LA Times: Russian President Vladimir Putin may pay heavy price for Crimea moves

[stevenleser]

http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-us-ukraine-20140316,0,4828947.story#axzz2w8hQQ4az

...Western officials and analysts increasingly feel that in the long run, Russians will come to see their nation's military and political move into Crimea as a mistake.

Two weeks after Russian forces entered the peninsula en masse, Russia's stock market and economic data have started to signal trouble — the start of what could become a lasting pullback by foreign investors. That would badly hurt Russia's efforts to modernize and diversify its economy.

At the United Nations and other international forums, the number of countries supporting Moscow's strong-arm action has shrunk close to zero. Even China, which frequently sides with Russia on international issues, has turned sour.

Nor has Putin succeeded in splitting the Western coalition and stopping U.S.-led efforts to impose sanctions in retaliation for the seizure of Crimea. Instead, his strategy seems to have driven the alliance together while frightening countries on Russia's borders into closer cooperation with the United States and Western Europe.

The clearest indication of how Putin's action may be backfiring came Thursday when German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had been the foremost advocate for a soft line, shifted position and warned Moscow of a possible new East-West division that could "massively damage Russia, economically and politically."
.
.
.
More at above link

[Nuclear Unicorn]

1. Even if Russia can't be dislodged anytime soon the world should disincentivize/deter such actions.

If that can be done through non-violent actions such as divestment, so much the better.

K&R

[BeyondGeography]

2. Very persuasive on the point of forcing his neighbors to think of strategic alternatives

Especially economically.

[LisaL]

3. Well it sure looks that he is willing to pay it.

Does it not?

[stevenleser]

4. To answer that question we need to make several assumptions I'm not prepared to make.

We would, for instance, need to assume various answers to the following questions at the very least:

1. Did he know all of the potential long term and short term consequences in advance?

2. Does he think the consequences that appear to be materializing will in fact happen?

3. Does he now feel like he would lose face if he does not complete his anschluss of Crimea and is that now driving the continuation of this policy instead of risk/consequence/benefit analysis?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At this point, I think the Crimean invasion may spell the end of Putin's Presidency in 6-18 months. The oligarchs will not sit still for a major erosion in their holdings and ability to do business and travel overseas. If Putin knew that, would he be willing to pay it? Again, more questions whose answers let alone how and whether he is thinking about them is not in evidence.