforth, that history is no longer instrumental in the present conflict.

[@OFTENUSER]

Or a Putin would come along

[@kingx6891]

​@@OFTENUSER and reunite Crimea with Russian Federation

[@ericwanderweg8525]

@@OFTENUSERstate actor. Prove me wrong

[@natmaren989]

Everyone is so actively discussing the transfer of Crimea by Khrushchev, forgetting that Malenkov transferred the Crimea ) It was he who dominated the presidium, which gave the Crimea to Ukraine. At that time, it was the figure of Malenkov who was more influential in the USSR. Attention to Khrushchev shifted later. Partly because Malenkov's name fell into disgrace, and partly because Russia benefited from the image of Khrushchev's "prejudice" and sympathy for Ukraine.This emphasized that Russia lost Crimea unfairly. Why was Crimea handed over to Ukraine? Even today, Crimea cannot conduct agricultural activities without water from Ukraine (one of the goals of the 2022 war was to seize a canal to supply water to Crimea). After the deportation of the Crimean Tatars (they were the dominant ethnic group in Crimea before the deportation), the Crimean economy was in decline. Its restoration was entrusted to the republic, connected with it by economic and geographical logistics. Russia at that time had no bridge or land connection to Crimea except through Ukraine.

[@Philip.Kovalevsky]

The author told all the options except the present. Crimea was transferred to Ukraine because it has a land border with Ukraine, but not with Russia. The national composition does not matter. Ukraine is partly populated by a Russian-speaking population. Also in the USSR, a new nationality was created - Soviet, common to the entire state.

[@danielhutchinson6604]

The arrangement apparently never included the Sevastopol Region or the Shipyards and support facilities. That minor exclusion appears to be something NATO appears to overlook?

[@erynn9968]

Why the much farther Kaliningrad wasn’t passed to Lithuanian SSR?

[@paulingvar]

@@danielhutchinson6604 I think there was an agreement for Russia to rent Sevastopol, not to "have" it, for a number of years

[@danielhutchinson6604]

@@paulingvar If you believe that shit, you probable assumed the NAZI Guys from Germany were just nice Folks? Stop adjusting facts as if you were a Wall Street Investor..... Does the appearance of NATO Weapons in Sevastopol, seem like some innocent adventure? NATO is an offensive organization.

[@OFTENUSER]

Krushchev, born in Kalinovka, Kursk headed a commission to investigate the problems in Crimea like water supply, bad farming and bad government, due to the fact Stalin deported al the native Tartars The conclusion was it were better Crimea would be governed from Kiev. Kiev was closer than Moscow and many Ukranians lived there or did business. Krushchev gave nothing away. He was not in the position. He became First Secretary of the Communist Party on 14 September 1953 until 14 October 1964 and Premier of the Soviet Union on 27 March 1958 until 14 October 1964. The decision to hand over Crimea to Ukraine was taken on 19 February 1954 by the Supreme Soviet. Ukaz 4 (798) and was signed by the President of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the SSSR K.E. Voroshilov and its Secretary N Pegov.

[@mohamadazamabdullah4191]

If it is one country, one region can be merged with another for administrative purpose.

[@garysymons3930]

A very good analysis , crisp, clear and concise as the comments indicate

[@teresaolszanka112]

And warped.

[@Nauda999]

@3:30 not "from Russian republic to Ukraine republic" but from "from Russian soviet republic to Ukraine soviet republic" both where soviet republics and part of Soviet Union. Similar how territory and borders are moved inside USA between states.

[@valenrn8657]

Ukraine signed the Charter of the United Nations as the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic on 26 June, 1945, and it came into force on 24 October, 1945. Ukraine was among the first countries that signed the United Nations Charter, becoming a founding member of the United Nations among 51 countries.

[@valenrn8657]

1. US states are *not* members of the UN. 2. Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic is a member of the UN. This provided the Soviet Union (a permanent Security Council member with veto powers) with another vote in the General Assembly.

[@joeshar.]

@@valenrn8657in order to get more seats in UN, USSR has insisted UN for other SSRs too but UN has only accepter Ukraine and Belorussia.

[@ВладимирМамонтов-ц6щ]

@@valenrn8657 кому принадлежал Крым, когда Украина подписывала устав ООН.

[@Homer-OJ-Simpson]

@@joeshar. That doesn't make the comparison to US states valid. Soviet Russia already had something comparable to US states.

[@patron9336]

It was given simply because they could do so, for free. This is something that is difficult for capitalist to understand. Also fresh water to peninsula goes from Ukraine side. Crimea is the autonomous republic and back in 1991 should have been a referendum to stay with Ukraine or go back to Russia, but never happened. This is why Russia took it and Ukraine wants it back.

[@deguilhemcorinne418]

Very sensible comment about the water provided by Ukraine as a vital link for Crimea. Also, the video does not explain that Sevastopol has a special status and is separate from the autonomous republic of Crimea. This autonomous republic voted in favor of Ukraine independance, although with a lesser margin than other parts of Ukraine.

[@malfeasance62]

@@deguilhemcorinne418 There were 3 referenda in 1991in Crimea. First one was on 20th of January and was about restoring Crimea as an autonomous republic of the USSR, i.e. being independent from Ukraine. The turnout was 81,3% and 93% voted yes. Second one was on 17 of March and was about the Preservation of the USSR. I can't find the data for Crimea specifically right now and honestly i don't want to bother since it's doesn't differ from the average across USSR: ~80% turnout and 70-80% voting yes. And the final one and the one you are talking about was on 1st of December and was about independence of Ukraine. Voter turnout was 67% and only 54% of them voted yes. So the last one is a little bit misleading because only 2/3 of Crimea participated in it and only 54%(or 1/3 of total population) of them voted yes. If we take all 3 referenda into consideration it becomes clear that Crimea wanted to secede from Ukraine and become a separate soviet republic; it wanted to preserve the USSR so it could be independent from Ukraine as a part of it; and when it was clear that wouldn't work they gave up or were just indifferent to Ukraine in the last referendum.

[@darthparallax5207]

Capitalists understand gifts. However, gifts are complicated and do not remain free. So it is better to get a legal contract drawn up and inform a higher authority they need to arbitrate.

[@cliffordcarrera8150]

Therefore, Crimea is part NOW of Ukraine. Therefore, the Russian annexation of Crimea is illegal.

[@Breakfast_of_Champions]

@@cliffordcarrera8150 Never was an "annexation". There was a perfectly legal referendum just like the "West" demonstrated it in Yugoslavia. Besides, the Ukrainian regime is illegal and only came to power in a violent putsch.

[@kishfoo]

It was probably a culmination of all those reasons, including a few in the comments regarding aqueduct management, etc. But one more thing I'd like to point out, is that this happened not only after WW2 but more importantly, after the Soviet Union became a nuclear power in 1949, and by this time, had a growing nuclear arsenal. Why this is important is because of nuclear mutual destruction, Crimea, and more precisely, a burgeoning Black Sea Fleet was no longer a strategic necessity for the Soviet Union. On top of that, Turkey was by this time, already cozing up to soon join the EU and their choke on the Bosporus would hamper the mobilty of the Soviet Union Black Sea fleet. The cost outweighed the benefits. Add that to the mix, and it seems like a legit play by good ol' Krushy. Pacify Ukranians for the famine incident, have a strong ethnically Russian province mixed directly in the local politics and racial doings of Ukraine, alleviate the troubles of managing a satellite province, etc.

[@StevenWJRichards]

The "golodomor" also affected parts of Russia proper, not just Ukraine so I don't see it as being "created" for this purpose. More likely communist reform combined with bad harvest year.

[@Vrykron]

Great work!

[@darius3550]

A gesture of brotherhood among two members of the USSR

[@sergestan8384]

It's Ok not to know about this subject. But to bullsit about it without even figuring the real problem is really stupid. Author should try to find out what happened between 1944-1954 to give a solution to such a "mystery ".

[@DK4WI]

He just needs to spew the same stupid rhetoric to get paid, doesn’t matter how inaccurate or irreverent it is

[@jackrosario9990]

The thing is when the USSR collapsed the crimea was under Ukraine authority and the Russians government recognized the fact.

[@sarafarron7844]

I dont think that preventing this decision of Khruschev's would prevent today's war since Crimea is not the only part of Ukraine with majority of russian population

[@RainerMichelle]

no, the Russians in Crimea are all military and their families who moved to Crimea after the annexation in 2014, they will have to leave and go back to Russia

[@mrparrot234]

@@RainerMichelle That's not even slightly true at all

[@RainerMichelle]

@@mrparrot234 you can jump up and down and say "it is not true", all day long, that does not mean you are right, the people in Crimea have raised the Ukrainian flag and are waiting for their liberation and the Russians have started packing, ready to leave

[@elyisusking3603]

@@RainerMichelle you're smoking crack, Russian were living there before Ukraine existed, it became a Russian majority region by the time Ukraine gained independence

[@RainerMichelle]

@@elyisusking3603 no, this is a lie, there was no Russian majority till after 2014 a lot more Russian military facilities were built in Crimea, and many Russian military personnel moved their with their families, they will be all asked to leave, when Ukraine liberates Crimea

[@donaldmackerer9032]

O m g this issue about crimea is so complicated! It's hard to see who's right and who's wrong and to what degree, What's fair and what's unfair to either side. Then there are the practical issues to be considered and what would They mean to either side. Would there be any kind of possible compromise both could live with. And what about the Crimean people themselves, especially the native born ones who have been living for several generations? What do they think and feel? What percentage do they feel one way or the other? It appears they are caught in the middle here and nobody seems to care about what they think. Who knows, They may even want to be independent of both countries. At any rate all these are issues I think need to be explored.

[@katalinjuhasz641]

KI KÉRDEZTE MEG A MAGYAROKAT, HOGY AKARNAK E ROMÁNIÁHOZ TARTOZNI??? SEMMI ÖNRENDELKEZÉS CSAK LOPÁS....

[@pip5461]

Crimea has had quite a varied history.

[@johnkrieger185]

I heard Khrushchev's son answer this very question about two decades ago. He said that at that time, it was something like moving a document from one drawer of a desk to another drawer of the same desk. No one at the time would have thought that Ukraine would someday be independent of Russia.

[@Calicarver]

It is striking there is no paper record available describing how this decision was made. You would think it would be possible for historians to go back through the archives and read it

[@j.dragon651]

There probably is but I doubt Russia has a freedom of information act.

[@crhu319]

There's testimony from people in the Politburo that it was on 15 minutes notice and no one was notified.

[@janlepetun9687]

In 1953, Khruschev visited Crimea and saw such ruin he couldn't believe it (and swore non-stop). There were only three (!) working shops in the whole Crimea. All Qirimli (Crimean tartars) had been deported in 1944 but the russian resettlers had no idea how to manage agriculture and water supplies. People were literally starving. So Crimea was transferred to Ukraine to rebuild it (and no, not by Khruschev alone but obviously he had a major role in it). The soviet Ukrainian authorities actually didn't want to take it over, as it as too much trouble (and no budget for it). The Dnipro waterway to supply water to Crimea was built at the cost of destroying 100s of Ukrainian villages.

[@MrGreyKa]

Best comment

[@davidfiorini2565]

I believe Crimea was a poisoned gift. Transferring land with a large amount of Russians to Ukraine, would create much difficulty for future Ukrainian attempts to become independent. As well as the Soviet creation of the district of Nagorno Karabak, populated by Armenians but territorially in Azerbaijan. "Divide et impera" Divide and rule

[@anabona4764]

In eastern Ukraine is the majority of Russian speaking population. When I lived there in the USSR nobody spoke Ukranian. First time I heard Ukranian was in Kiev.

[@BSland]

That's exactly what happened. He called himself Ukrainian,he loved Ukraine. Crimea was an apology to Ukraine for Stalin horrors.

[@willemdebatavier7485]

How about Sebastopol home of the Russian Blacksea fleet? If Russia did not take action in 2014, Nato warships would now have access to this port.

[@Reichsritter]

Westerners ignore all Russian interests

[@sb7467]

Now Russia has no Black Sea fleet and NATO didn’t even show up 😂 Brilliant

[@slevi7708]

12:17 lol

[@IG7799-c4u]

Just had to add some extra emphasis. :P

[@roytaylor2161]

This video misses out so much stuff that it will add very little to your overall understanding of the situation. It's a bit depressing.

[@Jonas4175]

"But at the end of the day, but at the end of the day, this remains all speculation, nevertheless." - that's a powerful closing statement

[@MrKlipstar]

Krutchev and Lepnid Bresnev were Ucranians,that why they took Crimea from Russia SSR and offered wrongly to SRR Ukraine.Crimea and Donbass are historical ,cultural and ethnical Russian since the last 4 centuries.

[@andrewmckenzie292]

In their defence if they knew what the fate of the USSR would be they likely would have reconsidered. Moving territory from one SSR to the other wasn't that big of a deal (even if Ukraine/Belarus even within the USSR had separate seats at the UN).

[@OFTENUSER]

tupoy

[@johnglenn1634]

Stupid idea but could the answer not be in the soviet archives? And weren't those declassified after the fall of the union?

[@Igor_054]

Some things are never really written down on archives. Even secret ones.

[@neurofiedyamato8763]

Archives are massive so it can be hard to find. And sometimes the reasons may not be explicitly written down since it may have only existed in discussions. The legal proceedings don't require you to provide a reason after all.

[@mildot5482]

On this time 1954 wasn't so important .. because for the soviets URSS would be for eternity , no one could imagine URSS could collapse.. just would be for 10000 years

[@VajrahahaShunyata]

Russhists... Nazis... The same arrogance and stupidity..

[@kaixhoi831]

Nikita khrushchev was born in Ukraine. By this, he was Ukrainian. During WW2, he commanded the forces of the Ukrainian front. The only logical reason for Khrushchev's decision is that he was anti-Stalin and hailed from Ukraine.

[@InAeternumRomaMater]

Make a video about, "why did Stalin transfer Northern Bucovina and Bugeac to Ukraine?"

[@9_9876]

Why did stalin create Moldavian ASSR Why did stalin give transnistria to Moldova Why did stalin invent Moldovan language

[@Scenariania]

why did stalin take cernăuți if it wasnt included in the moltov ribbentrop agreement? why was hertsa taken? why didn't stalin also take southern bukovina?

[@alex3261]

During the same timeframe of the.50s, Ukraine received the Snakes Island from Romania (not part of the Soviet Union), and the southern still is today. of Moldova in the same time, Transdnistria was taken from SSR Ukraine and attached to the Eastern part of SSR Moldova, where it stilll

[@ortolitore1522]

Moldova declared its independence in 1918 and united with Romania. The Dniester River was the eastern border. In 1924, the Soviets took a part of the Ukrainian SSR across the same river and renamed it the Moldavian ASSR. In 1940, the Soviets demanded that Moldova secede from Romania and join the Moldovan ASSR. The result was called the Moldavian SSR. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the Moldovan SSR declared independence and became Moldova again. The territory of the former Moldovan ASSR across the river (Transnistria) decided to leave Moldova, but no one has officially recognized it as a country.

[@IonBrad-d4c]

USSR/Ukraine did not "receive" the Snake Island. They just took it. Because they could.

[@TreyMessiah95]

Even tho I don't care about Europe and I don't support the Ukraine / Russia situation, I like history and this is interesting

[@polarbear3262]

I can safely say Europe doesn't care about you either.

[@pmenchions]

All that conjecture but they missed the real reason. Khrushchev needed Ukrainian support to keep his position secure. That's all.

[@btjmrp]

Catherine the great thought it was part of Russia too.

[@Paguo]

I always thought the answer is pretty obvious. The administration of Crimea by Ukrainian SSR is 10x easier due to the land connection. Being controlled by the Ukrainian SSR or Russian SSR ends up being the same, even if it's historical Russian land The USSR was only one country in the end of the day

[@ИльяМуромец-е5ш]

Тогда почему никому не приходило в голову подарить Калининград Литве (Литовской ССР)? ))))

[@erynn9968]

Doesn’t explain why Kaliningrad (which is much farther away!) wasn’t passed to Lithuania.

[@Bobeli2008]

In fact, the same hunger as "Holodomor" in the Soviet Ukraine, a lot of different states in USSR had had. Just there's no names of those periods in these states.

[@jamessmithers4456]

It is important to remember that Khrushchev was himself from the Ukraine. Indeed cadres from the territory of the Ukraine frequently held top posts in the Communist Party of the USSR. Even at that time, the Ukraine was the most corrupt part of the Soviet Union.

[@AIainMConnachie]

The Soviets created Ukraine basically by an act of imagine nation, then decades later gave it an imaginary gift

[@davidtrindle6473]

Ukraine was around way before the USSR

[@fredthefreeloader616]

Come on, let's not exaggerate

[@alexandersergienko1098]

How can you quickly show that you are an idiot? Thank you, it was very fast!

[@rel256]

I am from Crimea. We were given to the USSR ( Current Ukraine) as a gift in 1954. We, the Crimean people were not asked if we wanted this or not. The government decided this for us. No one wanted this. Later we were FORCED to learn Ukrainian, we did not want this too. Even though the majority of Crimeans are Russian speaking/ ethnic Russians Ukraine never made "Russian" language even as a second state language. Ukrainian was/is always the ONLY state language. That is why we all were so happy to REJOIN Russia in 2014. Thank God that Putin took us back!!!

[@OFTENUSER]

The Russians came in after the Tatars were deported

[@rel256]

@@OFTENUSER Then how my RUSSIAN grandparents were born in 1910 and 1914 in Crimea? See what propaganda does? It makes you believe WRONG information. Stop. Believe FACTS.

[@ChrisWalker-fq7kf]

"Two of Europe's largest countries are at war". That's a weirdly neutral way of describing an unprovoked invasion of one country by a much larger one.

[@glennjames7107]

I see you neglected to mention that in 2014 the US orchestrated a coup in Ukraine. This coup overthrew the diplomatically elected government of Ukraine, then they installed a pro US government. That's when Russia took Crimea back. Which had been the home of Russia's naval fleet for more than two centuries. The borders throughout Eastern Europe have always changed, they don't seem to stat the same for more than a little bit before one country claims, or reclaims territory. This isn't a new occurrence.

[@algi1948]

Khrushchev was one of the two Soviet komissars who supervised the execution of the Holodomor in1932-1933. So the "love for Ukraine" could hardly been a factor in his decision.

[@charlesarmstrong1888]

One more reason - the North Crimean Canal (search it). Crimea was short of water. Approved in 1950 construction of the canal began in 1957, a couple of years after the transfer. Construction was funded by Ukraine. By 2014 it supplied 85% of Crimea's water. For this reason it was always unlikely that Russia would blow up the Kakhovka Dam on the Dneiper/Dnipro river, as suggested by various sources including the Ukrainian government.

[@tetyanas4026]

Well, the Russians did blow up the Kakhovka dam.

[@ILoveQazaqstan]

@@tetyanas4026a facepalm for the Ruzzians

[@margaretcaine4219]

​@@tetyanas4026Really? I doubt it.

[@oanskeptic5822]

'Blowing up the dam might have covered Russia's left flank. At this point who knows how rational the Russian Army is. Wagner was one of the few effective fighting forces they had and they were starved of resources. That the Russians did it is suggested by more than the Ukrainian government. There is a limited amount of forensic evidence. There is issue of who had access to the inside of the dam. It was designed to resist attack from the outside; even by atomic weapons. It was destroyed right down to its foundations at the very level where there is an inside passage way - something you can see with the naked eye. It simply looks like it was blown from the inside out. There is no question that the Russians prepared the dam for demolition. The only question is why was it blown at a less than auspicious time. Anything beyond that is pure speculation and will need to wait until someone or some information explains it. So far, whenever a heinous act has occurred, it has usually (not exclusively) been the Russians. Besides, if the Ukrainians did it, it was their right. It was their dam. If the Russians did it, they did not have the right. Crimea has enough water for drinking, but not for agriculture. The long bloody history of Crimea can be argued over forever. The fact is that it was sovereign Ukrainian territory, although Russia had a lease on Sebastopol. The Russians didn't care about the borders of Georgia or part of Moldova. They threatened the Baltics and the Balkans. This time they got their teet caught in a ringer. They didn't count on Zelenskyy sticking around or the Ukrainian military putting up a solid defense. if not for those facts, we never would have helped them. Never. The Russians also managed to unite most of the people of Ukraine. Putin's solution seems to be that if he can't have it, he will show the world that no one else will, either. Look what he has done to Navalny. You want to assign rational reasons to the man?

[@yuriyseliuk4120]

yes, as we know russians always was logical and reasonable and no stupid\fuckup decisions happened ever

[@frankiehunter.]

The famine in Ukraine in the thirties is a myth or to be precise the biggest lie of the 20th century. When Stalin came to power, around 1929, the Soviet Union had 145 million inhabitants. When Stalin died in 1953, the SU had 250 million inhabitants, despite heavy losses in the Second World War.

[@Bracus.Reghusk]

This is not proof. This is a documented subject that you call a lie and only give a figure that does not correlate with it as proof, you really have to be an idiot to take you seriously.

[@thawrysh]

Likely all of these reasons together moved Khruschev and the USSR Administration to give Crimea to Ukraine.🇺🇦 Crimea is Ukraine!

[@alilabeebalkoka]

Well Ukraine should take an accurate census of the regions and just give any ethnic Russian majority areas to Russia 🪆. This would probably end 🔚 any and all issues permanently!!! Yes this would probably unfortunately result in Ukraine losing Eastern regions of the Nation butt it would probably result in a different and more stable country.

[@tomastomastomas1521]

You are a complete and total moron. Russia has lots of Ukrainian lands like Belgorod and Kuban. And no it will not solve the problem. The problem is Russian imperialism

[@palar4195]

but they prefer to ethnically cleansing eastern regions with full support of nato block

[@tomastomastomas1521]

@@palar4195 when did this happen? How many russians of Donbas were killed before russian invasion of 2014?

[@palar4195]

​@@tomastomastomas1521 "how many jews was killed by nazis before 1933" - are you holocaust denial?

[@tealkerberus748]

Except those ethnic Russians are only living there in such numbers as a direct consequence of Stalin's policies of genocide, ethnic cleansing, and deportations to "labour camps" for the native peoples of conquered territories, and forced colonisation of the emptied lands with ethnic Russians. So if the descendants of those ethnic Russian colonisers want to be ruled by Moscow, they can just go back to Russia instead of living on stolen land and continuing to profit from the results of a genocide. This also applies in all the other countries where Stalin did this - you should research why there are so many ethnic Russians now in the Baltic states. Anyone who wants to be part of Russia can go back to Russia.

[@roubika1922]

Crimea is a Russian territory and will forever remain so

[@hi-re2wp]

Crimea is Russia more then ,75 percent of people there support being whit Russia

[@sunray888]

Historically true Slavics origin from ukrainian land. So if we look for population since their origin Crimeans closer to Ukr or Türks

[@matheuswagner5198]

Russians were forcibly moved into crimea, it never their native lands.

[@rafarafa5180]

No .

[@RustedCroaker]

@@sunray888 Turk were invaders at Crimea. They came there only with Golden Horde. There were no Turks in Crimea before the 14th century at all. But Slavs were there long before that. Along with Greeks and Scythians.

[@DTczsk1999]

Crimea was starting Ancient Greece! 🇬🇷

[@margaretcaine4219]

In 1954 the country called ukraine did not exist. The republics of the USSR were more like states within the union.

[@uasite]

Your video looks like Russian lies! You "forgot" to mention A LOT of important data: 1. Before uniting with Ukraine, Crimea mostly was salty desert 2. Crimea was part of RSFSR for smaller period of time than of Ukraine (if speaking about Soviet period) 3. If you look on Russian empire data you'll know that in beginning of 20th century Crimea was mostly populated by Ukrainians and tatars, not Russians 4. For some reason you don't mention that not only Russia gifted Crimea, but in the very beginning of Soviet union Ukraine gifted Belgorod and Taganrog to Russia. 5. Ukraine really had connections with Crimea for CENTURIES (it is very long story of many different events) So it looks like you even didn't try to investigate anything and just read Russian Wikipedia

[@AlexOliveGrove]

Yes, this video is Russain propaganda.

[@OksanaIshchenko-sn6oe]

Exactly!

[@IonBrad-d4c]

True, except the manipulation "If you look on Russian empire data you'll know that in beginning of 20th century Crimea was mostly populated by Ukrainians and tatars, not Russians". A better way to say it is "If you look on Russian empire data you'll know that in beginning of 20th century Crimea was mostly populated by Tatars, not Russians or Ukrainians". Normally, we should have had a Tatar state there. But deportations...

[@hughjass1044]

It's nowhere near as complicated as all this. Khrushchev lost it in a poker game and Soviet and then Russian authorities covered it up because they were embarrassed.

[@kaliningradtoczechrepublic8162]

i cant tell if this is sarcastic 😅

[@ionbrad6753]

You're probably right! : ))

[@asbest2092]

those who cry "it was a gift" for some reason ignore the iron fact - such gifts are impossible. If it was a whim of one man - the man would be moved from his position. If it was a whim of a group of people, there would start an internal struggle. The struggle wasn't there, the decision wasn't undone so it just logically can not be a whim. If khruschev wanted to make a gift, the other party members would say "well and we don't" and you can do nothing about it. So the decision was approved by the majority and it's surely not true that ukraine was a "favorite republic" of the majority. The decision was obviously made by some undeniable reasons. Only russians cry about the mythical "gift" to devalue the event.

[@ИлФак]

1:20 The state with the name "Kievan Rus" did not exist. There was "Rus". 2:25 Officially, the Crimean Tatars were displaced due to collaboration with the German Nazis during the occupation of Crimea by the Germans in 1941-1944. 7:41 Famine in these years was not only in Ukraine, but also in the Volga region, the North Caucasus, and Southern Siberia. Everyone died of hunger, not only Ukrainians. But Ukrainians are trying to speculate on this topic, declaring themselves the exclusive target of this famine, creating a state-forming myth. The Holodomor was recognized as genocide by those countries that have no idea about the history of the USSR or those that support everything that harms Russia.

[@aldofromsf]

Crimea and Ukraine were part of both the Zarist and the Soviet empires. Crimea was never part of the current Russia polity, created in 1991. Only a die hard Sovok would agree with Knowledgia's "narrative." Slava Ukraini! 🟨🟦

[@IonBrad-d4c]

I strongly support the International law (according to which Crimea is Ukraine). Because we need to obey rules, order and law to avoid perpetual tribal conflicts. Not because your pseudo-argument. One could also say "Crimea was never part of the current Ukraine polity, created in 1991". Irrelevant.

[@aldofromsf]

@@IonBrad-d4c We're saying the same thing, Crimea is Ukrainian territory. That subtlety went by your bald head. 🤣

[@larryjaviersanchezgonzalez1688]

The video did not start explaining Coup d'Etat (supported by US and EU) against pro Russian president Yanukovich... What triggered the conflict between two former sovietic countries.

[@gabriellin1352]

No one should just give away a whole peninsula or province like that to another country. That’s ridiculous. A nation’s sovereignty is of utmost importance. Regardless of anything else, including human life. At least sell it out for a price, but not for free. Unless it serves a real goal or purpose.