ShareThis Page

The Crimean situation: Emboldening Putin

| Monday, March 17, 2014, 9:00 p.m.

Russian forces, in violation of international law, invade Ukraine's sovereign Crimean peninsula. Crimea then schedules, in violation of the Ukrainian Constitution, a secession referendum. Crimean voters overwhelmingly approve re-entry into the Russian federation — under the watchful eyes, of course, of the not-so-clandestine Russian military.

But don't you worry, the world will increase its farcically weak initial sanctions on rogue Russia and hold it “accountable.” The United States is prepared to get tough, says presidential mouthpiece Jay Carney. He warns, again, of “increasing costs for Russia.” But, reports The Washington Free Beacon, that apparently doesn't include turning away Russian arms inspectors headed to the United States this week under terms of New START. Russia routinely and grossly violates the treaty. And Russia is talking about denying entrance to U.S. inspectors.

Neither, it appears, are our French allies about to get really tough. There's a new round of U.S.-mimicking hand-slap sanctions. But as John Fund reveals in National Review Online, our French friends don't appear ready to, say, stop building four Russian helicopter aircraft carriers, the kind of war materiel that only emboldens Crimea-like aggression.

Vladimir Putin's ultimate goals reach far beyond the Crimean peninsula, warns Russian expert Andrey Zubov in The Financial Times. And, we warn, international weak knees and limp wrists are green lights for even more Russian adventurism.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.