It cannot just be about power, otherwise it would be perfectly acceptable for those nations with power, for instance the USA and Russia, to invade and conquer their weaker neighbours as and when they feel like it. This would render the entire Westphalian system redundant.

National sovereignty refers to the right of nations to exercise the principle of self-determination in dealing with internal matters. A nation is not an abstract principle, it is a body of people with common blood, history, culture of language living in a particular geographical territory. National self-determination can therefore only exist when power lies in the hands of the people, not in the hands of one man.

It can't be that simple surely??..... What if in 10 or 20 year's time Bradford's population becomes overwhelmingly swayed towards people of Pakistani origin - If those people decided they felt more Pakistani than British and felt their own ideals were not that of Britain's, could those people apply for Pakistan to 'claim' Bradford?

I forgot the part in which we used to be the Asian Union not too long ago

To paraphrase Putin today, the West's idea of international "law" is just the law of the powerful.

You seem confused. You rightly say a nation is a body of people but then imply the people living within the borders of the Ukraine of last week are one nation. The whole point is a part of them (the majority in Crimea) are of the Russian nation and want to be part of Russia geographically. Russia in turn wants them.

If Obama was asked by a journalist to choose between a pro-US dictatorship and an anti-US democracy, he'd answer by sending the journo to Guantanamo Bay.

Argument doesn't really work. Bradford has never been part of Pakistan, and Pakistan has never made any claim on Bradford being part of Pakistan. Also, the people of Bradford with Pakistani origin are migrants or the descendents of migrants, they left one territory for another a long way away. Crimea on the other hand was part of the Russian Empire from 18th century and then it's successor the Soviet Empire in the 20th century, it was only ceded to Ukraine within the context of Ukraine also being part of that Soviet Empire. So it's existence outside of effective Russian control is a relevatively short post-Soviet experience.

I'd guess the majority of those in Crimea, who consider themselves Russian, were actually born in the Ukraine - It doesn't matter how recently Russia gave Crimea to the Ukranians, you can't just march back in on the whim of the people, without at least trying to negotiate with the people who legally 'own' the land.

The scary thing is, if Russia are allowed to get away with this method of land grabbing, then I fear this won't be the last such incident in Eastern Europe.

I'm all for the will of the people, but things have to be done properly (negotiation, proper legal referendum, etc).... A rush job referendum, loaded towards those who have called that vote, isn't really how you should be doing things.

Putin should have just stated that his secret service, (SVR) had informed him of the possibility the Ukranians had WMD pointed at the Kremlin.

Another leaked tape not being reported by any Western Media. Of course I don't speak Ukrainian so can't verify what she actually says but if the subtitles are anything to go by Tymoshenko is another nasty piece of work the Western powers love to support. rt.com/news/tymoshenko-calls-destroy-russia-917/

Another leaked tape not being reported by any Western Media. Of course I don't speak Ukrainian so can't verify what she actually says but if the subtitles are anything to go by Tymoshenko is another nasty piece of work the Western powers love to support. rt.com/news/tymoshenko-calls-destroy-russia-917/

There's a Mitchell and Webb sketch [Are we the baddies? that has me thinking sometimes, we hear all the stuff in the media and wonder if we are given a balanced viewpoint and just because Putin DOES have SOME vile policies, is he wrong on this one?

It doesn't really matter if Putin is "right" or "wrong", he has very carefully calculated what he can and can't do and the answer was he can annex Crimea with little or no meaningful repercussions. I expect he is weighing in the balance whether the probably slightly greater problems of annexing Ukraine itself are worth the candle.

ATEOTD unless you are prepared to go to war with Russia (or whoever it may be) then diplomacy is never going to prevent such action. And while some level of sanctions may cause Putin real issues, he knows full well that the chance of military conflict with the west is nil. The USA will pick on isolated basket cases like Iraq, and the UK will happily hang on to its coat-tails, but there isn't a cat in hell's chance of Putin's bluff being called, and ultimately all we rely on is his good will not to do such takeovers. Nobody was or is ever gonna prevent them.