The “Great Russian Word” Festival: A Parade of Russian Nationalism in the Temporarily Occupied Territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea

At the opening of the festival, information billboards were installed in central occupied Simferopol carrying the message “Govori po-russki” (“Speak Russian”).

Within the framework of the VRS festival, it was reported that the “State Council of the Republic of Crimea” signed an “agreement on interparliamentary cooperation with the Luhansk People’s Republic.”

At the same time, Russian media claimed that the VRS brought together “politicians and scholars from across Russia and from abroad,” thanks to which the occupied region “became the capital of the ‘Russian World’ for a week.” This was stated by Alexander Mashchenko, a contributor to the Russian publication Parliamentary Gazette, who also presents himself as the “director of the Institute of Media Communications, Media Technologies, and Design at the Crimean Federal University.” In an appearance on the Russian-occupied radio station “Sputnik in Crimea,” he also claimed that the Ukrainian language in Crimea “somehow disappeared” after the 2014 Russian occupation, as it was allegedly “non-organic” to the peninsula.

Regarding the VRS festival, Mashchenko listed participants as coming from Vietnam, China, Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Greece, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan, as well as de facto Russian-controlled South Ossetia (Georgia). The geography of Russian participants was described as covering Moscow, St. Petersburg, and “four dozen other cities.” He also emphasized the symbolic timing of the festival: from June 6 — the birthday of Pushkin, whom the Kremlin also presents as the International Day of the Russian Language — to June 12, which is celebrated in Russia as Russia Day.

Calling the VRS a platform for “serious discussions about the role of the Russian language in the history of Russia, the fate of our country and the entire world,” Mashchenko outlined his version of its chronology. He recalled that the first festival took place in 2007 — during the “Ukrainian” period — under President Viktor Yushchenko, who allegedly “actively pushed the Russian language out of all spheres of life: state administration, education, culture, media, and documentation.” According to his claims, documentation, school and university education, television, radio, print media, cinema, and theaters were allegedly “forcibly switched” to Ukrainian. He further stated that “official heroes of Ukraine became figures such as Bandera, Shukhevych, Konovalets, and others.”

In this narrative, the VRS festival, initiated by the Crimean parliament, is presented as an “act of spiritual resistance to the policy of forced Ukrainization” not only of Crimea but also of other regions, which he claims were predominantly Russian-speaking except for Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk, and Ternopil regions.

Consequently, Mashchenko attributes the cause of the Ukrainian crisis since 2014 not to Russia’s military aggression and subsequent occupation, but to Ukraine’s “language policy,” which he claims became one of the catalysts for the country’s collapse due to its alleged refusal to take regional linguistic and cultural diversity into account.

He further argues that in 2014 Crimea did not undergo occupation but rather a “reunification with Russia,” resulting from the “struggle of Crimeans for the right to speak and think in their native language” and the “strong socio-political resistance to Ukrainization.” In the same logic, certain regions of Donetsk and Luhansk (since 2014) and Zaporizhzhia and Kherson (since 2022) were not occupied by Russia, but instead “followed Crimea.”

Accordingly, Mashchenko divides the history of the VRS festival into three periods:

1. 2007–2014 – “the struggle of Crimeans and representatives of other regions of Ukraine for the right to speak and think in Russian, which ended with the referendum of March 16, 2014”;

2. 2014–2021 – Russian occupation authorities and their collaborators began presenting the VRS festival as a “large all-Russian socio-political forum,” which for several years was held under the patronage of the Federation Council of the Russian Federation and its chair Valentina Matvienko, with the active participation of collaborators from the so-called “L/DPR” (whom Mashchenko claims were “fighting for their self-determination”);

3. Since 2022 – after the start of Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine; collaborators from the temporarily occupied territories of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions began to take part in the VRS festival.

On June 4, within the framework of the VRS festival in Yalta, under the leadership of Archpriest Alexander Yakushechkin (secretary of the “Crimean Metropolis of the Russian Orthodox Church,” rector of the Sts. Peter and Paul Cathedral in Simferopol, and member of the so-called “Public Chamber of the Republic of Crimea”), the 15th Church-Pedagogical Cyril and Methodius Readings were held on the topic “Education and Morality: Formation of Personality and Challenges of the Time.”

During the event, Yakushechkin stated that it is important for the younger generation in the temporarily occupied territory of Crimea to absorb “information necessary for the survival of Russia,” which is transmitted to them by teachers and mentors.

“Without knowledge of history and spiritual traditions, young people will lose the heritage left to us by our pious ancestors. At the same time, education is of great importance. Then knowledge of [Russian] history, Russian literature, and the word — symbolized by the festival, whose name is taken from Anna Akhmatova’s lines — will have an instructive and educational character,” he said.

In turn, the so-called “Commissioner for Children’s Rights in the Republic of Crimea,” Svetlana Savchenko, spoke about the allegedly effective work of the “Crimean Metropolis of the ROC,” as well as medical workers and educators in the temporarily occupied territory of Crimea, aimed at reducing the number of induced abortions; according to her, this has led to an increase in the birth rate in the occupied region.

It is reported that at the conclusion of the readings, a final “document” was adopted defining measures for the “development of spiritual, moral, and patriotic education” of youth and the promotion of Russian family values in the temporarily occupied territory of Crimea; its content has not been made public.

In addition, on June 4, the “International Scientific and Methodological Seminar” for teachers of the Russian language and literature titled “Russian Philology: Theory and School Practice” was ceremonially opened in the building of the Yalta Chekhov Theater. The event lasted until June 8. It was opened by Sergey Tsekov, First Deputy Chair of the State Council of the Republic of Crimea and head of the “Russian Community of Crimea,” who once again referred to foreign borrowings in the Russian language as its “corruption.” He also stated that the Russian language and the Orthodox faith are a “gift from God,” the “fundamental basis of [Russian] national identity and statehood,” and “pillars that created, preserve, and develop our state [the Russian Federation].”

“‘To destroy a state, a people, and a nation, it is first of all necessary to destroy their language. Despite intensive efforts to eliminate the Russian language in a number of former USSR republics, these attempts are not achieving their intended goals,’ Tsekov added.”

Teachers from the temporarily occupied territories of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions took part in the “seminar.” According to the organizers’ concept, they were meant to adopt from their “colleagues” in the temporarily occupied territory of Crimea “experience of the transitional period in the education system,” with the aim of integration into Russian realities. Teaching delegations from de facto Russian-controlled Abkhazia and South Ossetia (Georgia) also participated in the event.

The largest “academic” event of the 18th VRS festival was presented as the “international” symposium titled “The Russian Language in a Multicultural World,” held from June 8 to 12. Participants were shown the documentary film “Crimea: Chronicle of the ‘Russian Spring’” and a video lecture titled “Three Years Later: Lessons of the ‘Special Military Operation’ for Crimea, Russia, Ukraine, and the Whole World.” The symposium was organized jointly by the so-called “State Council of the Republic of Crimea,” the “Council of Ministers of the Republic of Crimea,” the “V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University,” and the “Crimean Engineering and Pedagogical University named after Fevzi Yakubov.”

According to Russian-occupation-controlled media, around 300 scholars from the Russian Federation and the territories it occupies in Ukraine, de facto Russian-controlled South Ossetia (Georgia), as well as from Belarus, Vietnam, Germany, Greece, Kazakhstan, China, the UAE, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Uzbekistan took part in the symposium.

The so-called Livadia Club is presented as the main intellectual platform of the VRS. It is usually mentioned alongside other Russian conservative political forums such as the Valdai, Izborsk, and Zinoviev clubs, and its events are typically held at the Livadia Palace (Yalta district of the temporarily occupied territory of Crimea). This platform was established during the winter session of the 4th so-called Livadia Forum, held on December 7, 2018, within the framework of the VRS festival, following the conference “The Russian Experience of Resolving Global Conflicts: Russia’s Place in the New World Order.”

The declared main task of the Livadia Club is the systematic and intensive work of preserving the legacy of the “great Russian thinker” Nikolai Danilevsky, who is said to have made a “fundamental contribution to the study of relations between Europe and Russia in the 19th century.” In his 1869 work Russia and Europe, Danilevsky argued that Europe was for Russia “not only something alien, but also hostile, so much so that its interests can not only not be ours, but in most cases are directly opposed to them.” He also advocated the creation of a “Slavic federation” with its capital in Constantinople (Istanbul, Turkey) as a goal for which Russians should reject any human sympathy toward foreigners and cultivate in themselves “odium generis humani” (“hatred of the human race”).

The theme of the 2025 session of the Livadia Club was formulated as follows: “Russia on the Western Front: Strategic Defense or Strategic Offense?” Participants in the discussion — including international and federal-level experts, historians, political scientists, and publicists — were invited to address questions such as: “Why does Russia need the West?”, “Why does the West need Russia?”, “Is another ‘reset’ in Russia–West relations possible?”, and “What should we do about Ukrainianness?” (the latter was addressed by Tatyana Kuzmich, the occupation “deputy governor” of Kherson region), among others. The event was traditionally moderated by Russian propagandist Sergey Mikheyev.

During his speech at the Livadia Club session, the so-called “Head of the Republic of Crimea,” Sergey Aksyonov, called on Russia’s political leadership to use Russian diaspora communities in Western countries to organize mass demonstrations in support of Russia’s war against Ukraine, similar to Arab mobilization during Israeli operations against Palestinians, and to “take example” from the United States, which he claimed had “changed 83 regimes worldwide to pro-American ones.” According to the collaborator, such actions could shift public opinion in Western countries and “create a threat to their governments.” To justify his position, Aksyonov stated:

“The theme of our meeting reflects the core of the current historical period for our state. The masks have fallen: a war of annihilation has been launched against Russia, openly declared without any hesitation. Its cause is not mythical Russian aggression, but an irreconcilable conflict of values, a global confrontation of ideas and meanings that has lasted throughout the entire past century. Our country has been attempted to be dismembered and destroyed using any available means and methods. The time has come for us to move from defense to offense. Russia has never waged wars of conquest, unlike Western countries that once enriched themselves through colonies. But we know how to attack and win, to defend our interests and fight for a just future, and we remember the lessons of recent history.”

Regarding domestic and foreign policy, Aksyonov stated that achieving the goals of the Kremlin regime in the war against Ukraine is only possible through maximum consolidation not only of Russian citizens but also of Russians living abroad:

“It is important to pursue an effective policy aimed at forming national identity, protecting the Russian language, our history, and culture. The main task now is to continue ensuring a strong and reliable rear, supporting the armed forces [of the Russian Federation] and our president [Putin]. Our unity and cohesion are a great force that will allow us to overcome any obstacles. This is the guarantee of our victory.”

The so-called “Chairman of the State Council of the Republic of Crimea,” Vladimir Konstantinov, stated that the VRS festival was first organized during the “Ukrainian period” and became, for part of the population of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, “one of the fronts of struggle for the Russian language, culture, history, and identity,” and one of the events that “brought Crimea home — to Russia.”

“The long-term struggle of the West against the ‘Russian world’ continues. After the collapse of the USSR, they believed they could completely dismantle Russia. The center of this struggle became the cultural front. They wanted to destroy us from within and still want us to fight among ourselves. We, Crimeans, are on the front line of the struggle for the ‘Russian world.’ If [Ukrainian] nationalists had captured one position — language — they would immediately have moved on to destroy the next one. Their goal was to destroy the entire ‘Russian world’ and Russian civilization, starting with language and history,” he said, adding that the relevance of the VRS remains due to ongoing “attacks by adversaries on the Russian language and Russian civilization.”

Konstantinov also argued that for many years Russian society was “oriented toward the West, striving to become part of it, sometimes even resorting to humiliating attempts.” As a result, Russia “became accustomed to the idea that it needed the West, even depended on it, yet every attempt at closer integration ended in failure.”

“The West wants us not to exist at all. They want us to be nobody, to dissolve our people and break the country into separate entities. And to withstand this pressure, we need cultural and civilizational mobilization — not tomorrow, not today, but yesterday. Without this, nothing will work; no one will form a new, effective, self-sufficient ‘Russian world’ for us,” Konstantinov concluded.

Former Russian political and academic figure Sergey Baburin, head of the board of the “Russian World” Foundation for the Protection of the Rights and Legitimate Interests of Russian Citizens Abroad, described Russia as a “unique civilization that has always stood between East and West,” while calling for a distinction between “the West” and “Europe,” the former of which he associated with “the denial of God and spiritual-moral values.”

“This is not European civilization, but a cultural anomaly that promotes the cult of non-traditional families at the expense of traditional values. The West is destroying the divine element in human beings through genetic intervention in the human body and artificial intelligence, but we must understand that no artificial intelligence will ever have a soul. Through the ‘special military operation,’ Russia is now saving the human soul in our homeland and defending the spiritual world everywhere.”

In his report titled “On Russian Global Responsiveness and Russian National Egoism,” Associate Professor Sergey Kiselev of V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University stated that Russia, “while preserving its Orthodox faith, offers humanity the possibility of salvation through spirituality and moral revival.” He also referenced Nikolai Danilevsky’s ideas on “Russian national egoism,” where Russia’s and the “Russian people’s” interests are paramount and leave no place for “European or universal human interests and rights.” According to Kiselev, such a policy allows Russia to achieve “political sovereignty, which is constantly denied under various false pretexts.” Observing Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy, he concluded that it “largely corresponds to Danilevsky’s principles” and expressed confidence that Russia “will certainly endure and prevail.”

In addition, Ivan Skorikov, head of the Ukraine department of the autonomous non-profit organization “Institute of Diaspora and Integration” (“Institute of CIS Countries”), presented a report titled “Re-Russification as the Main Meaning of the ‘Special Military Operation’ of Russia.”

Overall, it is noted that the Livadia Club session featured presentations on the “policy of [Russian] national dignity, universal values of the ‘Russian world,’ and the future of Europe, as well as strategies and tactics of Russian policy toward carriers of Ukrainian identity and other aspects.”

Also, within the framework of the VRS, on June 7, events of another socio-political platform — the “Solovyov Readings” — took place at the Livadia Palace, named after Russian Rear Admiral Vladimir Solovyov (1942–2020), former head of intelligence of the Black Sea Fleet and head of the CIS Institute branch in Sevastopol (2007–2020). In 2025, the 5th “Solovyov Readings” were organized by this institution under the leadership of Konstantin Zatulin, First Deputy Chair of the State Duma Committee on CIS Affairs, Eurasian Integration, and Relations with Compatriots, with support from the so-called “State Council of the Republic of Crimea.” The theme was formulated as: “Crimea in the Focus of Geopolitical Civilizational Confrontation: Our Heritage, Present, and Vision of the Future.”

During the “Solovyov Readings,” the highest number of openly anti-Ukrainian statements by participants of any event within the 2025 VRS festival was recorded.

In particular, Sergey Khalyuta, the so-called “archpriest of the Central Church District of the Russian Orthodox Church” in occupied Sevastopol, complained about Ukrainian resistance to Russian military aggression and stated that Ukrainians are similar to the Janissaries — Slavs who, after being taken into Turkish captivity, fought on the side of the Ottoman Empire against their former compatriots and co-religionists.

“Why did we encounter such resistance? We can recall the Janissaries, the most combat-ready unit of the Ottoman Empire. Who did it consist of? Slavs who, through manipulative methods, were turned so strongly against their own relatives and close ones that more brutal people could hardly be found in the 18th–19th centuries. The same happened in Ukraine, when one people, one church faced such a terrible challenge. And ‘Novorossiya,’ Crimea, Sevastopol, and all the conquests of our ancestors were, of course, bought with our blood. But our generosity later led to mistakes that we are paying for today. What is happening now in the ‘special military operation’ is forced action by the peace-loving Russian people. We are truly peace-loving; we have no desire to take anything from anyone. The Russian bear, when awakened, finds it extremely difficult to restore order, but it wants to crawl back into its den and not bother anyone. We love the Poles, we love the Germans — strangely enough, even though the Germans have brought us so much pain and sorrow. But no Russian person will say they hate Germans. We have forgiven everything; we are generous. But we are being deprived of our very existence. That is why we are fighting,” Khalyuta stated.

Andrey Stavitsky, an associate professor at the Department of International Relations History at the Moscow State University branch in Sevastopol, also stated that the “Ukrainian project repeatedly ends in ruin and war, and this reflects its internal unsustainability, proving that it is not self-sufficient by nature,” and that its purpose allegedly is “not to succeed itself, but to prevent Russia from succeeding.”

According to the “scholar,” Ukraine in geopolitical terms is an “instrument for the destruction of Russia in the modern global context,” while the modern “Ukrainian project” without geopolitical framing remains incomprehensible to him. He interprets its purpose as “civilizational reprogramming through identity re-coding,” allegedly using “phantoms of historical memory” and “various myths,” including what he calls the “Holodomor myth.” At the same time, he describes Ukraine, the “Ukrainian question,” and all related issues as “Russian by origin,” since they allegedly represent a phenomenon that historically emerged within Russian space.

“The Ukrainian question escalates and resurfaces whenever Russia weakens and becomes ill. However, when it grows stronger, the question disappears. Systemic mistakes on our part in relations with Ukraine led to a situation that did not allow problems to be solved by non-military means. However, apparently, Ukraine is a historical trial assigned to Russia. There is no other way for it to regenerate and improve. A different level of understanding is needed; otherwise, we will face historical pitfalls and another cognitive trap. Russia will prevail, but the cost largely depends on understanding these issues, and the hardest period for us will begin after the ‘special military operation’ ends. The ‘non-Bandera’ Ukraine is restless, searching for whom to betray. That is how it is, historically speaking. And one must find weak points there, primarily within the elites. Buying elites in modern conditions is quite an effective tool. We missed the Russian popular movement in Ukraine — I will not say betrayed it, though that would be appropriate — because it was destroyed after 2014,” Stavitsky said.

During his speech, Konstantin Zatulin, the de facto organizer of the “Solovyov Readings,” stated that the Western world “is far from monolithic” and that Russia “must do everything to split it apart so that it abandons its crusading mission in Ukraine.” He also admitted that he could not say Russia is “winning the battle for people’s minds,” including in Ukraine. Referring to Vladimir Putin’s claim that Russians and Ukrainians are allegedly “one people,” Zatulin warned against developing the idea that Ukrainians do not exist or denying them their identity.

“Engaging in Ukrainization, as was done in Soviet times, is not our task. But at the same time, we must understand that after the military operations, Ukraine will still remain in one form or another. Therefore, we must relearn how to fight for the Ukrainian people from within. But doing this by claiming Ukrainians do not exist is impossible,” Zatulin stated, calling for “building bridges to the population of Ukraine” specifically from occupied Crimea, as it “was part of Ukraine before the Russian occupation, so here people better than anywhere else understand what can and cannot be done, what must be pursued, and what must be avoided.”