Specifics of the Potential of Ethnopolitical Tension in the Municipalities of the Republic of Crimea (2014−2020)

Introduction. At present, the process of integration of the Crimean peninsula into the Russian Federation cannot yet be called complete. A special role in these processes can be played by the scientific community, which can present its understanding of various topical processes in Crimea, in particular, ethno-political ones, which are of great importance for ensuring the stability of regional security of the peninsula. Of utmost importance here are scientific studies focused on analyzing the potential of ethno-political conflictogenity in different parts of the Republic of Crimea, which also further actualizes the topic of the selected study.

The purpose of this study is to calculate the index of ethno-political tension of municipalities of the Republic of Crimea, the subsequent zoning of its territory according to this indicator, and the identification of municipalities with the lowest and highest level of ethno-political tension.

At present, a certain bibliographic base has been formed on this topic, in particular, it is possible to single out the works of such researchers as K.N. Kulikova. Akhmadeev [1], A.V. Baranov [2], D.K. Grigoryan [3], E.N. Kondratenko [3], T.K. Faraponova [3], A.V. Levin [4], D.A. Mamina [5], D.N. Mishchenko [5], T.A. Senyushkina [6], S.S. Smetannikov [7], A.B. Shvets [8]. At the same time, a more in-depth study of some aspects is required. For example, this concerns statistical research methods in analyzing ethno-political tensions in modern Crimea, as well as the application of quantitative research methods in analyzing ethno-political processes of Crimea in the context of municipalities.

Materials and methods. A number of methods of statistical analysis, in particular, correlation analysis of statistical data, as well as grouping and summarizing of the obtained statistical data were chosen as the basis of the research tools.

In the study, by means of the formula developed by us, the index of ethno-political tension of municipalities of the Republic of Crimea was calculated. The formula was based on three indicators: the level of ethnic heterogeneity of municipalities; the degree of transformation of the ethnic structure; ethno-cultural “distance” between the three largest ethnic groups of Crimea (Russians, Ukrainians, Crimean Tatars) [9, p. 27].

In the course of calculating the level of ethnic heterogeneity of municipalities, we used a methodology that was developed by researchers Taylor and Hudson in the first half of the 1970s. last century to determine the degree of linguistic heterogeneity of the population by applying the quantitative information presented in the Atlas of the Peoples of the World [10]. The formula for determining this indicator has the following form:

where Si is the share of the population of the i-th ethnic group in the total population, N is the number of such groups.

During the calculation process, the index values range from 0 to 1 − 1/N. The lower the index data, the lower the ethnic heterogeneity of the population in a particular municipality. If the index values are high, the heterogeneity of ethnic structure is correspondingly high. It should be emphasized that this indicator does not take into account the distance between ethnic groups of a certain society, which does not provide an opportunity to identify the most and least significant ethno-cultural differences, so for the final formula we took another indicator for calculation − the level of ethno-cultural distance between the three most numerous ethnic groups of the Crimean peninsula − Russians, Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars.

In determining such an indicator as the level of ethno-cultural distance, we applied an adjusted version of the methodology for calculating the diversity index, which was presented in 1956 by scientist J. Greenberg and is aimed at quantifying the existing distances between ethnic groups [11]. The indicator definition formula itself has the following form:

where S_i is the share of the population of the Russian ethnos in the total population; S_j − the share of the population of Ukrainian ethnicity in the total population; S_k − the share of the population of the Crimean Tatar ethnos in the total population; P_ij − ethno-conflict potential along the line “Russians − Ukrainians”; P_ik − ethno-conflict potential along the line “Russians − Crimean Tatars”; P_jk − ethno-conflict potential along the line “Ukrainians − Crimean Tatars” [9, pp. 27]. Five conflict factors formed the base of ethno-conflict potential values. Table 1 quantifies each of the factors in more detail.

As for such an indicator as the degree of transformation of the ethnic structure, it was calculated according to the dynamic ratio of two ethnic groups − Russians (who are the majority in the ethnic structure of the population of the Republic of Crimea) and Crimean Tatars (the ethnic group that had the greatest impact on the transformation of the ethno-cultural and demographic balance of the Crimean peninsula in the late 1990s − early 2000s) [9, p. 28]. These processes were greatly influenced by the repatriation of the Crimean Tatar ethnos that took place during this period, which significantly changed the nature of the ethnic structure of the Crimean population. This is evidenced by the quantitative data: in the period from 1989 to 2001, the share of Crimean Tatars in the population structure of the Crimean peninsula increased more than sixfold (from 1.58 % in 1989 to 10.26 % in 2001) [12], [13].

Below we present in detail the formula for calculating the degree of transformation of the ethnic structure:

where S_k2021 is the share of the Crimean Tatar population in 2021; S_k2014 − share of the Crimean Tatar population in 2014; S_i2021 − share of the Russian population in 2021; S_i2014 − share of the Russian population in 2014 [9, p. 28].

Speaking about the final formula for calculating the index of ethno-political tension in the municipalities of the Republic of Crimea, it has the following form:

where EH − ethnic heterogeneity (ethnic heterogeneity); ED − the level of ethno-cultural distance (the level of ethnocultural distance); TES − the level of transformation of the ethnic structure (the level of transformation of the ethnic structure).

Results. In the course of the calculations made, the data were obtained, which are displayed in Table 2.

As evidenced by the data presented in Table 2, 75.00 % (absolute majority) of municipalities with a minimum level of ethno-political tension are located in the southern part of the Republic of Crimea. Most of the municipalities with low and lowered level of ethno-political tension are located in the northern part of the Crimean Peninsula (36.36 %), however, it should be noted that, with the exception of Dzhankoy District, these municipalities are urban districts, not just districts. In this aspect, it is also necessary to emphasize another important detail − none of the urban districts of the Republic of Crimea record average, high, or maximum values of the index of ethno-political tension. The only district among the municipalities with minimal and low indicators of the ethno-political tension index is the Chernomorsky district.

Compared to 2014 [9, p. 29], in 2021 it is impossible to single out any one part of the Crimean peninsula, where high and maximum indicators of the index of ethno-political tension clearly prevail: If in 2014 the majority (58 %) of municipalities with high and maximum indicators of the index of ethno-political tension were located in the central part of Crimea [9, p. 9. 29], then in 2021, 28 % of such municipalities were located in the central, eastern and northern parts of the republic (see Table 3).

Among the municipal formations with high and maximum values of the index of ethnopolitical tension, there is also one area of the south of Crimea (Bakhchisarai district), while in 2014 there were two such municipalities among the southern part of the Crimean Peninsula. It should be noted that in the period from 2014 to 2021. There was a significant decrease in the ethno-political tension index in the Sudak city district. In many respects, this was due to a certain change in the ethnic structure, in particular, an increase in the share of Russian ethnicity and a decrease in the number of Ukrainian ethnicity in the population structure.

It should be emphasized that such a trend is typical for other municipalities of the republic after 2014. For the first time since 1939, the second largest ethnic group on the Crimean peninsula were Crimean Tatars rather than Ukrainians. For the period from 2014 through 2021. the loss of Ukrainian population in Crimea amounted to 49.98 % [14], [15]. At the same time, the growth of the Russian population amounted to 62.71 %, Crimean Tatar population − 9.20 % [15]. To a certain extent, such transformations were caused by the outflow of the Ukrainian population from the territory of the Crimean peninsula after 2014 due to the rejection by some residents of the events of the “Crimean Spring” and the processes of integration with Russia. At the same time, we do not consider this factor as the main one, because among the Ukrainian population there were quite a lot of those citizens who positively perceived the events of the “Crimean Spring”, and who earlier, before 2014, for a number of reasons, were forced within the framework of the 2001 census identify themselves as Ukrainians, although internally they felt themselves as Russians. The situation had already begun to change in the 2014 census, as the statistics clearly show, but even more global identity transformations could only take place after a certain time, which happened by 2021.

It should also be noted that, compared to 2014 [9, p. 29], in 76 % of municipalities of the republic there was a decrease in the index of ethno-political tension. In six municipalities these indicators increased: in Razdolnensky, Pervomaisky, Krasnoperekopsk, Leninsky districts, as well as in the urban districts of Krasnoperekopsk and Feodosiya. Mainly, the increase in the index of ethno-political tension in these municipalities is due to the highest values of growth in the number of the Crimean Tatar ethnic group, which influenced the values of the three indicators that make up the final formula for calculating the index of ethno-political tension. If in the period from 2001 to 2014 in the mentioned municipalities there was a negative dynamics of the number of the Crimean Tatar ethnos, in the period from 2014 to 2021 the opposite processes took place. This was particularly strongly reflected in such a calculated indicator as the degree of transformation of the ethnic structure, the values of which directly depend on the specifics of demographic transformations of the Crimean Tatar ethnos.

Discussion and conclusion. So, as a result of the analysis, the following conclusions can be drawn:

1) at present, the southern part of the Crimean peninsula hosts the absolute majority of municipalities with a minimal level of ethno-political tension;

2) Most of the municipalities with low and lowered levels of ethno-political tension are located in the northern part of the Republic of Crimea and have the administrative status of urban districts;

3) in comparison with 2014, in 2021 it is impossible to identify a single part of the Crimean peninsula, where high and maximum indicators of the index of ethno-political tension clearly prevail.

In general, in comparison with 2014, in the municipalities of Crimea (in 76.00 % of the total number) there is a decrease in the index of ethno-political tension, the main factor of which is the 62.71 % increase in the Russian population in the period from 2014 to 2021, which, in turn, had an impact on the indicators that make up the final formula for calculating the index.