The key I think is energy. I heard yesterday that Russia supplies about 70% of the Ukraines energy needs. They pretty much have their foot on thei air hose.
True, but the rest of the Ukraine will be challenging to control and I think that Putin learned a lesson in Afghanistan. Don't take what you cannot control.
To a certain extent, yes. If Crimeans are concerned about Ukraine's economic stability and choose, in the absence of force, to break away and join Russia, that would be fine. However, Putin is taking advantage of the country's instability to expand his territory -- (1) allegedly introducing "protestors" clamoring for Russia's help, (2) exaggerating the need for a Russian peace-keeping force there (most unrest is not in Crimea but in Kiev), etc... A more reasonable Russian response would be the use of diplomatic envoys to Kiev, with involvement from other nations. Instead, within days of the Olympics being completed, he sent in troops to occupy key locations across the entire Crimean peninsula... There is virtually nothing the West can do about this, except sit back and watch the partitioning of Ukraine. If Russia only confiscates Crimea and maybe 1 other majority Russian eastern province, perhaps the outcome is loosely tolerable. History, however, shows that dictators like Putin, rarely curb their appetite for territorial expansion after successful acquisitions...
Crimea really is separate from the rest of Ukraine. They are mostly ethnic if not actual Russian citizens. If they broke off from the rest of the Ukraine and chose to join Russia, would that not be any different from if Ontario chose to become the 51st US State?
I predict that Putin will have his troops control Crimea as a so-called "stabilizing, peace-keeping force." Then, at the end of March, Crimean citizens will vote to secede from Ukraine and join Russia, and Putin will accept this, saying it is "the will of the people."
Not sure about the 70% to Ukraine, specifically. I know it's a good portion to Europe as a whole.