"We believed that the world's reaction to the occupation of Crimea would be tougher"
Mustafa, thank you for taking the time to talk to us. I would like to talk about Crimea, and about Ukraine in general, and about the things that are common to Ukrainians, to Crimean Tatars, the experience that you had, which we didn't have until recently, I mean 1944, the deportation. You have not been able to be on your land for 10 years. How do you maintain your attachment to it in the absence of physical contact?
My life happened in such a way that I spent a significant part of it away from my homeland, away from home. In Soviet times, mostly in camps. Then - far from my homeland. Somehow it's already familiar to me.
But the biggest pain is that we have been fighting for half a century to return to our homeland, and now, after the occupation [by Russia in 2014], many of our fellow citizens are forced to leave it again. Before the full-scale war, people were free to move to the mainland of Ukraine, and after the war, when the borders were closed, they moved through different countries, across the Russian border, to European countries and Turkey. There are about 4-5 thousand Crimean Tatars in Ireland.
But I did not think that the occupation would last so long. On 19 April 2014, when I was read a decree on the border between Crimea and mainland Ukraine that I was banned from entering the territory of Crimea for five years...
When you tried to return, right?
...I told them proudly that "you are too much of an optimist if you think you will be here for five years. We'll be back soon". I thought so. Because the violation of international law, the outright international banditry was so obvious that we thought the world's reaction would be more severe.
The occupation has been going on for eleven years. But I still hope that it will come to an end. I once addressed the veterans of the national movement in Crimea on television and said: "It is forbidden to die until the end of the occupation. Anyone who dies is a deserter." And I thought: "My God, how old am I? I could be called a deserter myself". But the people are still holding on. Many have lost hope. Talk of various peace plans is upsetting. There are fears that a compromise with Russia could be made at the expense of Crimea. That is why these Crimean Platform summits - whether at the level of heads of state or the parliamentary dimension of the Crimean Platform - are of great moral importance. When dozens, about a hundred heads of state come together, and everyone says that Crimea must be liberated, it inspires people to endure this occupation.
Where, in your opinion, is it morally harder now: to be in the occupied Crimea or outside of Crimea?
Well, of course, I would like to be in Crimea, because it is very important to be with my fellow citizens. Now, if there are important conversations, a strategic plan for what to do next, we cannot talk on the phone. Then we arrange a meeting in Istanbul, and they go there via Russia.
If we go back to the experience of deportation, a terrible bloody experience, in fact, Russia's goal was to eliminate the Crimean Tatar people, to completely assimilate them, to dissolve them. How did the Crimean Tatars manage to preserve themselves?
On 11 September, on the eve of the fourth summit of the Crimean Platform, we opened a monument to the victims of deportation. There are three main dates that have catastrophic consequences for the Crimean Tatar people.
This is 1783, the first occupation of Crimea by Russia, the destruction of the national elite and, most importantly, the displacement of the indigenous people and the settlement of Crimea by Russians. Within a few decades, we became a national minority in our homeland, although we made up about 95% of the population.
The second is genocide. The outright genocide of 1944, when the entire nation was evicted. Even mixed families, if, for example, the wife was Russian, were offered to stay, and those who considered themselves Crimean Tatars were to be deported. To the credit of many women, they all left with their husbands.
And so we have been fighting for the return of Crimea for half a century. And there, of course, the situation was as follows... The majority of the population is Russian and pro-Russian, they have close contacts with their historical homeland, and they all wanted to Russify the region. And the state, yes, recognised the illegality of the deportation and assisted in the return of the Crimean Tatars, but this assistance was insufficient.
If Ukraine had pursued a very rigorous policy of returning and restoring all rights, I think that the current situation in Crimea would not have happened. There were pro-Russian narratives in Ukraine that Crimean Tatars were a danger to the integrity of Ukraine. And the Russians are Slavs, like brothers. And in this situation, it was, of course, very difficult to restore our rights. Nevertheless, using the democratic rights that existed in Ukraine and still exist, we achieved something step by step.
And in 2014, everything came back. Again, the occupation, again people are forced to leave their homeland. So when people say that we need to stop the war by giving up Crimea, it sounds like this: "Let's sacrifice the Crimean Tatars". Because without returning to their homeland, without de-occupation, Crimean Tatars have no future.
I completely agree with you.
"The greatest achievement of the Crimean Tatar people is that we democratically created our national body, the Kurultai, before the collapse of the USSR"
I would also like to ask you if you remember your return to Crimea, back then, during the collapse of the Soviet Union. How did you return?
After my next term, it was 1973, I first set foot on the land of Crimea. There were already about two thousand Crimean Tatars living there, mostly illegally, without registration.
We were travelling by plane. The girl next to me was from Simferopol University, she was talking about the tourist attractions of Crimea. She did not know that I was a Crimean Tatar. She said: "Well, it's just disturbing that now more and more Crimean Tatars are coming to Crimea. It's dangerous because they might start demanding their homes, start slaughtering Russians, and it's good that the authorities are trying to keep them out."
And when they arrived in Simferopol, she said: "Well, how do you like our Simferopol?" I said: "It’s ok, but what do you think of our Crimea?" - "Why?". I said: "I am an indigenous resident. But don't be afraid, we will not evict you and we will not slaughter you, we have more serious things to do here. Live in peace."
As it turned out, they lived in a Tatar house, and they were most afraid that the Tatars would come…
At that time, I never saw the "charms of Crimea" because the KGB was tracking my every move.
During perestroika, in 1989, there were no permits to return to Crimea, but there were no such harsh repressions as to evict us immediately. So I came back with my family. I was then elected chairman of the Organisation of the Crimean Tatar National Movement (OCTNM). And since the main front of the struggle was already in Crimea, the congress decided that the head of the OCTNM should be in Crimea.
When I arrived, the whole of Crimea was in a rally, pickets demanding residence permits. But, thank God, the Soviet Union soon collapsed and we started to build our lives.
Did you have a contradiction between what you expected to see in Crimea and what you saw? I think this is the picture that is in the eyes of many Ukrainian citizens who have left their homes today. They think: I will return home after the war, what will I see there?
I didn't have such clear memories of Crimea. I had a few months when I was deported. I knew only from the stories of my family. What I saw coincided with what they told me, but there was such a chauvinistic, hostile mood there. No one told us: "Welcome". Everyone was afraid of what the Crimean Tatars would do.
And in 1991 we held a national congress, the Kurultai. This, by the way, is the greatest achievement of the Crimean Tatar people, that we democratically created our national body before the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Once in the 90s, I gave a lecture at George Washington University on the situation in Crimea. And one professor said that in the Soviet Union, especially during the perestroika years, many national movements and organisations appeared, but soon they quarreled with each other, began to fight and even battle. The communists took advantage of this, and in many countries they gained power even after the collapse of the Soviet Union. But the Crimean Tatars, on the contrary, became stronger.
We also had different views, different movements, but the supreme representative body, like a judge, passed a verdict if any disputes arose. And this is how we managed to preserve our national unity.
"Ukraine would have become an independent state long ago, long before 1991, if the Ukrainian people had unity"
If we believe in victory, in regaining the occupied territories, in returning to our lands where we are not now, what lessons could we learn from the lessons of Crimea, from the lessons of the return of the Crimean Tatars?
I will probably say very standard things. I think that Ukraine would have become an independent state long ago, long before '91, if the Ukrainian people had unity. I was always saying, when I was the chairman of the Mejlis (and I was for 23 years), that there should be no place for the word "I" in the national movement. With every word, every action, you have to think about what it will bring for the people, whether it will be harmful or beneficial.
Where is the nature of the greater unity of Crimean Tatars? Is it history, the fact that you were in exile, a religious peculiarity, or did it just happen?
I would not say that Crimean Tatars are a special people, it just happened. If we had been equal citizens in the places of deportation, perhaps the people would not have had such unity. But every Crimean Tatar understood that to a certain extent they could hold some positions under the Soviet regime, but in general, the people were humiliated and discriminated against, so all people were drawn to unity because they understood that something could only be achieved together.
In Soviet times, there were collaborators who, in order to benefit their lives, tried to be snitches, and sing along with the Soviet regime, but common sense prevailed for the vast majority of people.
There was a chairman of the regional committee, a certain Tayirov, who was also a collaborator, he was a Crimean Tatar at heart, he understood everything. But he believed that in this position he could do something for his people. Well, he was naïve. And he repeated the propaganda that Uzbekistan is our second homeland, we have no reason to aspire to Crimea.
However, he secretly helped activists of the national movement, either financially or otherwise. People like Tayirov were used by Soviet propaganda to show…
The equality of all nations, right?
Yes. What are you talking about inequality? Look at the position he holds!
Of course, we did not welcome such people, we did not want them to hold any positions.
"Everything is very tough in Crimea now. For a few words, you can get 17-20 years in prison"
You once said a very interesting thing: "The formation of the Crimean Tatars' worldview mostly took place in the family. That's why Soviet propaganda did not have much effect on Crimean Tatars. We knew everything as it was from our parents." The institution of the family as the main source of transmission of traditions, history, customs, principles, identity - today, in fact, we have this situation again?
If we compare the Soviet regime with the one that exists now in the occupied Crimea, the Soviet Union can be considered a "model of democracy".
Strict surveillance, wiretapping. If you read my Soviet indictments, I had seven convictions, which, by today's standards, means I should have been shot several times. Back then, they gave me three years.
Today, even in families, people are afraid to talk. Not because children will go and, like Pavlik Morozov, accuse their parents. Under Soviet rule, the greatest pleasure was to visit each other and have conversations, and we, the children, listened all the time. And there, things were called by their proper names: what the Soviet government was, what Stalin was. And my mother, I remember well, was still pulling my father: "Look, there are children nearby!" I pretended to be asleep and listened all the time.
One might wonder why Russia, with 17 million square kilometres, a huge country, decided to settle this captured small piece, only 26,000 square kilometres? Just as the replacement of the population began in 1783, this kind of Russification continues. The only difference is that if in 1944 people were put into animal wagons and taken away, now they are creating unbearable conditions.
There are interesting paradoxes there: at the same time, they want to create the impression that Crimean Tatars are equal. For example, in normal times, to become a deputy, you had to spend money and bring money somewhere, but now, to get a Crimean Tatar to agree to become a deputy, they promise him some privileges, and if he doesn't, they start blackmailing him. To show that Crimean Tatars are treated as equals here. Mostly, it's in local elections - the village council - and they don't let them run for higher office. They keep such very prominent collaborators, a few people, at the top.
But, Mustafa, let's get back to the question of the importance of the family. When the family becomes the centre where you can save at least something, despite all the fear, the fear of information leakage, when the people have no institutions, no statehood, no legal representatives of the authorities, everything is transferred to the family, it turns out? This is once again in the history of the Crimean Tatar people.
This was probably one of our great advantages. In Soviet times, if, say, a dissident was arrested in Moscow, his circle of acquaintances would run away from him, sometimes even his relatives, lest the ricochet hit them too.
And the Crimean Tatars are the opposite. If you are imprisoned for a crime against the Soviet regime, you are almost a national hero.
When I was in prison, in the camps, I had no concern for my family. I knew that they were under the care of their people. They would receive material assistance and be monitored all the time. The Moscow dissidents were jealous of the Crimean Tatars, that the people supported them so much. This is of great importance when you have a rear.
And you are sure of it.
In one of your interviews, you mentioned the story of your father, who very gently discouraged you from joining the Komsomol. He said that it was clear that there was a system, and if you joined, you would join, but he would have been happy if you hadn't. And you didn't join. And this is actually a soft call to resistance, a domestic resistance, not political yet, not armed, but still resistance. Today, can such calls, such behaviour of parents be dangerous, when parents tell their children not to join United Russia?
If information gets out that parents are very persistent in raising their children against the occupiers, they will definitely face repressions.
Here's an easy example. In schools, on 1 September, on some monotonous holiday, students are lined up and forced to hold a Russian flag and sing the Russian anthem. A boy, a Crimean Tatar, held this flag and threw it away, and stepped on it. Such repression fell on the parents! Under Soviet rule, they would probably have called the parents, scolded them, "how you raise them!", but hardly anyone would have been imprisoned.
Or this girl, Zarema, commented on Putin's interview on her Facebook page. In the interview, Putin described how the seizure of military facilities in Crimea took place. He said that "there were women and children in front, and our soldiers were behind, and if these ‘Banderites’ touched our women and children, we would punish them". And the girl wrote: "What a difference in mentality between Russians and Crimean Tatars. I can't even imagine that Crimean Tatars would send women and children ahead in such a critical time." So she was thrown into the basement for "inciting ethnic hatred". There was a lot of fuss, including abroad, and she was not imprisoned, but she was fined 300,000 rubles, which was about $5,000 at the time.
But the girl hadn't had that kind of money for ages, so all the people raised money for her, because if you don't give this money, they will take away your house and so on. They also collected money in an original way. With ten-ruble coins. Sixteen kilograms. In bags, in buckets. To express their contempt.
The Crimean Tatars liked it so much, because when they get a fine, they get it in such coins. People can give you a thousand rubles, but you have to exchange them.
"This war is, of course, terrible, but it has great positive consequences for the consolidation of the people"
I would like to talk to you, Mustafa-aga, about language. You said in an interview that many Crimean Tatars no longer know their language.
It is believed that only about 20% of Crimean Tatars can speak their language more or less well. And the vast majority cannot say that they don't know it at all, because they hear some conversations, but it is at a very low level. The fact is that after the deportation of the Crimean Tatar people, there was no education in our language. Everything was destroyed during the deportation, as in the days of the Inquisition, all books were collected and burned. Including the works of Lenin and Stalin, if they were in the Crimean Tatar language, everything was burned.
It is interesting to imagine how the works of Lenin and Stalin are burned.
Because they were in Crimean Tatar.
And the knowledge of the language was mostly at the kitchen level. My parents, of course, knew the language, because they speak their native language at home... But it's not comparable to what you learn at school. And not every family was like ours, for example: my father forbade us to speak Russian at all, he said sternly: speak the human language!
I think an interesting parallel can be drawn between Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians. I think you can also see that there are different points of view in Ukrainian society as a whole about whether language is essential for preserving national identity. Language and, more broadly, culture. There are those who say that you can love Ukraine, you can fight for Ukraine without knowing the language, without using the language. Some say: yes, you can, but it is desirable to know the language. What can the experience of the Crimean Tatars teach us? Is it possible to love Crimea and be a Crimean Tatar without knowing the language?
It is possible, of course, but, as you said, it is better to know the language, without knowledge of the native language it is not quite the same. Of course, we had many patriots who were imprisoned and did not know their language thoroughly. This is acceptable. But what is happening now in Ukraine, the rise of the role of the language, Ukrainisation, I really like. I think this is a move in the right direction. This war, of course, is terrible, but it has great positive consequences for the consolidation of the people.
At one time, I was recommended for the post of Deputy Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada. When I spoke, I said that I had made a pretty big mistake in my life. I did not expect to live so long, and I did not attach due importance to learning the Ukrainian language. It will be strange to sit here and not know Ukrainian thoroughly, it is very important.
Do you have a programme or vision of what the concept of education for Crimean Tatars should be after de-occupation? How can it be combined with the Ukrainian curriculum?
The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine has adopted a resolution on the development of the Crimean Tatar language, a programme for 30 years, and this is very significant. In Crimea, they are trying to destroy everything Crimean Tatar, and here such serious steps are being taken. The Cabinet of Ministers adopted a resolution, in accordance with the decision of the Kurultai of the Crimean Tatar people, to legalise the transition of the Crimean Tatar orthography to the Latin script. A lot of work is being done, despite wartime, and Ukraine attaches great importance to this.
The Crimean Tatar factor in the corridors of the Ukrainian government and in society as a whole has increased significantly. The stereotypes that Crimean Tatars pose a danger or can break away and declare independence have remained only in some minds.
Attitudes have changed radically. In wartime, the appointment of a Crimean Tatar as Minister of Defence was a signal to the whole world, to the whole nation! In short, the Ukrainian state has gone far ahead in this matter, has advanced.
Did you take into account any mistakes or shortcomings of previous years?
Not really, no. We had three things that Ukraine had to do: adopt a law on indigenous peoples, recognise the Crimean Tatars as an indigenous people of Ukraine. Adopt a law on the status of the Crimean Tatar people. And to amend the Constitution of Ukraine to reformat the autonomous republic into a national-territorial republic.
This is supported by the President. The first law has already been adopted. This is the law we have been pushing for since Ukraine's independence. It was adopted in 2021. Now other laws can be adopted on the basis of this one.
But there is no rush to do so, although there are good reasons, because it is difficult to amend the Constitution in wartime. But the law on the status of the Crimean Tatar people could have been adopted long ago.
"I think that more than 90% of Crimean Tatars who left will return to their homeland"
The Crimean Tatars who left for the mainland of Ukraine, outside of Ukraine, one way or another, all these people carry encapsulated knowledge and memory of Crimea. I think most of them want to return, think about returning. But maybe some of them don't. In your opinion, will this memory, this love they have, be enough to make them return?
Many ethnic Ukrainians left Crimea, too. The vast majority will not return. Actually, there is no particular reason, they are in Ukraine, on the mainland.
As for the Crimean Tatars, the situation is a little different. We can only preserve our identity and the future of our children in our homeland. Those who have gone to European countries, to countries that are not poor, may stay there. But I think that more than 90% will return.
No matter who you talk to, everyone is thinking about when we will return. Most of them have family and friends in Crimea. They left everything there. Not only their homes and property, but also their relatives.
And from an ethical point of view, what is more important for Crimean Tatars now: to physically stay in Crimea, or to preserve this Crimean Tatar identity no matter where you are today? Is it necessary to stay today?
There is a slogan in Crimea: "Stay in your homeland, no matter what". We welcome this slogan, but I was saying that you can live in different ways. You can live with your dignity, or you can obey the occupiers. Therefore, if you cannot live with dignity there, you do not have the strength, you should leave. This is our position.
To avoid temptations, to avoid future shame in front of our relatives, in front of the people, is that it? I understand what you are saying.
Today it is difficult to talk about the status of post-war Crimea, because there is an occupation and a hot phase of the war, and it is difficult to make optimistic forecasts. But if we're talking about what will happen to Crimea after the war, how can Crimean Tatars stay in this conversation? How can they maintain their voice and their position?
This is the most important thing, and we talk about it at every meeting with the President. Even before the de-occupation of Crimea, we need to determine exactly what kind of state it will be. Whether it will be an amorphous, no-man's-land administrative unit, or whether, on the basis of international law, the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples, an autonomous republic will be created on the basis of the exercise of the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination within the existing state. If the latter is adopted, then we can be calm about the future of Crimea. If not, then turbulence is inevitable again.
What problems will remain unresolved?
I think that after the de-occupation of Crimea, the air on the peninsula will be much cleaner. Many collaborators will leave. All those who entered illegally must leave. Perhaps, they should first be punished for entering illegally. Some kind of fines.
We would very much like those Ukrainians who left Crimea to return. There would still be fewer of us, and with loyal allies in the country, it would be easier for us to defend our rights. I would like to hope that the relationship between Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars will be qualitatively different, that we will not repeat our mistakes.
I think few people understand and imagine what is happening to young Crimean Tatars. In fact, 10 years of occupation, a new generation has grown up. Children who have already grown up under the occupation, under the new Russian government - what are they like, how do they differ from their parents, has their attitude to both Ukraine and Russia changed?
As I said, the situation in the family is of great importance, but it is no longer the same as under Soviet rule, given the huge massive propaganda and parents' fear that their children will suffer.
But just imagine, in 1991, before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the vast majority were in favour of communist rule, but it took a few years of perestroika, publications, and everything dissipated. So, I don't have any great fears for the way our young people think. I think everything will recover quickly, especially since the background of their parents will help.
Many people, speaking about Ukrainian children, children of Ukrainians under occupation, in Luhansk, Donetsk, and Kherson Regions, have great fears, and to a large extent these fears are related to the Russian education system. Children go to Russian schools, where they are simply brainwashed with propaganda and Russian narratives, and, accordingly, many are afraid that when we return, these children will not quite feel like Ukrainians.
This will be true for a certain period of time. And then, if there is a democratic system, freedom... You know, the ardent communists later became ardent anti-communists.
This happened.
In general, if we're talking about the front line, which today passes through most of Ukraine, through Crimea, through the North and the East, do you have an understanding and a recipe for how to keep in touch with your people, how to maintain contact with them, how to keep faith in them, how to build contacts with those on the other side of the front line?
We are doing our best. In September 2022 [in Crimea], forced mobilisation began, and it greatly contributed to the mass exodus of Crimean Tatars, especially young people. We said that if you are drafted into the Russian army, you have two choices: either you will be dead, returning in bags, or you will be scum, murderers, cursed by your people. But if you can't avoid it and you end up in the Russian army, we have developed instructions on how to surrender more effectively and quickly.
But it is very difficult because there is a system of outposts. We have information about 41 Crimean Tatars killed in the Russian army. Of these, about 28 were prisoners, criminals who were captured. Only 6 of those killed are those who were taken for big money. The rest were simply captured. Therefore, it will not be possible to completely avoid the ranks of the occupation army. But we are making great efforts to reduce the percentage as much as possible.
Please tell us your subjective opinion: do Ukrainians want to return Crimea?
It's hard to say about the whole of Ukraine, but opinion polls show that 90% believe that peace is impossible without the return of all the occupied territories, including Crimea. And about 10% - I assume that these are mostly ethnic Russians - admit the possibility of leaving Crimea to the occupiers.
Then we will hope, believe and work to ensure that Crimea returns and the rest of our occupied territories return. I think that we are all doing this, each in our place.
On the eve of the new year [2024], I made an appeal to my fellow citizens. It turned out that Budanov came to me and said: "If you make an address in Russian for one minute, for the residents of Crimea, our hackers will remove Putin at 24:00 and put you there."
They managed to put me on one channel instead of Putin. But there were a lot of views, about a million and a half on Facebook. I said that there is every reason to hope that this is the last year of the occupation. Therefore, my recommendation to all Russian citizens who have illegally entered Crimea is to leave the territory as soon as the Kerch Bridge is open, without delay. Including collaborators and snitches. Leave. We do not want to get our hands dirty in Crimea.
And I suggested to all my compatriots that they stay away from military facilities, because we are not Russia, we will not, of course, hit peaceful cities, but war is war, and for safety...
I really believed, because there were all the prerequisites that we could enter Crimea, but we did not expect that our biggest ally would withhold support for almost six months. This is a very worrying time, no one knows how the new president [Donald Trump] will behave, but the United States is not a sultanate, not everything is done as he wants, no matter how peculiar the president is, there is still the Congress. We hope that there will be support for Ukraine and a just peace, which implies the mandatory liberation of every square centimetre of the occupied territory.