How can dissent survive under the conditions of territorial occupation? After Crimea has been transforming into a ‘Russian’ entity since March 2014, the public dissent is reported to calm down due to the increased risks of prosecutions. Despite the ongoing sense of isolation, certain voices still articulate desire for social change. Situating this study in a context of the Crimean territorial dispossession, this paper approaches language as means of resistance in semiotic. landscapes (Stroud, 2015; Lou & Jaworski, 2016), where political is produced in the ‘hooks and crannies’ of the everyday life (Scott, 1990). The study draws from the ethnographic data collected between September and October 2019, where participants share their experiences of the everyday semiotic landscapes in interviews and walking tours as they intertwine with their memories of Crimean annexation.

As I will argue, inhabitants are forced to maneuver in order to enable dissent in conditions of restrained freedom. I demonstrate that the turbulent shifts experienced due to the territorial, and, most importantly, ideological occupation, sharpened the breaches, intensified the visibilities of individuals’ vulnerabilities, and pushed to reconsider own semiotic practices of protest.