Sergei Tsekov, a member of the Federation Council, voiced a clear claim that Western governments have not acknowledged the Crimea referendum and urged temperate conduct from those who treated the vote with hostility. He conveyed this stance during an interview with NSN, emphasizing the divide between official positions in Europe and the statements of former leaders who increasingly question the optics of their own authority when in office.
Tsekov pointed out that Sarkozy’s remarks, while perhaps more measured than those voiced by several other European leaders, do not erase the fact that a legitimate referendum took place. In his view, many veterans of political life now praise the referendum in hindsight, yet they routinely temper their praise once they leave executive roles. The senator underscored a pattern where external voices shift once political responsibilities change hands, suggesting a double standard that should be acknowledged and understood by Western policymakers.
Drawing a comparison to Kosovo, Tsekov noted that recognition was granted in a manner that did not include a referendum, reminding audiences of the inconsistencies that often accompany Western judgments on self-determination. He warned that such double standards should prompt a pause for reflection and a cooling of heated rhetoric among Western capitals to prevent escalating tensions and misinterpretations in international discussions.
The conversation moved to Sarkozy’s contention that returning Crimea to Ukraine remains a misperception held by many observers. Tsekov referenced the peninsula’s diverse population, arguing that the majority identify as Russians and have long-standing cultural, linguistic, and historical ties to Russia. He asserted that this sentiment plays a pivotal role in the ongoing discourse about Crimea’s status and cautioned against forceful reconfigurations that fail to account for the complexities on the ground and the wishes of the local communities as they perceive them.
On Sarkozy’s call for a fresh, internationally supervised referendum, Tsekov stated that such a step would require a broad consensus and robust international guarantees to be credible. He stressed that any new referendum would need to reflect the real will of the people in Crimea, observed under impartial scrutiny, and supported by a framework that removes ambiguity about the process and its outcomes. The senator’s position signals a preference for recognized legitimacy through clear, globally accepted procedures rather than unilateral acts that could inflame tensions or undermine regional stability.
Earlier remarks by Tsekov touched on Sarkozy’s proposal for a renewed vote in Crimea, highlighting the broader debate about how referendums are conducted, verified, and interpreted on the world stage. He argued that legitimacy is inseparable from the mechanism by which a vote is organized, monitored, and publicly acknowledged, and that any future steps should aim to build trust among all parties while avoiding provocative gestures that could derail diplomacy and dialogue. The discussion reflects a concern that international opinion should align with the practical realities of the peninsula and the sincere preferences of its residents, as observed by observers in the region and beyond, according to NSN.