Intermediate Debate Competition R3: The Crimean Referendum was was not legitimate or democratic

Thanks, Con. I agree to debate your re-formulation of the thesis. I'll disagree that the Crimean Referendum was sovereign, popular, or just.Let's begin by focusing on a word you introduced in your thesis: sovereignty.Mirriam-Webster defines sovereignty as a a country's independent authority and the right to govern itself. [1] Since the Crimean Referendum was not conducted by a sovereign authority, the popularity of decision must be called into question. In truth, the results published by Russia's puppet government demonstrate that the vote was false and unrepresentative.CRIMEA WAS INVADEDJust 3 weeks before the Referendum, Crimea was invaded by tens of thousands of Russian forces who took control of Crimea's borders, its military installations, its ports and parliament. Armed men took control of the Crimean Supreme Council and raised the Russian flag over government buildings. [2] After confiscating phones and shutting down internet connections, parliament is reported to have voted out the sitting Prime Minister, replacing him with a pro-Russian politician, Sergey Aksyonovwhose extreme Russian Unity party was only able to garner 4 percent of the vote in the last elections. [3] With machine guns at the doors refusing entrance to some members, the Supreme Council voted to hold the March referendum. So from the outset, the Crimean Referendum slipped from any possible moorings of full representation or due process. As soon as gunmen took control of parliament, the outcome of any referendum was guaranteed by threat of force. The REFERENDUM ITSELF DID NOT OFFER a CHOICEThe Referendum itself only offered two choices: Choice 1: Do you support the reunification of Crimea with Russia with all the rights of the Russian federation?That is, join Russia now, or Choice 2: Do you support the restoration of the Constitution of the Republic of Crimea in 1992 and the status of the Crimea as part of Ukraine? That is, authorize the Russian-occupied parliament to vote to join Russia. Since Crimeans were not offered the opportunity to reject or qualify Russian occupation, the Referendum's outcome can't be said to reflect popular or sovereign opinion. The RESULTS WERE OBVIOUSLY FAKEAlthough ethnic Russians achieved a majority of 71% of the population after Stalin forcefully deported the native Tartar populations to Uzbekistan, that majority has been in sharp decline since the fall of the USSR. Although a 1989 census calculated the Russian majority at 67% of the population, that percentage had declined to 58% 12 years later in 2001 while the Tartar population increased tenfold to 12%. There has not been a census since 2001, but we know that ethic Russian populations have continued to decline while the number of Tartar returnees continues to soar. [4]A 2011 poll conducted the Razumkov Center reported that the number of Crimean residents who consider Ukraine their motherland increased from 32% to 71.3% from 2008 through 2011. [5] A poll by the International Republican Institute only last May found that 67% wanted to remain in Ukraine and 23% wanted unity with Russia. [6] Considering the turmoil since those polls and the number of likely abstainers for the Referendum, a result that favored instant absorption into Russia might have plausibly exceed the necessary simple majority of 50%. But when the puppet government trumpeted that of the 80% of registered voters, 97% favored an immediate secession of Crimean sovereignty to Russia, the results insulted the intelligence of all and recalled the worst propaganda from the days of Soviet domination.ELECTION OBSERVERS LACKED CREDIBILITYThe most credible organization for observing such a referendum should have been Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, with a long history of observing and endorsing free elections. In spite of a public invitation, attempts by OSCE observers to enter the country were repeatedly denied, sometimes with shots fired. [7] Instead, the organizations from which Russia could obtain endorsement tended to be the most extreme right-wingers of Europe, including a remarkable number of prominent neo-Nazis. [8] Of the usual rolecall of election observers recognized by the United Nations and the international community, no organization with a reputation to uphold was willing to endorse the Referendum and most condemned the election before March 16.In short, the Referendum of March 16 was a farce manufactured by Russia for the satisfaction of Russians. A sovereign referendum cannot be held under military occupation. A just referendum cannot have two options that have essentially the same meaning. Free and fair referendums cannot be held when all of the propaganda is generated by the state. A legal referendum cannot be held when TV stations are closed, when journalists are beaten and observers intimidated. Russia's nonsense claim that 80% of the population participated and 97% voted to rejoin the old oppressor state is not tenable. Con has proposed that the international community should not sanction Russia in response to Putin's aggression. I think we can be skepticial about the effectiveness or advisability of such sanctions while at the same time recognizing that some proportional sanctions are certainly justified. In the larger picture, the most effective sanction against Russia may be the absorption of Crimea itself, a perpertually unproductive state, however strategically valuble. Having forced the remainder of Ukraine into Europe's hands, Putin has unnecessarily placed Russia into a no-win situation: losing European markets, European oil sales, Ukrainian trade, Ukrainian frakking rights, Ukrainian pipelines in exchange for Ukraine's least economically viable province. Whatever the strategic value a Black Sea port or the political value of Nationalistic bragging rights, Putin has damaged Russia's long-term propects more greviously than any half-hearted US sanction might.[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2] http://www.theguardian.com...[3] http://www.nytimes.com...[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...[5] http://www.kyivpost.com...[6] http://www.iri.org...[7] http://www.reuters.com...[8] http://en.wikipedia.org...