Protesters Clash in Crimea

George T. Wittman’s newest blog post

A elderly Tatar man, with flags waving behind him.

In the Crimea region of southern Ukraine, tensions have been erupting in the past couple weeks.  With Yanukovych no longer President, the region is divided between a pro-Putin Russian majority and a pro-Ukrainian Tatar minority.  On Wednesday, thousands of Russian and Tatar protesters clashed in Simferopol, the region’s capital city.  Tensions, previously nationalistic, developed a religious undertone, as the predominantly Muslim Tatars shouted “Allahu akbar”, which is Arabic for “God is great”.

The conflict in Ukraine, with Russia on one side and the west on the other, is eerily reminiscent of the Cold War.  Protests erupted in Ukraine after Yanukovych flaked out of a treaty with the European Union in favor of a bailout from Vladimir Putin.  On one side, Ukrainians protested the move, while the eastern and southern regions of the country, which are predominantly Russian, were pro-Putin.  Since Ukraine gained independence in 1991, the Russian majority in Crimea has been secretly wishing that Russia would annex their homeland.  Many of them are distrustful of Ukrainian nationalists, since some of them formed alliances with Nazi Germany during World War II.  Tatars, on the other hand, have no love for Russia; during World War II, Stalin deported many of them were deported en masse to Siberia and, since returning to Crimea, have little desire to become a part of Russia once again.  While most of the people on both sides have no desire for an armed conflict, small militant groups have been getting more and more active.  Pro-Russian groups have been creating “self-defense” units, while hard-line Cossack organizations, descended from the warriors who worked to expand and secure Russia’s borders, have no desire for peace.  While the Tatars are known to be peaceful, and have historically shown little interest in Islamic extremist movements, a small number of militant Tatars have started to talk about calling for a jihad.

No doubt, the protest’s religious undertones is disconcerting to the Russians, who have spent the past 20 years quelling Islamic separatist movements in the North Caucasus.  Since the ousting of Yanukovych, Putin has been ordering surprise military exercises on the Ukrainian border, furthering tensions between his country and the United States and betraying his desire to keep Ukraine under Russian influence.  It seems likely that Putin will stage a military intervention in Ukraine.  This expansionist policy, combined with the tensions in Crimea, pose two huge challenges that the new regime in Kiev has to face.

Yesterday, Russia’s military put tens of thousands of troops on Russia’s western border on alert for an exercise scheduled to last until March.  The Russian minister of defense also mentioned plans to tighten security at the headquarters of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, located in Crimea.  He insisted that Russia was only testing its military’s readiness to respond to a “crisis situation”, and not related to events in Ukraine.  In recent days, Russian military vehicles are making their presence felt on the streets of Crimea.  Road blocks flying Russian flags appeared on the main highways leading to Sebastopol, a Crimean city dominated by the headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet.

While Russia prepared for possible military intervention in Ukraine, American Secretary of State John Kerry warned the Russians doing so would “cost them”.  Kerry also was considering offering Ukraine a $1 billion package of loan guarantees, as well as aid to the Ukrainian government, to help deal with the economic crisis.  So far, the Russians have yet to recognize the legitimacy of the new Ukrainian regime, denouncing their actions as “inflammatory and divisive”.  While Russian officials have been talking, however, Putin himself has yet to comment on the crisis.  However, the clamor of the ethnic Russian majority in eastern and southern Ukraine might lead Russia to intervene.

Former Pope Speaks Out

George T. Wittman’s latest blog post

A photo of former Pope Benedict XVI, back when he was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

There has recently been much speculation that Benedict, formerly Pope Benedict XVI, was forced to resign.  The fact that he was the first pope to resign since 1415 looked suspicious to many.  However, in one of the few times that Benedict has broken his silence since stepping down last year, he spoke out against these accusations, referring to them as “absurd”.  According to Catholic church law, a pope’s resignation is only valid if he makes the decision voluntarily and without pressure from others.  Benedict, who now holds the title “pope emeritus”, wrote in a letter to the Italian website Vatican Insider that there was no doubt regarding the validity of his resignation.

Just over a year ago, Benedict announced his decision to resign, and formally stepped down from power on February 28th.  Two weeks later, Francis was elected pope, the first non-European pope since Gregory III, a Syrian, was elected in 741.  According to Benedict, he stepped down because he no longer had the physical or spiritual strength to run the Catholic Church, and the decision was 100% voluntary.

Earlier this month, the day after the first announcement of Benedict’s resignation, Italian newspaper Libera ran a long story which speculated that the former pope was forced to resign due to scandals in the Vatican.  Since Benedict continues to wear white and has kept his papal name (instead of reverting to his birth name, Joseph Ratzinger), Libero claimed this was because Benedict still viewed himself as pope.  According to Benedict, however, this is only for practical reasons.  Benedict lives in near-total isolation inside a former convent in the Vatican, and has only responded to a select few letters and appeared in public only a handful of times since his resignation.  The last time he was seen in public was last week, when he attended a ceremony in St. Peter’s Basilica where Pope Francis created new cardinals.