Re: Presumbly the UK has similar plans
There wasn't free campaigning or international monitoring and there wasn't an option to keep the status quo.
Wrong-
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/international-observers-find-crimean-referendum-strongly-and-voluntarily-supported-by-the-crimean-people-250658201.html
A group of international observers from Israel, Spain, Italy, USA, UK, Latvia, Moldova and Serbia, which were invited by the Central Electoral Commission of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, visited the largest cities of Crimea - Simferopol, Yalta, Evpatoria, Alushta, Saki, as well as many villages in the countryside.
All observers unanimously noted that the referendum was held in full compliance with international standards.
So although it somewhat trampled over the Ukrainian constitution, the referendum was considered valid. It's one of those odd bits of history where people think Russia 'invaded' Crimea, despite having large bases there, and many troops. And of course it happened following Ukraine's coup, which was also unconstitutional.
That conflict would have to be decided by a court, that doesn't exist. Therefore two states or groups of lawyers could write reasonable sounding opinions on the matter that disagree - and there'd be nowhere to finally settle the dispute.
There are many courts. Problem is sanctions prevent Russia(ns) from hiring Western lawyers to challenge the decisions. Or potentially even attend court given sanctions have included travel bans. But collective punishment is against Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II. There's also some fun history lessons, eg-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerable_Acts
The Intolerable Acts were punitive laws passed by the British Parliament in 1774 after the Boston Tea Party. The laws were meant to punish the Massachusetts colonists for their defiance in the Tea Party protest in reaction to changes in taxation by the British Government. In Great Britain, these laws were referred to as the Coercive Acts.
The acts took away self-governance and rights that Massachusetts had enjoyed since its founding, triggering outrage and indignation in the Thirteen Colonies. They were key developments in the outbreak of the American Revolutionary War in April 1775.
So the UK used collective punishment against it's colony, much as Kiev did against Crimea. Rather ironic that the US is objecting to the very thing that gave it it's independence. It's probably a bit late for the UK to demand restoration of it's territory though.
And if Russia wants concessions out of Ukraine after slaughtering its population and destroying its cities, well that money could be a useful way of doing it. Some sort of 100 year lease on Crimea in exchange for money seems like a realistic deal with international precedent behind it.
Crimea was already leased by Russia, but after the coup, Ukraine wanted to cancel that lease. As for slaughtering populations, that's why we're in this mess. Ukraine has been doing that since 2014. See-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa6DBkvNNLk
as an example. See also the OSCE reports pre-invasion where they reported increased shelling by Ukraine prior to Russia's invasion/intervention. Something that the MSM conveniently ignores, ie if Russia hadn't intervened, Ukraine would have been trying to re-take Crimea and Donbas.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
