Collective Memory, Moral Economy and Land Disputes after the Repatriation of Crimean Tatars

Sobolieva, Olena

doi:0071-1861

Download

Title: Collective Memory, Moral Economy and Land Disputes after the Repatriation of Crimean Tatars

Abstract:

This article is devoted to the meaning of identity and belonging in the processes of defending land rights. The 20th century was marked by unprecedentedly large processes of rejection and redistribution of land ownership in the countries of the socialist camp. Forced confiscation of property and collectivization fundamentally changed the landscape of land ownership. And in some border territories of the Soviet Union, which includes the Crimean peninsula, the events of ethnic deportations of the population had a decisive influence on the redistribution of land ownership as well. Separated from their ethnic lands, the Crimean Tatars formed an identity that had a clear connection to the lost territory and homeland. The process of political resistance, which continued during the Soviet period, and mass spontaneous repatriation took place under the main slogan - the restoration of justice and the return of Crimean Tatars to their ethnic homeland. After the return of a large part of the Crimean Tatars to their ethnic lands, the process of restoring land rights began. This process had an organized nature and great political resonance in Crimea and led to a significant reorganization of the cultural landscape of the peninsula.

References:

Ballard Christopher, Banks Glen 2003, Resource Wars: The Anthropology of Mining, Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 32 no. 1, pp. 287–313.
Bohomolov Alexand, Danylov Sergei, Semyvolos Igor 2012, Zemelnye spory kak faktor sotsialnykh konfliktov v Krymu Skhіdniy Svіt, vol. 4, pp. 164–188 [in Ukr] (Actions concerning land as a factor of social conflicts in Crimea).
Buhai Mykola 1992, Deportatsiia krymskykh tatar u 1944 r (Deportation of Crimean Tatars in 1944), Ukrainskyi Istorychnyi Yhurnal, vol.1, pp. 29–44.
Derzhheokadastr pidbyv pidsumky 100 dniv pislia vidkryttia rynku zemel v Ukraini, 2021 (StateGeoCa-dastre has summed up the results of 100 days after the opening of the land market in Ukraine). Derzhavna sluzhba Ukrainy z pytan heodezii, kartohrafii ta kadastrutate, Service of Ukraine for Geodesy, Cartography and Cadastre, https://web.archive.org/web/20211129110636/https://www.kmu.gov.ua/news/derzhgeokadastr-pidbiv-pidsumki-100-dniv-pislya-vidkrittya-rinku-ze-mel-v-ukrayini (accessed 30.10.2023).
Fay Derrick, James Deborah 2008, The Anthropology of Land Restitution: An Introduction, [in:] Fay, Derrick and James, Deborah, (eds.) The Rights and Wrongs of Land Restitution: ‘Restoring What Was Ours’, Routledge, London, pp. 1–24.
Frevert Ute 2019, Moral Economies, Present and Past: Social Practices and Intellectual Contro-versies, Geschichte Und Gesellschaft, vol. 26, pp. 13–43.
Hale Charles R. 2006, Activist Research v. Cultural Critique: Indigenous Land Rights and the Con-tradictions of Politically Engaged Anthropology, Cultural Anthropology, vol. 21, no.1, pp. 96–120.
Hann Chris 2007, A New Double Movement? Anthropological Perspectives on Property in the Age of Neoliberalism, Socio-economic Review, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 287–318.
Low Setha M. 2009, Towards an Anthropological Theory of Space and Place, Semiotica, vol. 175, pp. 21–37.
Meillassoux Claude 1972, From Reproduction to Production: A Marxist Approach to Economic Anthropology, Economy and Society, vol. 1, pp. 93–105.
Nora Pierre 1982, Les Lieux de mémoire, Edition Gallimard, pp. 17–50.
Pro kilkist... 2001, Pro kilkist ta sklad naselennia Avtonomnoi Respubliky Krym za pidsumkamy vseukrainskoho perepysu naselennia 2001 roku Derzhavnyi komitet statystyky Ukrainy vseu-krainskyi perepys naselennia 2001 (About the Number and Composition of the Population of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea According to the Results of the All-Ukrainian Population Census of 2001) State Statistics Committee of Ukraine. All-Ukrainian population census 2001, http://2001.ukrcensus.gov.ua/results/g (accessed 30.10.2023).
Seitbekirov Eldar 2016, Uroki Zemli (Earth Lessons), Golos Kryma, vol. 20 no. 60, http://golo-skrimanew.ru/uroki-zemli.html (accessed 30.10.2023).
Skilky krymskykh... 2021, Skilky krymskykh tatar i ukraintsiv pid tyskom RF pokynuly Krym za chas okupatsii, rozpoviv Korynevych, Kanal Dim (How many Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians left Crimea under the Pressure of Russian Federation during the Time of Occupation, Tells Kory-nevych), https://kanaldim.tv/skolko-krymskih-tatar-i-ukrainczev-pod-davleniem-rf-pokinuli-krym-za-vremya-okkupaczii-rasskazal-korinevich/ (accessed 30.10.2023).
Sobolieva Olena 2015, Vesillia krymskykh tatar: tradytsiini formy ta transformatsii, bila Tserkva, O. Pshonkivskii.
Sviezhentsev Maxim 2021, Unwelcome at Home: Politics of Race in Crimea in the Early 1990s, Slavic and East European Journal, vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 603–621.
Sviezhentsev Maxim, Kisly Martin - Olexandr 2023, De-occupation or (De)Coloni-zation? Challenges for Crimea’s future, Canadian Slavonic Papers, vol. 65, no. 2 , pp. 232–244.
Thompson Edward Palmer 1971, The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century, Past & Present, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 76–136.
Tishchenko Yulia (ed.) 2015, Hromadianstvo, zemlia, “natsionalizatsiia vlasnosti” v umovakh okupatsii Krymu: defitsyt prav. Analitychnyi zvit. (Citizenship, Land, “Nationalization of Prop-erty” in the Conditions of Occupation of Crimea: Lack of Rights. Analytical Report), Kyiv Agency “Ukraine”, Kyiv.
Turner Bertram 2017, The Anthropology of Property, [in:] M. Graziadei and L. Smith (eds.) Comparative Property Law. Global Perspectives, Cheltenham, Northampton, MA, Elgar, pp. 26–47.
Uehling Greta Lynn 2000, Social Memory as Collective Action: The Crimean Tatar national movement, [in:] Globalizations and Social Movements: Culture, Power, and the Transnational Public Sphere, University of Michigan Press, pp. 260–87.
Uehling Greta 2004, Beyond Memory: the Crimean Tatars’ Deportation and Return, New York, Palgrave Macmillan.
Vyatkin Anatolii, Kulpin Eduard (ed.) 1997, Krymskiye tatary: problemy repatriatsii. (The Crimean Tatars: The Problem of Repatriation), Moscow, Institut vostokovedeniya RAN.
Williams Bryan Glyn 1997, A Community Reimagined. The Role of “Homeland” in the Forging of National Identity: The Case of the Crimean Tatars, Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 225–252.
Zaloznaya Marina, Theodore Gerber 2012, Migration as Social Movement: voluntary Group Migration and the Crimean Tatar Repatriation, Population and Development Review, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 259–284.
Zinych Volodymyr 2005, vyrishennia sotsialno-ekonomichnykh problem repatriantiv u Krymu: rozpodil zemelnykh resursiv (Solving Socio-economic Problems of Repatriates in Crimea: Dis-tribution of Land Resources), Demohrafiia ta sotsialna ekonomika, vol. 2, pp. 78–85.
Verdery Katherine, Huphrey Caroline (eds.) 2004, Property in Question. Value Trans-formation in the Global Economy, berg, Oxford.
Zaplitna Iryna 2016, Pravova pryroda ta kharakterystyka zemelnoi chastky (paiu) (Legal Nature and Characteristics of the Land Share-pai), Naukovyi visnyk Natsionalnoho universytetu bioresursiv i pryrodokorystuvannia Ukrainy, vol. 243, pp. 117–124.
Zhylin Ivan 2017, Narod, opalennyi «vesnoi» Krymskye tatary y Rossyia: ot soprotyvlenyia, ubyistv, pokhyshchenyi y tiurem — do polnoho pryniatyia novoi vlasty, Novaia Gayeta, vol. 80. https://novayagazeta.ru/articles/2017/07/26/73245-narod-opa (accessed 30.10.2023)