Some aspects of geospatial localization of Crimea (notably its connection to the rest of Ukraine via the Perekop Isthmus and its separation from Russia by the Kerch Strait) that determine its organic belonging to the Ukrainian State are noted. It is emphasized that the Crimean peninsula occupies an extraordinary place in the geospace of Eastern Europe, as evidenced by the diversity of its landscapes, ethnicities and cultures or civilizations. Some geopolitical and geosophical aspects of Crimea’s landscape diversity and its “internal essence”, that manifests itself as a predominantly Turkic ethnic landscape which is similar to the Ukrainian and “relatively opposite” to the Russian, are observed. The historical-geographical development of Crimea as an ethnic mosaic is elucidated. The internal diversity of the Crimean peninsula in its natural, historical and socio-geographical aspects is stressed. It is noted that for a long time none of the ethnicities could possess all of Crimea and that, as a rule, each concentrated in only one of its natural regions, such as dry-steppe, mountain or sub-Mediterranean. It is noted that the Crimean Tatars were the first to take possession of the entire peninsula only five hundred years ago. Moreover, it is noted that thanks to their higher birth rate, the Tatars today have a demographic advantage. Meanwhile, it is stressed that Russians, with their short history in Crimea as an ethnic community, have not adapted to any of its landscapes. An example of one variation of administrative and territorial restructuring of Crimea, proposed after future restoration of Ukraine’s control over it, violates the peninsula’s unity as an administrative unit. According to the scheme created by Prof. Anatoliy Dotsenko, the north and east of Crimea are proposed to form the Azov Kray while the west and south would form the Black Sea Kray.

Key words: Crimea, geopolitics, geospace, landscape, ethnicity.


  1. Borysova O.V. Hots’ki klimaty / Ol’ha Borysova // Bachmuts’kyj šljach. – 2002. – # 3–4. – S. 161–178.
  2. Humylёv L.N. Etnohenez y byosfera Zemly / N. Humylёv. – M.: Ajrys-press, 2006. – 558 s.
  3. Docenko A.I. Administratyvno-terytorial’nyj ustrij i rozselennja v Ukraïni / I. Docenko. – K.: RVPS Ukraïny NAN Ukraïny, 2003. – 63 s.
  4. Kysel’ov Ju.O. Dejaki heosofični aspekty landšaftno-etničnych vzajemozv″jazkiv / Kysel’ov Ju.O. // Učёnye zapysky Tavryčeskoho nacyonal’noho unyversyteta ym. V.Y. Vernadskoho. Heohrafyja. – Simferopol’: TNU im. V.I. Vernads’koho, 2008. – T. 21 (60). – # 2. – S. 201–205.
  5. Kysel’ov Ju.O. Rol’ i misce Krymu v ljuds’komu heoprostori: heosofičnyj pohljad / Kysel’ov Ju. O. // Učёnye zapysky Tavryčeskoho nacyonal’noho unyversyteta ym. V.Y. Vernadskoho. Heohrafyja. – Simferopol’: TNU im. V.I. Vernads’koho, 2011. – T. 24 (63). – # 2. – S. 126–131.
  6. Kysel’ov Ju.O. Osnovy heosofiï: problemy teoriï ta metodolohiï / O. Kysel’ov. – Luhans’k : DZ “LNU imeni Tarasa Ševčenka”, 2011. – 208 s.
  7. Savyckyj P.N. Kontynent Evrazyja / N. Savyckyj. – M. : Ahraf, 1997. – 464 s.
  8. Sid I. Konkurencija v spravi ljubovi / Ihor Sid // Ukr. lit. hazeta. – 2010. – #26. – S. 8.
  9. Fadeeva T.M. Krym v sakral’nom prostranstve: ystoryja, symvoly, lehendy / M. Fadeeva. – Symferopol’: Byznes-ynform, 2002. – 304 s.