Using this diagram we visualise the irrigation systems of Crimea as a network in which decolonial infrastructures of care coexist with infrastructures of colonial violence, layering on top of one another.

According to Alam and Houston, the daily practices of care with which we are surrounded create an infrastructure which determines our political, social, and symbolic existence. Infrastructure understood in this manner is not separated from the social order, but is an environment existing in the union of human and non-human bodies. In analysing infrastructure, we can speak of ecology without leaving room for ecofascist interpretations or a less radical shift of focus from a (de)colonial context. Infrastructure allows us to demonstrate the materiality of relationships, their spatial realisation. The cases we look at reveal a physical connection with one another and and their attachment to a specific place. Such a locality is key is describing the material evidence of the past, present and future of the Crimean Tatars. The material space of the Crimean peninsula is a key component of Crimean Tatar culture, which is demonstrated in the two previous diagrams.

We examine irrigation systems, granting special attention to what is understood by their creation. The conventional understanding of infrastructure construction takes creation to mean innovation. Critical studies of infrastructure, at the same time, propose to reject such a reduction and look at the labour needed to maintain the correct functioning of the infrastructure, while granting attention to the process of creation as well. Such a frame in and of itself does not guarantee the differentiation between colonial and decolonial projects. Despite the fact that mega-infrastructure is a distinctive feature of colonial projects, the infrastructure of colonialism also demands everyday action for its successful function. Maintenance as creation is necessary to notice (de)colonial infrastructures in principle through the process of their constant creation.