After the attempted annexation of the Crimea, the Russia-controlled “authorities” literally immediately introduced “transformations” in the social, political and economic spheres of the peninsula. Such “innovations” also affected the Crimean higher schools, where in September 2014 the formation of a “new institution – the Crimean Federal University named after Volodymyr Vernadsky” («CFU») was announced. “Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education” «CFU» appeared with a claim to be “prestige and status one”, but over time it became clear that the changes have provoked many problems that now prevent “Crimean students from receiving quality higher education”.

Our Association has repeatedly written about «CFU» as a tool of strengthening the Russian invaders’ influence in the Crimea. After all, it was to «CFU» that the occupiers forcibly gathered almost all higher educational institutions of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, research centers and branches of educational institutions, colleges and technical schools. This list includes the Tavrida National V.I. Vernadsky University, Crimean Humanities University, the Crimean Economic Institute, the Crimean Institute of Information and Printing Technologies, the Crimean Agrotechnological University, the National Academy of Environmental Protection and Resort Construction, etc. Against the background of notoriously fruitless scandals and protests, the “integration” the Crimean State Medical University, captured by the Russian occupiers, into the «CFU» was carried out [1]. Serhiy Donych, who previously worked as the Vice-Rector of the Crimean State Medical University, and then “went into regional politics” and became in 2011 the first deputy chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea from the “Party of Regions”, was first appointed head of the newly created “Federal University” [2].

Within the framework of «CFU», the Russia’s occupiers established a number of “academies” on the basis of the captured Ukrainian universities on the peninsula, as well as twelve «CFU» “branches” – Kerch, Feodosia and Yalta “Engineering and Technical Centers for Urban Development”, Yalta “Humanitarian and Pedagogical Academy”, “Alushta Branch”, “Yevpatoria Institute of Social Sciences”, “Institute of Pedagogical Education and Management” in Armyansk, “Sevastopol Institute of Economics and Humanities”, “Agricultural College named after Vernovsky” in Simferopolsky District, “Bakhchisaray College of Construction, Architecture and Design”, “Pribrezhnensky Agrarian College” in Saksky District and “Technical School of Hydromelioration and Mechanization of Agriculture” in Sovietsky District [3]. It should be noted that all these structures were formed by the Russia’s invaders on the basis of seized Ukrainian institutions of higher and vocational education, and that the Russia’s occupiers did not create any new “institutions of higher education” in the «CFU» system.

It should be added that in Russia itself, its federal universities are considered relatively prestigious educational institutions. This is facilitated by their small total number and special attention to them by the authorities of the aggressor-State. The conceptual purpose of their discovery in general was to optimize the educational structure of Russia and to strengthen the university’s ties with general economic and social processes in the relevant federal districts. In this regard, Russia’s ‘federal university’ is characterized by “the careful selection of personnel, the introduction of enhanced state control, ensuring access to advanced scientific, technical and technological developments” [1]. But the forcible connection of relatively powerful educational institutions of Ukraine in the Crimea to the alleged “federal university” did not provide the expected results for the Russian occupiers.

Under “threat of reduction”

The issue of “cleansing” in the «CFU» has become particularly acute as part of the inter-clan struggle of the Russian invaders since 2017, when the “head of Crimea” Sergey Aksyonov said on “incompetent personnel policy”, “bad appointments and chaos” that prevail in the “university” [4]. Such loud accusations preceded the change in the “leadership” of the «CFU», when Serhiy Donych was “removed from office” and Andriy Falaleyev got the position of “acting rector”, later he became the “full-fledged rector” in 2020. It is noteworthy that Donych, deprived of his chair, eventually took another “bread”, namely – he was “appointed” by the head of the Russian President’s Office in March 2018, as the “head” of the Russian-occupied Sanatorium “Gurzufsky” where he successfully mastered the “presidential finances” till November 2021 [5].

However, the replacement of the “rector” did not reduce the relevance of “personnel cleansing” in the «CFU», where there are constant rumors of “reduction of the teaching staff”, which have intensified since 2019. We will add that according to the occupiers for 2018 in «CFU» there were 34355 “students”, 6567 “employees”, from them – 2851 were the “teaching staff”. At the same time, there was information that a “large-scale dismissal” of up to 40% of the “teaching staff” was being prepared, due to the introduction of “Russian education standards”. The scandal has begun to gain momentum, with «CFU» leaders still denying the prospect of “large-scale cuts”, but the atmosphere of tension remains. It is noteworthy that after the “appointment” Andriy Falaleyev at the “meeting of the labor collective” compared “the previous leadership” with “children who were left alone at home and found their parents’ bedside table with money and …ran and spent it, …just walked and had fun”. The hint that there is nothing more to “spent” was very well understood in the “labor collective”.

It is difficult to say what Dr. Falaleyev meant “parental bedside table”, but we can assume that this is a “purchase of equipment” that took place in «CFU» after 2015. Among the publicly available “contracts” of «CFU» at that time it should be noted on two deals of 302.4 million rubles each, for the supply of Kazan LLC “EIDOS Medicine” to the “Medical Academy” «CFU» a number of medical stimulants for alleged “stimulation center” [6]. The point here is not even that “EIDOS Medicine” Ltd. [7] with a share capital of ten thousand rubles produces these equipment as alleged products of “Skolkovo”, but – in close cooperation with Japanese companies, such as “KK DNAFORM” and in collaboration with the Japanese universities “RIKEN” and “Juntendo”, as well as – together with Columbia University and the University of Southern California, USA, forming the company “K.K. MedVision” [8].

Interestingly, the Russia-controlled press estimated the amount of this deal at fifty million rubles only [9], and later Russian propaganda somehow “forgot” about this example of “Crimean-Japanese cooperation” on which apparently “wrote off” half a billion. Also notable was another deal by «CFU», which supplied “Donau Lab CIS” with a software and hardware complex to control the consumption of liquids and gases for 37.59 million rubles. The supply of this equipment from the Moscow “laying” of European technologies to Simferopol took place in 2016, but then, with the change of the “rector” of «CFU» happened, Crimean “educators” began to “trample” the supplier with lawsuits for “penalties” [10].

After that, there are really no significant deliveries under the «CFU’s» “contracts” of some knowledge-intensive equipment in the Russian registers. Instead, “rector” Falaleyev gushes with projections, because it is obvious that PR is always cheaper than investing in research tools. Although the same «CFU» paid the Russian “Komsomolskaya Pravda” more than 13.4 million rubles by six “contracts” for the needs of advertising, of course, primarily on the “university leadership’s wise achievements”.

That is why Russia-controlled media loudly “promoted” Falaleyev’s statements in recent years: about the sham “space pavilion” in the «CFU» Botanical Garden [11], about “virus-free planting materials” of the «CFU’s» “innovative agricultural valley “Agropolis” (where such “knowledge-intensive” things as “biologically active additives” are produced) [12], about “Beshterek-Zuysky water intake” as “one of the most important scientific and industrial developments” (let us recall that in fact this object is provided by pumps of German “Siemens” and Danish “Grundfos”, which was discovered by our Association) [13], on “landfills for desalination technologies” (let us recall that the aggressor State actually acknowledged the complete absence of such technologies at Russia’s disposal); about “creation of the Crimean school of rehabilitation” “to make people in 75 years felt on 25” [14] (here it is too difficult to comment on “rector’s speech”).

In 2021, in terms of self-publicity, Dr. Falaleyev seems to have succeeded in “surpassing himself”, as he announced the use of “vaccine from COVID-19 of its own production” in nasal use at «CFU». The “rector” announced such a “scientific breakthrough” during the “student graduation”, noting that “we are one of the few universities in the world that has created its own vaccine. And even some of us somehow tasted it illegally, quietly. Maybe that’s why the university is quite calm now in terms of the epidemiological situation”. Let’s add that six months before Dr. Falaleyev fell ill with COVID-19 himself successfully [15], so he could actually sniff at “graduation” anything. But Russian experts, in particular from the Research Center for Epidemiology and Microbiology of Gamalia, were forced to refute the statements of the “rector”, pointing out that “nothing is known about the Crimean vaccine”. Association want to believe that Dr. Falaleyev simply lied once again, because a few blocks from the «CFU» is the infamous “Crimean Anti-Plague Station”, which has been controlled by the Russian military and intelligence services since 2014, and “ARC” already wrote in the investigation about illegal research of viruses there.

Among the «CFU’s» real “achievements” of recent years, a successful purchase of the German resistor firm “Rinntech”, bypassing the sanctions, can be called only, which took place in 2017-2018, and was later repeatedly boasted by Dr. Falaleyev [17]. This small measuring instrument is a tool for assessing the health of trees by accurately measuring the thickness of their annual rings, and its operation by «CFU» specialists ended… on the fourth tree, because no German specialists were purchased who could to exploit resistor together with it by the «CFU» [18].

Obviously, the appearance of “teachers” rumors is not unfounded. Economic realities and the impact of sanctions have provoked resource depletion and obvious financial problems in Russia itself, where austerity is becoming the norm in all social spheres. At the same time, the activities of such a “giant” as «CFU» are associated with high costs, which the new “rulers” are trying to optimize in any convenient way: reducing “rates”, increasing the “burden on teachers”, “reassignment in a number of specialties”, by the introduction of “cooperation on a number of scientific and technical issues” with the staff of the Russian Southern Federal University, located in Rostov-on-Don [4].

At the same time there was not noticed no practical result of the activities of the «CFU», which would have a material dimension, both under the “rector” Donych and under the “rector” Falaleyev. The “scientific and pedagogical” activity of “thousands of teachers” contrasts sharply with the zero economic results of the “science-intensive product” of «CFU», because the reality is different from the fantastic “university vaccines”, “space pavilions” and “schools of eternal youth”. For example, the Russian registers revealed information about 86 “contracts” concluded by «CFU» for the provision of services, totaling 166.87 million rubles. Although this figure contrasts unpleasantly with the other 2,494 “contracts” under which «CFU» itself paid for goods and services totaling 10 216.98 million rubles, but it is clear that it would be too biased to demand profitability or profitability from an “educational institution”.

But even those nearly 167 millions “earned” by «CFU», are far from the “innovative products”, because they consist primarily of providing “training” services for “officials” of various structures of the Russia-controlled “administration”, as well as – to provide the university pool for aggressor’s military stuff, including prison guards and pilots. «CFU» was also involved in the “scientific consecration” of a couple of “municipal and republican strategies” and in the “expertise of land allotments” on the Southern coast of Crimea [19]. No more income «CFU» from its services’ sale has been identified since 2015, so the “research” potential of the “university” is really impressive. First of all, it is extremely impressive – how it could be completely destroyed in less than a decade.

The “gigantism” of the artificially created «CFU» contrasts sharply with the lack of “students” as the Crimean population shrinks, as socially active youth leave the region and move to mainland Ukraine, to neighboring Russia, or to the third countries. And those who remain prefer to study in legal and internationally recognized institutions located on the mainland, with a view to leaving the Crimea after graduation. Well, young people who do not want to leave the peninsula, massively choose their jobs and refuse to use «CFU» for their diplomas; they are in no hurry to apply even for “9 thousand rubles per session”.

The issue of “staff reduction” in this context is based on the events of the infamous “Crimean Spring”, because the “recruitment” to the “new federal university” was then done then in general, for a beautiful picture of “the best Russian education in the world”. Therefore, the Russian invaders were forced “at least by someone” to cover the deficit due to the facto, that most of the teaching staff left the occupied Crimea for mainland Ukraine and third countries, and there continued to work in various educational institutions, including Tavrida National V.I. Vernadsky University, relocated to Kyiv over time. Vacant «CFU» “positions” were filled by unskilled “employees”, who obviously did not meet the minimum requirements. Also, most of the research and teaching staff who remained in the Crimea, are people of deep retirement age, who simply could not leave.

So «CFU» “departments”, “deans’ offices”, “scientific councils” were hastily formed from these “pioneers and retirees”. However, the real renewal of scientific staff is a slow process, and total savings prevent the «CFU» from providing something similar. If the Russian government continues to cut funding for «CFU», especially after the termination of the “Crimean federal target program”, it is worth waiting for the intensification of “personnel purges”, of “dismissal of certain categories of specialists” and of “elimination of vacancies and rates”. The prospect of a constant “increase in workload” looks scary for future “teachers and researchers”, which will affect both their “pedagogical work” and the “quality of the educational process” and the “level of student training”. For example, today in Ukraine the norm is 8-10 students per teacher, and the Russian format – is up to 12 people [4], while in the «CFU», which has to “save on everything” that is also not too much. “Increase in rates”, “increase in workload” and the corresponding “quality of teaching” – these are the things that await «CFU» “teachers” soon.

Corruption and attempts to “solve” it

It is obvious that in the situation of “integration” of the Russian-occupied Crimea, the organization of the “federal university” aimed to create conditions for “effective management” of socio-political processes in Crimean society by the Russian invaders. After all, it is known that in critical times, higher education takes on the mission of forming the thinking of young people, and the state’s global control transforms the processes of social development. At the same time, the use of a thoroughly corrupt structure for such plans obviously reduces their effectiveness.

It cannot be said that the aggressor State does not understand this, and “everything is fine” there with anti-corruption slogans and propaganda. As an example, as it was mentioned above, currently Andriy Pavlovich Falaleyev is the “rector” of «CFU». He has repeatedly made loud statements about the expediency and importance of “strengthening the status of the university and combating corruption”. “The existence of a contractual agreement between the university and the regional Anti-Corruption Committee” was callse as allegedly practical proof of his words.

In his public speeches, Andriy Falaleyev pointed out that “the problem of corruption is formed not only by the government, but also by society itself”. In this regard, he stressed the importance of “practical work with young people aimed at preventing their involvement in corruption schemes”. The “rector” made a pathetic emphasis on the fact that “corruption schemes are considered unacceptable within the university” and aimed at  “carrying out educational activities designed to form a negative attitude of students to corruption”, and thus “prevent the very fact of its emergence”. Dr. Falaleyev stressed at one of the “educational events” that he, as a “teacher”, faces the task of “forming internal motivation and beliefs in students against the use of corruption schemes” and “tough anti-corruption policy in a trusted school” [20].

Falaleyev’s “anti-corruption slogans” could be compared here, in terms of their level of connection with reality, with his fantasies about “vaccines’ and “spaceports” mentioned above. But there are other mechanisms for genuine assessment of the situation. After all, practice shows that the situation with bribes and extortion at the “university” remains significantly different from the slogans. The results of a survey, conducted in 2016 with “students of the Medical Academy”, which is a “part” of «CFU» is the illustration of the problem. These questionnaires look disappointing – many respondents directly stated that one way or another faced corruption at the “university” [21]. We should add that such a “poll” obviously contains significant “self-censorship”, because it is obviously dangerous for the respondent to declare corruption in the “federal university” under the Russian occupation regime.

Of course, in addition to loud statements by the «CFU» “leadership”, “anti-bribery” is imitated by Russia-controlled punitive structures. Here, the smaller the bribe, the greater the chances of it falling under the sights of the Russia-controlled punitive forces. For example, in 2015, the Russia-controlled media covered the attempt of a «CFU» “student” to “resolve the issue with the session” for a symbolic fee of “9 thousand rubles”. It was from this “particularly powerful” bribe-giver that the occupiers decided to make a “show case” in which “the prosecutor’s office launched an investigation”. But experts understand that the very fact of such a meager amount for “comprehensive services” means that the appropriate “form of training” was put “on the conveyor” (otherwise it simply would not have economic benefits), and this has happened since the formation of «CFU» in 2014. “Fight against corruption” has also become a form of competition for “university positions”. For example, the “dean of the management faculty of the Academy of Civil Engineering and Architecture of CFU”, who was disliked by «CFU» bosses, was “fined” in court for 200 thousands rubles for “admission to a session without rehearsals, examinations without exams” [23].

It would be indisputable to prove the existence of a corruption vertical in the «CFU» within the educational process through appropriate long-term monitoring, which the “ARC” has just begun. But now there are simpler ways to prove the obvious, namely, “federal university public procurement”, which is not organized by “students” or “teachers”. As it was mentioned above, the “rector” Falaleyev in 2017 angrily condemned the “squandering of federal funds” by his predecessor Dr. Donych, who, as we recall, was later entrusted with “punishment” to “master” same “funds” in the Sanatorium “Gurzufsky”. But Dr. Falaleyev apparently borrowed certain schemes from his predecessors on the principle of “preserving the chicken that lays the golden eggs”.

A good example is the «CFU» security. In September 2015, at the beginning of the “new teaching year”, the Russia-controlled media spread an interesting report about the break-in of two ATMs, located in the premises of «CFU». It was reported that the bandits attacked «CFU» “security guards”, as “unskilled elderly men”, and seized money. During the “case proceeding” it became known that the «CFU» “rector” has repeatedly requested the allocation of money for “concluding a contract with a private security agency”. But, as Russian propagandists complained, funds were not allocated for these purposes, while in Russia itself, almost 100 % of educational institutions are provided with professional security protection [24]. One would have thought that in the regime of “constant risks of terrorism” spread by the Russian occupiers in the Crimea, the aggressor State saves even on the «CFU» security.

But this was not the case, because «CFU», according to Russian registers, paid 10.76 million rubles to a certain private security company “Zashchita” during that period. The “strange thing” about this equipment was that the “Zashchita” (“Protection”) itself is a structure with a staff of three persons and with a place of registration in Moscow, at the address Sosenskoe settlement, Magellan Avenue, 2 room 928K. It is difficult to imagine how these “three heroes” from the Moscow suburbs could guard the «CFU», so the fact of registration of 767 different companies at the same fictitious Moscow address [26], intended primarily for money laundering, is symptomatic and needs no comment.

But then, after the incident with the “attack on ATMs”, the “protection” of «CFU» was really “strengthened”, but mainly in the measurement of costs. After all, since 2016 it has been entrusted to “another” Moscow private security company “Kris”, which already has “as many as 50 people” and even founded a kind of “association of private security companies” “Safety Krym” in May 2016 in the peninsula [27]. It is obvious that such “outsourcing” allowed the quickly hired “local security guards” from “Kris” to selfy periodically at the Crimean “objects” of «CFU». Since 2016 and until now, “Kris” uses the funds of «CFU» constantly and as of 2022 their total amount was six and a half billion rubles [28]. But the main thing to understand about this situation is the address of registration of the company “Kris” in Sosenskoe settlement, Moscow, which is almost identical to the address of the mentioned company “Zashchita”. Moreover, it was “Kris” and “Zashchita”  that jointly formed the aforementioned “Safety Krym” “association”.

We will add that “rector” Falaleyev didn’t stop the activity of this billion-ruble scheme initiated by his predecessor. But maybe these “economic issues” go “out of sight” of the “rector-scientist”, who is not distracted by his “breakthroughs” in the field of vaccinations and space? The biography of the “rector” shows the opposite. Kerch-origin Falaleyev made his career at Sevastopol National Technical University before the occupation of Crimea, where he was vice-rector for scientific work in 2008 – 2014, and he was vigorously engaged in obtaining a doctorate in the last years before the Russian invasion.

To this end, in 2013 he co-headed the Department of Motor Transport and began publishing scientific papers for his doctoral dissertation on “Scientific principles of restoring the properties of passive safety during the repair of truck bodies”. We will not say for now which of the subordinates of the vice-rector and head of the department was forced to deal with these “doctor’s texts” in fact, but let us note that the rest of Falaleyev’s “scientific publications” are “common graves” where he was “co-authored” as a boss, which allowed him to receive “more than 70 scientific papers” which boasts Russian propaganda and the «CFU» web-site. It should be added that even the author’s “seventy works” are somehow not enough not only for the “rector” but also for the “ordinary” professor, as there are actually three books among them only, closely related to the bureaucratic procedure for obtaining a degree. So Dr. Falaleyev was not a scientist before the Russian invasion, but a typical university bureaucrat.

It is noteworthy that Dr. Falaleyev’s “managing the European educational processes”, stressed by Russian propaganda [29], was just before the occupation, and it happened in the format of granting double diplomas for British citizens at the University of Sevastopol, where he was vice-rector. Since 2014, the “twin brothers” created by the Russian invaders occupiers – «CFU» and “Sevastopol State University” acted, and «SSU» has no “international cooperation”, despite the Russian propaganda statements, as our Association has already written. Therefore, it is interesting that the Russians pay attention to the «lord of the trucks» Falaleev, who managed to head the Institute of Advanced Production Technologies of St. Petersburg Polytechnic University in 2015 before the position of “rector” of «CFU». Of course, before the occupation, the leadership of the Sevastopol Polytechnic, especially “tied” to international cooperation, was under the strong “cap’ of the Russian special services. But did Vice-Rector Falaleev “reciprocate” them? Ironically, we can confirm this hypothesis with some evidence.

After all, the Russian registers contain information about the “full namesake” of Andriy Pavlovich Falaleyev, who received in 2010 the Russian tax number 235405171128 in the village of Arkhangelsk in the Krasnodar Territory, which is adjacent to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. At the same time, the only activity of entrepreneur Falaleyev was “road transport activities and transportation services”, too related to the “scientific interests” of Vice-Rector Falaleyev. Thus, the “scientist” Andriy Falaleyev has had Russian citizenship and “legalization” in Russia since 2010, but these facts have not been officially reported anywhere. Who and why assisted Dr. Falaleyev in these events – is a purely rhetorical question. Most likely, the same Russian structures later helped to “move” such well-controlled protégé to the helm of «CFU», and take off “rector” Donych, a client of the old Crimean mobster Leonid Grach, about whose clan our Association has repeatedly written. The same structures helped to “clean up” other corrupt competitors for the leadership of «CFU», some of which, incidentally, later moved to mainland Ukraine, which has also been written about by our Association.

“Academic freedoms” and dreams of “international status”

But not only corruption, the “game of rectors’ thrones” and the lack of scientific and practical results are among the problems facing the “Crimean Federal University”. The “teaching staff” of «CFU» has lost its freedom of speech and they are constantly under pressure and dismissal – this is the first thing offered to all those who disagree with the “new policy”. The active outrage among supporters of the “Russian world” against theses of the then “head of the Department of Russian and Foreign Literature of CFU” about “current changes in higher education” was notable at the beginning of the Russian occupation. “Head of department” was “careless” in declaring that the “innovations” introduced by the Russian occupiers were destroying higher education in the Crimea.

The opinion was immediately discussed in “narrow circles” and it was not difficult to predict the reaction. The proposal “not to extend the contract” to the dissatisfied professor came from the “Chairman of the Committee on Education, Science, Youth Policy and Sports of the State Council of the Republic of Crimea” [30]. Without assessing at present on the real motives of this really rather cautious statement by a well-known professor, let us note the level of response of the Russia-controlled “authorities” to it. This example clearly shows the real level of “academic freedoms” in «CFU».

Also, our Association has repeatedly written about the desire of the Russian invaders to provide some “international status” for «CFU», tht caused many scandalous and tragicomic situations. In February 2019, an international Russian-German conference was scheduled in Kazan with the presence of representatives and heads of major educational and research institutes of both countries. But at the last moment it became known that among the participants of the meeting the Russians announced the “motorist-scientist” Andriy Falaleyev, just as the “rector” of «CFU». His presence was a stumbling block for the German side, but the Russians took a hard line and refused to remove the “rector” from the participants’ list. As a result, the German side simply refused to participate in the event [31].

The situation with the alleged receipt of the «CFU» “international award” from the Canadian public organization “Humans for Peace Institution” is extremely ambiguous. On this occasion, the official website of the «CFU» posted messages with photos of “Vice-Rector” Serhiy Yurchenko and “Head of the Department of International Cooperation” Gevorg Gabrielyan with the relevant “World Certificate”. But meticulous readers have at least doubted its authenticity, because on the official website of the Canadian organization there is no mention of cooperation with representatives of the Crimean “university”, especially – about that award. The “document” in the photo itself looks very dubious [23].

The “official status” of the «CFU» in scientific activities, declared by the Russian invaders, remains controversial in general. Physically, the “high school” is located in the occupied Crimea, which the aggressor State illegally calls as allegedly “its own territory”. At the same time, in the international context, «CFU» declares itself to be a “higher education institution of Ukrainian subordination” and this fact is easily confirmed. It is enough to go to the global database of abstracts and scientific works “Scopus”, in which «CFU» is under Ukrainian registration. At first it may seem that the information “has not been changed”, but this is not the case. The name of the institution is already noticeable, because before the occupation the educational institution was named as the Tavrida National V.I. Vernadsky University, but “Crimean Federal V.I. Vernadsky University” was registered exactly in the base “Scopus” [23]. It turns out that the works of “researchers” of «CFU» are loaded into the database just as Ukrainian ones. It is obvious that this approach was chosen by the «CFU» curators to remain in international scientometric databases.

However, it is obvious that the “international activity” of «CFU» remains significantly limited in the “new realities”. At least not many people among representatives of foreign scientific institutions of third countries, including European and American ones, want to cooperate with it. That is why communist China and some Asian countries remain the main destination for «CFU» “external contacts”, actively lobbied by the Russian secret services. At the same time, representatives of the Russia-controlled “government” publicly declare that the root of the problems is allegedly not in sanctions, but purely in “incompetent management and managers”. At the same time, «CFU» cooperation with Russian-friendly countries is completely devoid of scientific and technical potential in many fields and areas, due to the fact that the state of education and science in these territories is even lower, not only compared to Russian universities but even taking into account the opportunities of Crimean higher school, almost destroyed by the aggressor State.

Thus, the seven years that have passed since the establishment of the «CFU», were marked by Russia’s aspirations for socio-political “consolidation” in the occupied territories. At the same time, the potential for higher education on the peninsula has been reduced as much as possible, and most of the potential for development has been lost. Inexperienced and unskilled personnel, insufficient funding and reduced quality of knowledge, political pressure and lack of freedom of speech, lack of opportunities for research and cooperation – this is what the Russian aggression has brought to Crimean education. Thus, there are currently no conditions for effective education, academic growth and development in the system of the “Crimean Federal University”.