Putin and the annexation of Crimea to Russia; geopolitical analysis of Russia's action in annexation of Crimea peninsula

Document Type : Research Paper


Assistant Prof., Dept. of political sciences, Shiraz University.


Putin and the annexation of Crimea to Russia; geopolitical analysis of Russia's action in annexation of Crimea peninsula
Extended abstract
Appearance of the Ukraine crisis as one of the most important controversies of 21 century, has put Russia in front of the west and became to one of the most controversial issues in international arena. Manifestation of west advocators in the election of 2004 in Ukraine and the next events of it conduced to the extension of tension in the relations of west and Russia. The intensification of these tensions brought to the creation of feeling danger in classical interests of Russia and after the exacerbation of crisis, Russia inserted Crimea peninsula to itself. The annexation of Crimea peninsula to Russia faced with a bitter reaction of the west and Europe and they imposed hard and widespread bans against Russia. This article tries to answer this critical question that what interests does Russia gain by the annexation of Crimea to itself which has caused to the endurance of hard bans of the west and Europe and also what geopolitical element or factors caused to Russian's decision and its action about the annexation of Crimea peninsula to this country and what geopolitical aims does it have about this decision and action?
The research method of this article is analytical- explanatory method and it has studied the problem of research by using library and internet resources with a geopolitical approach and by incorporation of classic and modern geopolitical theories.
Results and discussion:
The year of 2014 was the important and controversial year for the Russia. The Ukraine crisis and the annexation of Crimea to Russia converted the relation of the west and Russia to the congelation point. In reality, Ukraine is a club for the confrontation of west and Russia and westerns tries to drag Ukraine in to their block to maintain a strategy of geopolitical oppression on Russia. This matter has caused to Russia's fear about its interests in the western and south western borders. Ukraine because of its geostrategic situation as a buffer situation of Ukraine between the Russia and west (NATO) and supplying the security of Russian's navy and the security of black sea and also because of the Sevastopol Island's location in Crimea has a particular importance for Russia. Putin wants to use Ukraine as a buffer region between itself and Europe (especially NATO). This policy from the age of Stalin was a safe policy. In this time, the annexation of Baltic region to European Union and NATO has caused to the failure of creating secure buffer region of Russia. By repetition of the crisis in Ukraine we can see the fear of Russians and Putin's efforts for maintaining Ukraine as a buffer region to protect the Russia's interests. From the geo economical view, Russia pays attention to the Ukraine's market of energy consumption and also regards this country as a pathway of transferring the Russia's energy to Europe. More than 90 percent of Russia's energy exports to Europe by the path of Ukraine. More than this, Ukraine is one of the important importer of energy especially gas from Russia. Besides these existent energy resources in Ukraine, Russia has noted to other mineral resources such as the resources of Manganese, Iron, Phosphate, Uranium, Titanium, and Granite and … and also agricultural products. From the geo cultural view, culture and identity of the Ukraine people is important for Russia because Ukraine more than being one of the soviet's republics and Kiev which now is a political center of Ukraine, from the past centuries has been a center for Russian dynasties and still between the Russian language is called as metropolises of Russia and has cultural and national interests to Russia. So by regarding to the ethnic and linguistic similarities between the populations of Russia and Ukraine, localism and advocation of Ukraine's Russians is a geocultural ends of the Russia. Moreover, Russia pays attention to the protection of culture extension and Russian values in Ukraine.
What is scrutinized in this research was researching this problem that what geopolitical element or factors conduced to Russia's movement and decision to annexation of Crimea peninsula to this country and what geopolitical ends does Russia have to make this decision and action; in the other words, what geopolitical interests and values does Russia describe and appoint for itself which by this action has put itself in front of the west and has accepted the consequences of this action such as the bans of west. An answer that was given to this question is that Russia because of disability to confirm its power in Ukraine completely and feeling danger about leaning of Ukraine to west and loosing its interests in this country, for maintaining its minimum interests in Ukraine, will annex Crimea peninsula to itself in order to use the important geopolitical situation of Ukraine and this island in the geo strategic, geo economic and geocultural forms and protect its interests.
Russia after the annexation of Crimea, undergoes the most boisterous bans in financial and economic zones that impose high pressures to Russia's economy; nonetheless, Putin doesn’t accept to condone Ukraine and Crimea because he thinks that his interests depends on the dominance on Crimea. So Putin tried hard to annex Crimea to Russia and despite of European and western bans doesn’t accept to leave Crimea because loosing Crimea is equal to loosing all interests in Ukraine and widely in Europe and its vicinity (black sea, Mediterranean Sea and …) for him. So by regarding to these geopolitical interests that Ukraine has for the Russia, it is unlikely that Russia leaves Crimea unless more important and valuable interests convince it which it is unseemly and impossible.
Key words: Russia, Putin, Crimea peninsula, geopolitics, Ukraine, European Union.


Main Subjects

  1. ابوالحسن شیرازی، حبیب‏اله، 1395، مطالعة تطبیقی سیاست خارجی روسیه در دوران پوتین و مدودف، فصل‏نامة مطالعات روابط بین‏الملل، س 9، ش 33، صص ۹-54.
  2. امیراحمدیان، بهرام، 1384، تحولات اوکراین یا انقلاب نارنجی، فصل‏نامة مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، س ۱۳، ش 49، صص 49-70.
  3. حافظ‏نیا، محمدرضا، 1393، اصول و مفاهیم ژئوپلیتیک، مشهد: پاپلی.
  4. دانش‏نیا، فرهاد و مارابی، مهری، 1395، تقابل سازه‏انگارانة امریکا و روسیه در اوکراین، مطالعات اورآسیای مرکزی، دورة ۹، ش2، صص 231-248.
  5. دهشیار، حسین، 1393، سیاست خارجی روسیه در قبال اوکراین؛ گریزناپذیری بحران، فصل‏نامة روابط خارجی، س ۶، ش 1، صص ۸۳-121.
  6. ربیعی، محمدرضا، 1389، تأثیر ابتکار مشارکت شرقی بر روابط اتحادیة اروپا و روسیه، فصل‏نامة مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، ش 69، صص 25-52.
  7. زادوخین، آ. گ، 1384، سیاست خارجی روسیه، خودآگاهی و منافع ملی، ترجمة مهدی سنایی، تهران: ابرار معاصر.
  8. زرقانی، سیدهادی و قلی‏زاده،معصومه، 1391، بررسی و تحلیل نقش و جایگاه استراتزیک سواحل مکران، اولین همایش ملی توسعةسواحل مکُران و اقتدار دریایی جمهوری اسلامی ایران، 28 لغایت 30 بهمن.
  9. زرگر، افشین، 1384، تعارض هویتی در روسیه و تأثیر آن بر سیاست خارجی این کشور، فصل‏نامة مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، س ۱۴، دورة ۴، ش 50، صص47-86.
  10. زمانی، ناصر، 1392، تحلیل ریشه‏ها و ماهیت بحران اوکراین: تشدید تنش شبه جنگ سرد بین روسیه و غرب، فصل‏نامة سیاست خارجی، س ۲۷، ش 4، صص ۸۸۹-918.
  11. صفری، عسگری و وثوقی، سعید، 1395، «ژئوپلیتیک اوکراین و نقش آن در رقابت روسیه و ایالات متحدة امریکا»، فصل‏نامة تحقیقات سیاسی بین‏المللی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد شهرضا، ش ۲۶، صص 111-138.
  12. عزتی، عزت‏الله، 1373، ژئواستراتژی، تهران: سمت.
  13. فرخ‏منش، سمیرا و فرنیان، مهدی، 1393، بحران اوکراین و بازی قدرت امریکا و روسیه در منطقه، فصل‏نامة مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، ش 17 و 18، صص 127-156.
  14. قاسمی، فرهاد، 1389، اصول روابط بین‏الملل، چ ۳، تهران: نشر میزان.
  15. قاسمی، فرهاد، 1390، نظریه‏های روابط بین‏الملل و مطالعات منطقهای، تهران: نشر میزان.
  16. کرم‏زادی، مسلم و خوانساری‎فرد، فهیمه، 1393، بررسی روابط اوکراین و روسیه (ریشه‏یابی زمینه‏های بحران 2014)، فصل‏نامة مطالعات آسیای مرکزی و قفقاز، ش 86، صص 135-159.
  17. کریمی‏فرد، حسین و روحی ‏دهینه، مجید، 1393، بیشینه‏سازی قدرت روسیه در قبال بحران اوکراین، فصل‏نامة سیاست خارجی، س ۲۸، ش 3، صص 551-577.
  18. کولایی، الهه، 1384، افسانة انقلابهای رنگی، تهران: مؤسسة فرهنگی مطالعات و تحقیقات بین‏المللی ابرار معاصر.
  19. کولایی، الهه، 1385، سیاست و حکومت در فدراسیون روسیه، تهران: وزارت امور خارجه.
  20. کولایی، الهه، 1389، سیاست و حکومت در اوراسیای مرکزی، تهران: سمت.
  21. کولایی، الهه، 1393، ریشههای بحران اوکراین در میزگرد تحلیلی با صاحبنظران روزنامة اطلاعات، 6 مهر، ص 2.
  22. کولائی، الهه و نوری، علیرضا، 1389، عمل‏گرایی پوتین و تغییر در رویکردهای سیاست خارجی روسیه، فصل‏نامة سیاست، دورة 40، ش 2، صص 209-228.
  23. کولایی، الهه و صداقت، محمد، 1396، بحران اوکراین و آیین نظامی روسیه، فصل‏نامة مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دورة 10، ش 1، صص ۲۹۵-220.
  24. کوهن، سائول برنارد، 1387، ژئوپلیتیک نظام جهانی، ترجمة عباس کاردان، تهران: ابرار معاصر.
  25. مجتهدزاده، پیروز، 1392، جغرافیای سیاسی و سیاست جغرافیایی، تهران: سمت.
  26. ولی‏زاده، اکبر و همکاران، 1394، تأثیر بحران سال 2014 اوکراین بر روابط روسیه و ایالات متحده، فصل‏نامة مطالعات اوراسیای مرکزی، دورة 8، ش 1، صص 149-171.
  27. یاری، احسان، 1393، ژئوپلیتیک انرژی و بازسازی قدرت روسیه، فصل‏نامة جغرافیا (فصل‏نامة انجمن جغرافیای ایران)، دورة جدید، س ۱۳، ش 44، صص 259-282.
  28. یزدانی، عنایت‏الله و همکاران، 1395، نقش امریکا و روسیه در بحران‏های ژئوپلیتیکی گرجستان و اوکراین، فصل‏نامة سیاست جهانی، دورة ۵، ش ۴، صص261-295.
  29. پایگاه ملی داده‏های علوم زمین کشور، 1396، http://www.ngdir.ir/minemineral/PMineMineralChapterDetail.asp، (تاریخ دسترسی: 25/4/1396)

30. Arkady, M., 2000, Russian Policy Towards Ukraine, Belarus, and the Baltic States in the Putin Era, Ponars policy Memo 123 Institute of Europe.

31. Avetisova, A., 2015, The Ukraine crisis: a geopolitical power struggle between Russia and US, Bachelor thesis in peace and development studies, Linnaeus university of Sweden, PP. 1-44.

32. Baldoni, G., 2016, A Theoretical Analysis of Russian Foreign Policy: Changes Under Vladimir Putin, International relation studies, Available at: http://www.e-ir.info/2016/09/10/a-theorical-analysis-of-russian-foreign-policy-changes-under-vladimir-putin,( Accessed on: 2016/09/10).

33. Balzer, H., 2014, Vladimir Putin on Russian Energy Policy, The national Interest, Available at: http://nationalinterest.org/article/vladimir-putin-on-russian-energy-policy-600, (Accessed on:2018/02/21).

34. Bebler, A., 2015, Crimea and the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, Security Policy Library, The Norwegian Atlantic Committee, Vol. 52, No. 1, PP. 196-219.

35. Biersack, J. and O’Lear, S., 2015, The geopolitics of Russia’s annexation of Crimea: narratives, identity, silences, and energy,” Eurasian Geography and Economics, Department of Geography, University of Kansas, Vol. 55, No. 3, 247–269, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15387216.2014.985241.

36. Cordova, E. Carlos  et al., 2001, Vegetation patterns and conservation issues in southern crimea, Post soviet geography and economics, No.5, PP.362-385. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10889388. 2001, 10641176.

37. CIA, 2017, The World Factbook, Available at: http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/ukraine/ukraine_people.html, (Accessed on:2017/06/12).

38. Dalaklis, D., 2015, The geopolitical dimensions of the Ukrainian crisis, world maritime university, PP.1-8, https:// www. Researchgate.net/publication/282007294.

39. Gardner, H., 2014, NATO, the EU, Ukraine, Russia and Crimea: The “Reset” that was Never “Reset”, Nato watch,Briefing Paper, No. 49, PP. 1-16, Available at: http://natowatch.org/sites/default/files/briefing_paper_no_49_ukraine_russia_crimea.

40. Girgin, D., 2015, Geopolitical issues in the current crisis between Ukraine and Russia, Journal of social sciences, Vol. 4, No. 1, PP. 21-24.

41. Klapper, B., 2015, New Cold War: US, Russia fight over Europe's energy future, Available at: https://www.ksl.com/?nid=151&sid=33340477,(Accessed on:2015/02/12).

42. Kropatcheva, E., 2006, Russian Foreign Policy towards Ukraine: a Case of New Imperialism?, Centre for OSCE Research Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg. Paper presented at the Annual International Young Researchers Conference “Eurasian Empire: Literature, Historical, and Political Responses to Russian Rule in the Twentieth Century”.

43. Paul, A., 2015, Crimea one year after Russian annexation, Policy Brief, European Policy Centre, PP. 1-4. Available at: http://www.epc.eu/documents/uploads/pub_5432_crimea_one_year_after_russian_annexation.pdf.

44. Ratner, M.; Belkin, P.; Nichol, J. and Woehrel, S., 2013, Europes Energy Security: Options and Challenges to Natural Gas Supply Diversification Congressional, Research Service, Available at: http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42405,(Accessed on:2013/08/20).

45. Rexhepi, H. Enis, 2017, Kurian's geopolitical position: between east and west, faculty of public administration and political science in Seeu, DOI: 10.1515, PP. 95-111.

46. Sokołowski, W., 2015, Natural resources in Ukraine and their future, Economic Forum, Available at: http://www.forum-ekonomiczne.pl/article/natural-resources-in-ukraine-and-their-future/?lang=en#.WUmUrGiGPIU, (Accessed on:2018/02/23).

47. U.S. Army Special Operations Command, 2016, Little Green Men: A Primer on Modern Russian Unconventional Warfare, Ukraine 2013–2014, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, August 6, PP.78. http://www.amazon.com.

48. Vrsanska, I. and Kavicky, V., 2016, The conflict in eastern Ukraine- the new geopolitical source of terrorism, International journal of humanities and social sciences, center for prompting ideas, USA, Vol. 6, No. 3, PP. 95-103.

49. Wang, W., 2015, Impact of Western Sanctions on Russia in the Ukraine Crisis, Journal of Politics and Law; Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education, Vol. 8, No. 2. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v8n2p1.

50. Woehrel, S., 2013, Ukraine: Current Issues and U.S. Policy, Congressional Research Service, May 24, www.crs.gov.

51. Woehrel, S., 2015, Ukraine: Current Issues and U.S. Policy, Congressional Research Service, February 12. www.crs.gov.