Mustafa Dzhemilev (all photos: RBC-Ukraine) Author: Roman Kot
The leader of the Crimean Tatar people, People's Deputy of Ukraine Mustafa Dzhemilev, spoke about the situation in Crimea, the life of Crimean Tatars in mainland Ukraine, international negotiations to end the war and the role of the Crimean Tatar people in the defense and development of Ukraine in an interview with RBC-Ukraine.
Main topics of conversation:
- The Crimean Question after the USSR and the “People's Movement”
- Occupation of Crimea and a conversation with Putin
- Searches and repressions in Crimea
- Crimean Tatars in the army and in power
- Türkiye, Erdogan and the negotiations
- Deoccupation of Crimea
On February 26, 2014, thousands of Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians came out to the Supreme Council of Crimea to thwart Russia's attempt to seize the peninsula. This date became the Day of Resistance to the Occupation of Crimea in Ukraine. Despite the fact that the aggressor nevertheless seized the peninsula, the Crimean Tatars remain loyal to Ukraine.
“When, even before the full-scale invasion, I said that 95% of Crimean Tatars support Ukraine, they called me from Crimea and said, where did you get the idea that 5% do not support Ukraine? You can count these collaborators on your fingers,” Mustafa Dzhemilev, the leader of the Crimean Tatar people, said in an interview with RBC-Ukraine.
We talked with Mustafa-aga just at the time when the Munich Security Conference was taking place, US President Donald Trump managed to talk to dictator Putin, and Ukraine was being forced to sign a bonded version of the agreement on critical minerals. Therefore, during the conversation, we discussed how events around Ukraine are developing, what role the Crimean Tatars play and can play in Ukrainian diplomacy, in particular, in the Middle East and Turkey. We also talked about the place of the Crimean Tatars in the process of formation of the modern Ukrainian state. All this – through the prism of the life of Mustafa Dzhemilev himself.
Below is a shortened text version of the interview. The full recording of the conversation is on the RBC-Ukraine YouTube channel.
– There is currently a lot of active, turbulent diplomatic activity going on in the world regarding ending the war in Ukraine. You have seen several such turning points in your life. How do current events look from your perspective?
– In a word, I would say that it is alarming. A non-systemic person has been elected President of the United States. You can expect anything from him. But thank God, the United States is not a sultanate. Not everything is done there according to the president’s wishes. There is a Congress, there is democracy. Therefore, there is no particular pessimism. Nevertheless, there have been statements that Trump is talking and is going to meet with a wanted war criminal. Of course, they are not pleasant. Well, we will see.
The Crimean Question after the USSR and the “People's Movement”
– In 1998, you became a people's deputy, but even before that you became close with the “People's Movement of Ukraine” party and its leader Vyacheslav Chornovil. What memories do you have of him?
– I corresponded with him even during my exile. I knew about him from our underground samizdat publication – “Chronicle of Current Events”. I think I saw him for the first time in 1988, when the US embassy invited all dissidents to a cocktail party. When he was exiled to Yakutia, I was also in the neighboring region. Yakutia is a huge territory, the distance between us was about 500 km. We corresponded with him.
– Did your communication continue after Ukraine declared its independence?
– Yes, we met later, he came to Crimea. In general, the “People's Movement of Ukraine” of all the political forces most actively supported the Crimean Tatars. And then, when they adopted the program, it was clearly written in it that Crimea should be a national-territorial autonomy based on the principle of the right to self-determination of the indigenous people on its territory, that is, a national-territorial autonomy of the Crimean Tatar people.
With Vyacheslav Chornovil we went to the inauguration of President Aslan Maskhadov in Chechnya. It was 1997. He says: in general, the Crimean Tatars should have their own representative in the Verkhovna Rada, we have elections, and the “People's Movement” will definitely pass – a fairly influential political force – and I will include you in my top ten.
We had such an interesting conversation. It is no secret that back then, to get into the passing part of the list, you had to pay. According to the principle, if you are very influential and have votes, then you can do it without money. But if you are not influential enough (influential, – ed.), then you need to contribute a sum. And then, in my opinion, the cost was about two million dollars – to become a deputy.
I say: you, Vyacheslav, better give me these two million in dry rations, I have nothing to do here. But he says no, you should be a deputy. So in 1998 I became a deputy for the first time.
– What were the opinions in the Verkhovna Rada regarding Crimea? At that time there were many discussions about whether autonomy was needed in Crimea or whether it should be an integral part of Ukraine.
– We strictly adhered to the principle that there should be national-territorial autonomy. We are against cultural autonomy, because this is the land of the Crimean Tatar people. Our statehood was there, we want to be a national-territorial autonomy within the Ukrainian state. That's all, period, nothing more. And, of course, in this we were fully supported by the “People's Movement of Ukraine”.
But they were always in the minority in parliament. At first, the Communist Party was especially strong, then the Party of Regions. But we were always only with the “People's Movement of Ukraine”. And I remember when we considered the issue of restoring the rights of people deported on the basis of their nationality. There were discussions in the Verkhovna Rada, but it did not pass. And I remember Petro Symonenko, the leader of the Communist Party, spoke out against restoring our rights. He said that the Crimean Tatars should be grateful to Stalin for not shooting them all, but only sending them away. And there was applause in the hall.
And then, I remember, another one from the “People's Movement” spoke. He cited the name of a general of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, who later captured a Soviet general who led the deportation of the Crimean Tatars. This general was shot like a dog by our soldiers. And at least we took revenge for our Crimean Tatar brothers, he says. In general, there was such resistance. But the necessary majority for the adoption of the necessary laws in the Verkhovna Rada never existed.
Everything changed after the occupation of 2014. In Ukraine, there was a Soviet-era attitude toward the Crimean Tatars as unreliable. I remember when GRU agents captured the Council of Ministers and the Verkhovna Rada of Crimea, there were 110 of them in total. They could have been quickly neutralized, because our troop group was not far away – twenty kilometers from Simferopol.
And when, after these events, the Chairman of the Mejlis Refat Chubarov spoke with one major about why they weren’t neutralized, he said: firstly, we didn’t have a command, and secondly, we had instructions that the main danger to the integrity of Ukraine in Crimea were the Crimean Tatars.
And it turned out that in 2014, the main organized force that clearly stated that it does not recognize the occupation, that Crimea is part of Ukraine, were the Crimean Tatars. Then, both in society and in the corridors of power, the attitude towards the Crimean Tatars changed dramatically.
Occupation of Crimea and a conversation with Putin
– When, in your opinion, did Russia begin preparing to seize Crimea?
– Although Russia recognized the independence of Ukraine, that there are no territorial claims, that Crimea is part of Ukraine, but the FSB, the special services, very actively worked to undermine. Dozens of pro-Russian organizations. Their activity depended mainly on funding and they constantly squabbled among themselves, proving who is more Russian, who loves Russia more.
I remember one such case: in 2014, on February 15, a few weeks before the occupation, a representative of Tatneft, Rostislav Vakhitov, a half-Kazan Tatar, half-Russian, asked to meet with us. We had generally normal relations with them, and he asked to meet for a serious conversation.
We went there together with Rustem Umerov, who was not a minister at the time, of course, but my adviser, and his brother Aslan Umerov. They were talking about cooperation between the business circles of Crimea and Tatarstan. We agreed that we would send a delegation of our businessmen there to establish contacts. And then he said: well, that's a very good idea, this project will be more productive if you head the delegation.
I say: not a businessman… Well, we, he says, will organize meetings there with the former president Shaimiev, the current president Minnikhanov… In general, the program will be rich. Everyone agreed on this, and then suddenly at the end he says: I am authorized to convey to you the proposal of our president Putin for a meeting. I somehow shuddered. And he (Putin, – ed.) was in Sochi at that time.
I say: what are we going to talk about? This is not my level. Well, about the future of Crimea. I say: what does the future of Crimea have to do with your president? He replies: I don’t know. And I said: not my level.
Yanukovych was still (the president of Ukraine, – ed.) then. He had not yet fled, but was preparing to flee. And this Vakhitov also told me that after this Sochi Olympics, Russia's policy towards Ukraine would become much tougher. And we were also expecting this. And when he said that Putin was inviting us to discuss the future of Crimea, I was very worried. I remember very well, I wrote a closed letter to Refat Chubarov that something was wrong here.
– You had a telephone conversation with Putin on March 12, 2014. What are your impressions of what drives him – the manic idea of seizing Ukraine, or some other things?
– It’s hard to say. For example, I started by saying: Mr. President, I didn’t come here to give you advice. (Dzhemilev was then in Moscow on a visit for another reason, but he didn’t meet with Putin – ed.) The president of a huge, powerful country, you probably have hundreds of advisers. I came to tell you, as a representative of the indigenous people, that you are making a mistake. You need to leave our land immediately. Well, first I thanked you for the hospitality, indeed, I was there almost as the head of state, without any passport control, right in limousines they brought me to the hotel
And he compliments me: of course, we know you – a famous human rights activist. And in general, Putin is considered a great master of persuasion, of instilling his thoughts in people when they talk to him face to face. He kept telling me: well, let's wait another 4 days – there will be a referendum before March 16, we will find out the opinion of the “Crimean people”.
I say: you know, no one will recognize this referendum, and the Crimean Tatars, the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people have already decided to boycott your referendum. And he did it again: he talked about how happy we would be, how he would quickly solve all our problems, and so on. Although the conversation ended with him saying: any time you want to talk to me or even meet, come here, call this phone number at any time of the day or night.
But I flew to a meeting at NATO at the invitation of Brussels, I was invited there, and then from there to the UN Security Council. And after returning, I was banned from entering Russian territory.
– In March 2014, a session of the Kurultai of the Crimean Tatar people was held, where they decided how to act in this situation. Why then did some leaders of the Crimean Tatars still have illusions about Russia?
– The Chairman of the Mejlis at that time was Refat Chubarov. I was not at that Kurultai because I was in America. But there was an agreement that they would contact me by phone and I would contact them. At that time, I was driving from New York to Washington by car, and in a word, the connection did not work out. But they then decided that there were many issues that needed to be resolved, even under occupation. And so they thought of temporarily delegating two people to the leadership of the created occupation authority structure. And a little more than the majority voted for this.
There were people who were categorically against it, but Refat himself was in favor of introducing his people there. Unfortunately, it was a mistake from my point of view, because what kind of participation can we talk about? Criminals come to power, and you are there with them.
But he, Refat Chubarov, was in constant contact with Kiev. And Kyiv said: unfortunately, we cannot help you now. Do everything that is necessary for your people, and no one will dare to condemn you. You decide for yourself so that your people do not suffer. Based on these considerations. But it was still a mistake.
– But you corrected this mistake literally in a few weeks or a month, that is, the Crimean Tatars completely broke off contact with the Russian authorities?
– Yes, in general, according to our information, there were two opinions in the Kremlin about Russia's policy in Crimea in relation to the indigenous people. They also understood perfectly well how important it was to have representatives of the indigenous people on their side. Those who came from Russia are one thing, and the indigenous people are another.
And some said that it was necessary to attract the Mejlis to their side – by bribing or threatening, under blackmail, and so on. But the other part, more radical, said: it is impossible to come to an agreement with the Crimean Tatars, so it is necessary to immediately switch to traditional methods – to repression.
These repressions were very different from those that took place under the Soviet regime. But under the Soviet regime we did not encounter such things as kidnapping and murdering people. But they (the Russians, – ed.) started to practice this so that the people would be stupefied. Who would be kidnapped tomorrow, who would be killed… They found bodies with signs of torture. And, most importantly, not necessarily activists. Well, let's say they found a blogger hanged, he wrote something on Facebook. If you kill everyone who wrote something against Russians on Facebook, then there are probably thousands of them. But that's how they picked them.
Reshat Ametov is the first victim, on March 3 he came out with a Ukrainian flag and a poster “Down with the occupation”. Then they showed me photos – such a mutilated body, all in puncture wounds, he was killed by a bayonet blow to the eye. Once I talked to a member of the Mejlis Sadykh Tabakh. He was interrogated, the investigator said: I know that you are a brave man, but we know which road your daughter takes to school, and one day she will not return. Here is a person who is ready for anything, but when a child is a person in prostration, as they say.
Searches and repressions in Crimea
– How intense are the repressions in Crimea now?
– Five more people were arrested the other day. It's a common occurrence – searches, arrests. There's a term there – “prohibited literature”. We've long forgotten this term, but they have such a huge list. If someone needs to be arrested, they conduct a search, find literature. I remember they had three thousand at first, then six thousand, the list keeps growing. And if they don't find it, they bring this prohibited literature with them, plant it, find it themselves, and draw up a report. In a word, arresting a person there is a piece of cake.
You can be perfect. But they usually plant such religious extremist literature – Hizb ut-Tahrir (an Islamic political party, recognized as extremist in the Russian Federation – ed.). And they arrest people who actually have no idea what “Hizb ut-Tahrir” is. It is very convenient for them.
In general, of course, everyone who says anything is repressed in Crimea. But it so happened that the majority of those speaking out against Russians are Crimean Tatars. Therefore, despite the fact that Crimean Tatars make up about 13% of the population of Crimea, about 75-80% of those arrested are political prisoners – these are Crimean Tatars.
And it continues. It is simply astonishing, for some few words, some literature – 17-20 years of imprisonment. I think, for all my convictions, if you read my indictments, then for this I should have been shot several times. The Soviet power now seems like a model of democracy compared to what is happening in Crimea.
– When you recall those events, would you have changed anything in the actions of the Mejlis or Ukrainian authorities?
– You know, when Putin told me: I really hope that there will be no bloody clashes between the Crimean Tatars and our troops in Crimea, because you have always adhered to the principle of non-violence, I told him that yes, we have always adhered to the principle of non-violence, but this principle is in our own country for the protection of our civil rights.
These principles can change when a foreign soldier enters your land. But the Crimean Tatars are not in a position to fight Russia one-on-one. We, as citizens of Ukraine, will do what our leadership decides. I was almost certain then that a call would come from Kyiv: “Citizens, the Motherland is in danger, take up arms!” And the Crimean Tatars were preparing for this. Akhtem Chiygoz brought me a list of about three thousand people, young Crimean Tatars, from the Bakhchisaray region alone, who were ready to take up arms if Ukrainian military units began military action against the occupiers.
But the Crimean Tatars don't have any weapons. Under Ukraine in Crimea, it was ten times harder for the Crimean Tatars to get hunting weapons than for the Russians. That was the attitude towards the Crimean Tatars. And that's why it was simply impossible to fight them bare-handed. But if military action had started, then of course.
I think that this was one of the big mistakes of our leadership – not to resist. Of course, there would have been bloodshed, but there would definitely not have been such a large-scale bloodshed as there is now. And if military actions had started there, they would definitely not have gone to Donbass. And there would not have been a large-scale invasion either. But, unfortunately, what happened was what happened, and nothing can be changed.
– How does the Crimean Tatar community live in mainland Ukraine now?
– It varies. Everyone has their own arrangements. According to our estimates, about 30 thousand Crimean Tatars have left. The number is not very large at all, but it is about 10% of the Crimean Tatar people. Although we constantly appeal to our compatriots not to leave. Crimea cannot be left, because we have been fighting for this return for half a century. But people, of course, fear for the lives of their children. After freedom and democracy, to find themselves again under a fascist regime – not everyone can stand it.
Each one lives differently, but they mostly concentrate in Kyiv. I think there are about 10 thousand in Kyiv. Then, when in September 2022 the forced conscription into the Russian army began, there was also a big influx. But the border between Crimea and the mainland was already closed and people began to move to different countries in different ways through countries where there is no visa regime – Georgia, Kazakhstan. We now have so many diasporas all over the world. In Ireland alone, they say, there are about 6-7 thousand Crimean Tatars. There are several thousand in Turkey, Poland, Germany, America, Canada.
Crimean Tatars in the army and in power
– Well, and the Crimean Tatars actively joined the defense and development of Ukraine: Rustem Umerov, Arsen Zhumadilov, Neriman Dzhalal and others. The list can go on. How do you see this in general?
– As I have already said, the attitude of the state towards the Crimean Tatars changed after the occupation. Previously, it was impossible to imagine that a Crimean Tatar, especially in wartime, would be appointed Minister of Defense. Or First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs. Or Arsen Zhumadilov now heads all arms deliveries.
Of course, there are changes, quite explainable and understandable, because the Crimean Tatars have demonstrated their attitude to the state. This is a positive side. Firstly, Rustem Umerov, although he is not a military man, is a very decent person. I have known him almost since childhood.
– He was your assistant.
– Few people know, but here's an episode. In 2022, when he went to Saudi Arabia, different countries, to negotiate arms supplies, he arrives there – there is no money. He gives the order to sell all his business structures in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan – 23 million dollars. He collects money and buys these weapons. He doesn't say a word to anyone. I think this has never happened in history to such an extent that the last… some are trying to grab something, and then this.
Maybe, as a civilian Minister of Defense, he doesn't have to know everything. But, unfortunately, he doesn't succeed in everything yet. When I tell him: I'm receiving information about corruption here, there, there… the answer is: others are involved there, I'm only involved in strategy. I say: Rustem, Reznikov didn't sell eggs for 17 hryvnia either. But as the Minister of Defense, it went to him. Everything that happens there will go to you! He doesn't succeed in everything, but nevertheless, he is one of the most decent people.
I remember well when there was a scandal around his advisers, he was accused of being very close to Turkey, they wrote that his closeness to Turkey was causing great harm to Ukraine, because Turkey and Erdogan have difficult relations with America, and as a result this is reflected in Ukraine.
As part of a polemic, I wrote on Ukrainska Pravda that in 2022, when the large-scale invasion began, Rustem Umerov and I flew to Turkey at Zelensky's request. Rustem Umerov had a list of weapons we needed. There were drones, missiles, howitzers… everything except the atomic bomb. And that was the time when our allies gave us nothing but vests and helmets. And we went there (to meet, – ed.) with the president of the Bayraktar concern. Rustem says: this is what we need. And he gets on the phone and starts calling around to find out how much of this or that weapon they can urgently sell.
He calls his deputy and says: how many Bayraktars do we have for Ukraine? He gives a figure – not enough. Contact our Ministry of Defense now, let them give us from their warehouses, and I will replenish them in the near future. He says: by the way, the Ukrainians haven’t paid for the previous deliveries yet. He says: do as you are told, we’ll talk about money later, people are dying there now. And to say that proximity to Turkey is damaging…
Türkiye, Erdogan and the negotiations
– You mentioned Turkey. I know that you personally know Erdogan. In your opinion, what drives his actions? He actually takes a pro-Ukrainian neutral position, but still neutrality.
– In 2014, as soon as the occupation began, even on that very day – March 16 – when the so-called referendum took place, Refat Chubar and I flew there to meet with Erdogan. And I tell Erdogan in response to his question about what he can do: first, close the Bosphorus and Dardanelles for the passage of Russian ships, join the sanctions against the aggressor country. And third, I would like the Turkish fleet to block Crimea so as not to let Russian ships in.
But I got a “no” to everything: We cannot close the Bosphorus because there is the Montreux Agreement. We could close it if Turkey was a participant in the war. We cannot join the sanctions because we are not members of the European Union. Enormous contacts, connections, trade with Russia. 60% of natural gas comes from Russia. If we were a country of the European Union, then in the event of some cataclysms the European Union would help, but no one will help us. And as for the blockade, we as one country cannot. If there is a NATO decision, then that is a different matter. That is the situation.
It is interesting that a month and a half ago there was the SAHA EXPO-2024 arms exhibition in Istanbul. Erdogan and the Minister of Foreign Affairs were there. And they had just returned from Kazan that day, they were at the BRICS conference. And the Minister of Foreign Affairs Hakan Fidan and I shook hands. I say: well, did you see this scumbag again, called him a friend, huh? He waves at me: I cannot understand you: you are constantly turning to us, using our contacts with the Russians – to help free your political prisoners, free the Azovites, the Mariupol people, facilitate an exchange. And how do you imagine if we do not shake his hand? I say: that's it, I ask you to excuse my harsh tone.
Each country, including Turkey, is primarily guided by its own national interests. And the trade turnover with Russia is really huge. And if, say, they join the sanctions, then that's it, supplies and trade will stop… They foresaw this now, which could lead to this in the future. If, say, in 2014 they received 60% of their gas from Russia, now it's somewhere around 30%. They are gradually reducing it. They know perfectly well that they will never be allies, but such temporary relations exist.
– What role can Türkiye play now in diplomatic efforts to end the war?
– None at all. Russia will never agree to be a mediator. Because its position on Crimea is that he (Erdogan, – ed.) said on the last Crimean platform in a video address that the stolen Crimea should be returned to Ukraine, this corresponds to international norms. Putin does not need such mediators. He needs people like Orban.
– The Crimean Tatars are now a “bridge” not only between Ukraine and Turkey, but also with the Middle East and the Islamic world. How does this work?
– We try to use our connections. There is a very large Crimean Tatar diaspora in Turkey – different figures are given. From three to five million Turkish citizens of Crimean Tatar origin. Although it turned out that way: closeness of culture, closeness of language, traditions… few have preserved their national identity. But they have a memory that their ancestors are from Crimea, and they, of course, are keenly interested in what is happening in Crimea.
The Turkish press is very good at covering the fact that there are arrests and tortures there (in Crimea, – ed.) – they know all this. And the influence of the Crimean Tatar diaspora is quite significant. They say: what if Erdogan is like this now, and another one comes and changes the vector? He won't change anything. Because this Crimean Tatar diaspora will always remain pro-Ukrainian. And all leaders will have to take this into account.
Deoccupation of Crimea
– I would like to ask you about the self-identification of Crimean Tatars as citizens of Ukraine. What trends and prospects do you see, especially with regard to youth?
– Crimean Tatars are not an ideal nation. They have their own traitors, there are indifferent people who live by their own selfish interests, but the overwhelming majority consider their future to be tied to Ukraine. When, even before the full-scale invasion, I said that 95% of Crimean Tatars support Ukraine, they called me from Crimea and said: where did you get the idea that 5% do not support Ukraine? You can count these collaborators on your fingers.
But there are categories of people who say that we will not liberate Crimea anyway. Kyiv will not be able to liberate Crimea. So much time has passed and we need to survive somehow. There is such a category of people too.
– How can we maintain contact with the Crimean Tatars in Crimea now, especially with the youth?
– They haven't completely blocked the Internet yet, there is a VPN. They watch Ukrainian channels there. But the phone is still tapped. That's why when we want to make some serious agreements with our comrades, our compatriots in Crimea, we usually come to Turkey. And they will come through Sochi, and that's how we come to an agreement.
– What can the Ukrainian state and the Ukrainian public do now to ensure that the topic of Crimea does not disappear from the radar? Because there are already statements from the US that a return to the 2014 borders is unlikely.
– This is unrealistic until Putin dies. And he is not eternal, of course, he will die. It is for these reasons, because if we talk about the forcible liberation of Crimea, then this is associated, of course, with the death of people.
About a week and a half ago, Zelensky gathered representatives of Ukraine's national communities, including indigenous peoples. Refat Chubarov and I were there – he spoke there about the condition of the Mejlis and all that. And then I asked Zelensky aside and said: your rhetoric has changed. You always said: the war will not end until the last square meter of Ukraine is liberated, and now you have stated that it is impossible to liberate by force now, diplomacy is needed… And he: you see what is happening. We are forced to say so. It is quite clear that the war will not end until Crimea is completely liberated, the entire occupied territory.
That is, even if there are some agreements, of course, no one will legally recognize the occupation. This is the prerogative of the parliament, and it is impossible to imagine that the parliament would vote for this.
But now some negotiation formats… I think to contact our Foreign Ministry. Ukraine should use the trump card of the indigenous people to the maximum. What we say: no talk about Ukraine without Ukraine – there should also be no talk about Crimea without representatives of the indigenous people of Crimea. And I think it would be a good support for Ukraine if, say, the Chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people participated in these negotiations. I will talk about this with the Zelenskys and our Foreign Ministry.