I think that is certainly likely, Zim. Russia would have had an interest. And I'm not claiming the Russian government doesn't know how to play the game. In fact, that is how Russia went Leninist to begin with: a coup.
From Wikipedia:
Established in 1922 following the Russian Civil War, the Soviet Union quickly became a one-party state under the Communist Party. Its early years under Lenin were marked by the implementation of socialist policies and the New Economic Policy (NEP), which allowed for market-oriented reforms.
The rise of Joseph Stalin in the late 1920s ushered in an era of intense centralization and totalitarianism. Stalin's rule was characterized by the forced collectivization of agriculture, rapid industrialization, and the Great Purge, which eliminated perceived enemies of the state.
No "democratic" vote. Lenists don't believe in democracy. That is part of how they differ from Marx's ideal of Communism as an organic process."
But there is more to the story than even that. I posted part of here a long time ago. IN 1991 Crimea originally voted, democratically, to become its OWN country.
They were invaded shortly after by Ukraine and "convinced" to become part of Ukraine instead (although almost everyone in Crimea was actually ethnic Russian).
So, you've swallowed, and then regurgitated repeatedly, a lot of B.S. about how Russia STOLE Crimea from Ukraine. Doesn't it upset you that you were deceived?
That is only a half truth -- hiding the deeper, and uglier truth. Ukraine HAD STOLEN Crimea from its own citizens less than 20 years earlier. So Russia was just "liberating" them. And, given a choice between being part of Ukraine or part of Russia...well, when you are ethnic Russian, not ethnic Ukranian, I expect it was a relief for most Crimeans (although I won't claim that I know for certain, it makes vastly more sense than the nonsense our MSM fed us).
Anyway, that is what is going on. Or, at least, that is the story which makes the most sense to me.
Oh, here is a snippet, again from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Crimea_(1991%E2%80%932014)
"With the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Ukrainian independence the majority ethnic Russian Crimean peninsula was reorganized as the Republic of Crimea, after a 1991 referendum with the Crimean authorities pushing for more independence from Ukraine and closer links with Russia. In 1995 the Republic was forcibly abolished by Ukraine with the Autonomous Republic of Crimea established firmly under Ukrainian authority.
I'm not trying to say you should necessarily trust Wikipedia, btw. They are substantially "nudged" by various forces, also. But you can pick up the trail from there, if you care/dare to.
You have to dig your way pretty deep into the history books to get past the mountains of propaganda and “narrative” the US and European MSM are paid to push. But it is there. And, to really find out, it helps to talk to the people who actually lived in the regions one is talking about...at the time when things actually happened. I've done a little of that, as I partially explained right after the outbreak of this WW4 fuse.
Crimea has long been a jewel for larger nations to fight over. England tried to take it over at an earlier time -- and seems to still have a secret lust for Crimea.
Ah, here we go. "Strange" how the search engines are so loath to actually give you what you ask for, eh?
http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Outcome-Crimean-War/
The whole of geopolitics is filthy with the skullduggery and propaganda.
| 