Vicious Rants of an Angry Yellow Man

Hilary Clinton is calling Putin's invasion of Crimea similar to Hitler because in both cases the excuse was to protect their own people.  Of course this is a hyperbole because Nazi Germany was capable of invading all the countries around it while Russia, even if successful in Crimea, will not be able to push westward.   Sure, Russia is still powerful militarily but it has shown an inability to defeat even weak opponents and then occupy their territories.  Witness their debacle in Afghanistan and Chechnya.  Able to push toward Poland, Romania etc?  I don't think so.  The occupation of Crimea will be a bad move for Russia.  It will make Russia even more despised in the former Warsaw Pact nations.  Russia's influence, which is what Putin tried to increase by propping up Ukraine's pro Russia factions, will decrease with this strategic error.

Having said that the situation is still very uncomfortable for the Ukraine people.  You can never know exactly what a powerful dictator next door will do next.  Without any military options, the U.S. and Europe are promising billions to Ukraine to help it get out of its debts and make the pro western government more popular in eastern part of the country.  But most of the debts that Ukraine owe is to Russia.  So if you give Ukraine money, wouldn't the Russians indirectly benefits?  I say hold the money but have the Ukraine offer to sell Crimea to Russia.  This is a way to save face for both sides.  Ukraine will not have surrender Crimea due to force.  Russia will get Crimea, which it had given to Ukraine years ago, back without firing a shot.  This way Russia can say that it only wants to acquire Crimea back to protect the majority Russians living there and was not being the aggressor.  Ukraine gets rid of an area where their people are a minority without suffering any humiliation of defeat.  Win win for both sides and the U.S.

I am under no illusion that the above will be accepted by both sides.  But the idea here is that conflicts occur often not because someone really needs a land but usually because both sides are too macho to back down.  Once Putin made the decision to put soldiers into Crimea, he can't just back down even if he has no intention of expanding toward western Europe.  The Ukrainians don't want to give up Crimea because that will make them look weak, even if Crimea is not that important to leaders in Kiev.  But the longer the stalemate, the longer someone, maybe just a soldier, will make a mistake and ignite a war.  All those tough, empty threats coming out of politicians in Washington are not going to help but can also escalate the conflict.  So the best solution is that someone will need to find a way for both sides, particularly Putin, to save face.  I put up one idea, anyone else has a better one?