Soviet Ukraine was a UN state.
It is another common and uncritically accepted myth and slander against the USSR, conveniently cultivated by the bourgeois elites of the world and their oligarch friends of the Okhrana regime of Russia, that Crimea was given away to the Ukraine in the fifties as an arbitrary and divine dispensation, taken in a night of drunken rage, by Nikita and his pals of the Central Committee. If we were to 'scratch' the surface of this Russian and bourgeois propaganda however, we would find not only the proverbial Tatars, but profound reasons of State and International Politics.
That the defunct Soviet Union has become a handy and opportune scapegoat for every type of reactionary, including the worst of the Russians, cannot blind the proletarians about the adequacy or reasonableness of many of its actions, in spite of having been taken by despicable 'neocoms', that is, neocommunists liberals like Khrushchev and his supporters.
The cession of Crimea was an attempt to build up a credible Ukraine as a separate member of the United Nations and, thus, compensate for the imbalance against socialists nations in that organisation. A separate and semi-independent Ukraine in the UN, needed some teeth, some military and naval might and, also, some control. Crimea, as a 'Russian' military base, could provide both. Unfortunately, the fiction of an independent Ukraine, could not be maintained, neither for internal nor for external reasons.
Today, the restitution of Crimea to Oligorussia, although tacitly allowed by the West and greeted with jubilation by the asinine and slimy leftists of the world, might create as many problems as it solves for Russia, not only because of the different minorities stranded on the wrong side of the border, but also because it constitutes a clear abandonment and cowardly desertion of the other Russians in Ukraine. The Russian Panslavists of the heinous Oligorussian Empire, have separated their 'Chosen People'.