Do you think countries don't plan for situations like this? Before this is even bubbled over do you think phone calls weren't being made?
Diplomacy, perhaps? Winter is nearly over as well. Are Europeans divided? Europe lived through the Cold War not on the peripherals like Americans. Countries were occupied, people were forcefully displaced, assets stripped, assassinations, forced to learn Russian, under constant threat of invasion, and the list goes on. Um? Yanukovich killed a number of his citizens and fled to Russia to avoid prosecution? That seems like a choice to me, and a pretty poor one at that. Everything else you've said is irrelevant, or factual incorrect. Also the Budapest memorandum is worthy of a read and Russia has breached it.
Let me know what was "irrelevant or factual incorrect" because nothing in that post indicates that. Fact is the EU's ultimatum started the protests in Kiev. Period. There were no objections from the international community in regards to the elections that put Yanukovich in office. Period. A democratically elected head of state was overthrown in a coup d'etat right or wrong? How is that incorrect? How are the people whose votes have been disregarded irrelevant? I'm not talkin about Yanukovich's credibility as a human being, we all know he's a dirtbag. But if we're to accept these wanton coups where does it end? Point is, the referendum was agreed upon by all sides and would've brought a diplomatic solution to the dilemma but the snatching of power leaves the door open for more chaos. That's Putin's whole gripe, the right channels weren't used to get to a resolution and the West don't mind this at all knowing it would bring instability to the region. Libya and a host other other countries is indicative of this type of behavior.
You must of misunderstood me because the bolded in particular makes no sense whatsoever and has no relevance to what I was arguing. I'm talking about right now in 2014 and you're talking about a bygone era. Europe is absolutely divided on the use of economic sanctions, it's only being put on the table but if they can help it they'd rather solve this through diplomacy. If it were as easy as you make it seem to go to other routes for energy then why haven't these sanctions, bank freezes, etc but implemented yet? Plus maybe you weren't watching the riots but I've been watching from the very beginning, the protesters were using deadly force on the police while the police were still using rubber bullets. You think American police wouldn't of slaughtered Occupy protesters if they took it as far as the protesters in Kiev did? If anything, the police in Kiev held back quite a bit before finally goin to live rounds. Yanukovich used deadly force and he should've been impeached after that we can agree to that, but if he had stayed in Kiev he almost certainly would've been killed by the extremist members of the protest movement. Doesn't seem like a poor choice to flee to the nearest country that would give him refuge imo, and after Putin's presser this morning it's all but obvious that he's not exactly endorsing this guy other than pointing out that technically he's still the president and that although the protesters aren't wrong in fighting for change they were wrong in disrespecting their own constitution and democratic process in order to get that change. Compare this to another heated conflict in Venezuela and you see how Caprilles' experience led him to not seeking power through violent means because it makes matters worse.
I've read the Budapest memorandum, but that's not a formal treaty it's a diplomatic document promising territorial integrity. And the problem with that is that at this point Moscow feels as though the the govt in place is illegal as is so they see it as a mission to secure a situation. If something as basic as Ukrainian constitutional law couldn't be followed, what makes Putin believe that any other agreements will be? Plus the agreement regarding the Black Sea Fleet in Crimea is contingent on there being a legitimate administration in Kiev and this agreement can also apply to the autonomous republic of Crimea. So if Moscow believes that an illegitimate govt can/will threaten their military interests in Crimea as well as their citizens and compatriots Russia has the right to secure its interests in Crimea so long as its requested. The Crimean govt asked for the intervention which falls under the agreement that kept their Black Sea Fleet in Crimea in the first place. So Putin's logic is the representatives in Kiev are illegal anyway and the autonomous Crimean govt more or less invited them in to defend them from potential threats from the illegitimate govt in Kiev. Russia is toeing the line yes, but they haven't outright broken any treaties by marching into E.Ukraine for example. Had they gone into E.Ukraine it wouldn't of fallen under the Black Sea agreement which only deals with Crimea and they'd have no defense for what that.