The geopolitics of Russia's annexation of Crimea: narratives, identity, silences, and energy

This article analyzes official Russian government narratives for the annexation of Crimea and connects these narratives of identity and territory to the energy implications and narratives of Black Sea resources and the recent 30-year gas agreement with China. We argue that the events of Crimea’s annexation in the “west” signal a Russian shift “eastward.” With the occurrence of the Euromaidan protest movement and Ukraine’s president, fleeing from power, a pro-European Union government came to power in Kyiv. The Russian government reacted by deploying unmarked troops to support the holding of a secessionist referendum for the peninsula’s population. The Russian government incorporated Crimea by engaging in a sophisticated effort, through nonmilitary and military means, to promulgate narratives justifying Russia’s annexation of Crimea. The Russian government appealed to Russia’s geopolitical and historical imaginations of Crimea. There were two other, no less important, factors for annexing Crimea: control of the Russian Black Sea Fleet based in Crimea and new maritime territorial claims that encompassed much of Ukraine’s Black Sea energy potential and existing facilities. These two impetuses form the silent connection between Crimea, energy, and the Black Sea Fleet, that are then linked to the subsequent gas deal with China. The important gas agreement follows the discursive arc begun in Crimea, which appealed to the historical past, whereas economic developments in Asia and Russia’s energy power status discursively represent Russia’s future. Viewing Russia’s geopolitical narratives in the context of historical and geographical dilemmas shows the layered relationships informing identity, territory, and resources.