Patrick Le Tréhondat : Karyna, can you introduce yourself?

Karyna Chmeliuk : I am Karyna Chmeliuk, born and raised in Simferopol, the capital of Crimea. After graduating from high school, I decided to enter a university in Kyiv due to my pro-Ukrainian position. In 2022, I went to Crimea, where my parents still live, for the winter holidays and got stuck when the full-scale war started. When I attempted to get to Kyiv in 2023 through Russia, Turkey, and Moldova, I got detained in the Chisinau airport and was only released in four days with the help of Priama Diia (Direct Action), an independent student union.

What is the current situation in Crimea?

The occupants practically destroyed any civic activity, let alone representative democracy. There is no freedom of speech. Many people who supported Ukraine left, and many of those who stayed are scared to express their opinion. Russia, contrary to international humanitarian law, mobilized people for the war in Ukraine. There is still hope, though, as there are many good people who can be persuaded to take part in bottom-up organizing, civic initiatives, and helping each other.

What forms of resistance to Russian imperialism exist, and who are the social actors involved?

There are members of the resistance from different ethnic backgrounds: Ukrainian, Crimean Tatar, Russian, and others. Ethnicity doesn’t play a big role here, rather political and moral position. Some people are involved in actions like distributing stickers or leaflets, painting graffiti, setting recruitment points or other military objects on fire. Some work with the Ukrainian intelligence service. Moreover, even just existing in Crimea as a person who supports freedom, community, and peace is already a part of the resistance. While there are people like this, the occupants haven’t completely won.

Crimea and the Tatars have a long history of democracy. Can you tell us about it?

I am not really an expert in Crimean Tatar history, but I can tell that the Crimean Tatars have democratic traditions. The Crimean Khanate, which existed from the 15^th to the 18^th century, was a monarchy under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire, but it had some elements of representative governance. The Kurultai was a traditional assembly of nobles (beys), religious leaders, and tribal chiefs (mirzas), which played a critical role in political decisions, including the election of the Khan. It was responsible for managing internal governance and foreign affairs, and could even depose the Khan, showing proto-parliamentary features rooted in Turkic and Mongol traditions of collective decision-making. The Crimean Tatars maintained at some level decentralized and community-based governance systems through Mahalla councils: local self-governing bodies in villages and urban neighborhoods. These councils handled dispute resolution, charity, and education. Customary law (adat) coexisted with Islamic law (sharia), showing a flexible, community-driven legal culture. After the Revolution in 1917, the Crimean Tatars declared the Crimean People’s Republic based in Bakhchisarai. It was the first secular Muslim democratic republic in the world, with universal suffrage (including women), civil rights, and a parliamentary structure. After the mass deportation of the Crimean Tatars in 1944, they established national councils and informal assemblies in exile (mostly in Uzbekistan), operated underground schools, preserved language and culture, and practiced collective petitioning and advocacy. Their methods were often grassroots and community-driven, showing a resilient tradition of direct democracy under extreme oppression.

After returning to Crimea, the Crimean Tatars formed the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, an elected representative body to defend their rights and coordinate national life. The Kurultai, revived as a national congress, elects members to the Mejlis. It acts as a parliament-in-exile today, since Russia banned the Mejlis after occupying Crimea in 2014.

What forms of self-organisation exist in Crimea today?

Political self-organization in Crimea is now quite hard and dangerous, so it doesn’t involve a large part of the population. However, self-organization can be not just political. It can aim to solve problems on the most local level. For example, many Crimeans are involved in self-organization at the level of apartment buildings: participating in discussions in the group chats, collectively solving shared issues, and managing everyday matters in their communities. Such a form of self-organization can grow to set bigger goals and become a foundation for grassroots civic initiatives.

Last year, the Ukrainian government sought to shut down Taurida University, a Crimean university that had fled to Kyiv in order to preserve Tatar culture and merged with another university. What is the situation today?

This issue was postponed to 2025 due to the protests of students, professors, and administration of the Taurida University. So, this year we will probably have to resist the attempts to merge it again.

You recently gave a lecture in which you spoke about the power of popular movements to solve problems where the state and businesses are powerless or unwilling to solve community issues. Can you tell us more about this?

We build a platform and tools for Crimeans to simplify self-organization and resistance. This includes creating clear guides for joining the movement, helping people find resources, connect with others, and take action safely and effectively. We are building a decentralized network: flexible, anonymous, and resilient. Anyone can contribute at their own pace and risk level they find appropriate. Instead of a single center of command, we support autonomous cells and individuals who share common values and goals, but operate independently. This model lowers the entry barrier for civic engagement and resistance. Whether it’s organizing a neighborhood initiative, spreading information, or supporting political prisoners, people can join in ways that are meaningful and sustainable for them.

There is a policy of settling Russians in Crimea. It is a typical colonial policy. How do you see the future of Crimea with this occupation by new ‘residents’?

Of course, such a policy further eliminates anything Ukrainian or Crimean Tatar from Crimea. If we talk about the options for the Ukrainian government after de-occupation, one of the options would be deportation of the Russians who came after 2014 and therefore live in Crimea illegally. We can though provide them with the opportunities to get the right to stay there by fulfilling certain criteria. These criteria may include learning the Ukrainian language and history.

More generally, how do you see the future of Crimea ?

I think that Crimea will be deoccupied early or late. Maybe not directly in the military way or through people’s revolution, but after the government in Russia changes to another one. After that, the future of Crimea and full reintegration will be defined by the state of the grassroots organization there. We can and should build bottom-up structures in Crimea now, so that later they will be able to govern Crimea ensuring wide participation and trust of the local population.