Russia’s actions are illegal in international law.
No they are not. Crimea's actions may have been, depending on how you feel about the legitimacy of popular rebellions. Crimea underwent a revolution in which it broke free of Ukraine. The revolution was successful, no violent resistance from the Ukrainian military. Russia redeployed troops legally in Crimea to aid Crimean self-defense forces in their efforts to establish control over military facilities. The latter did violate the terms of their deployment agreement with Ukraine, but that's pretty small potatoes. After the referendum, the newly independent Crimea asked to become part of Russia and Russia accepted that request. If Crimea had become a legitimate independent state -- and who are we to say it's revolution was illegitimate? -- then it can't be illegal simply to accept such a request.
The Crimean assembly that voted to hold a referendum was not representative.
No, it was the elected parliament and 78 out of a 100 voted in favor of holding the referendum and union with Russia.
The referendum on Sunday was held under conditions of Russian military occupation and cannot be certified as meeting international standards for elections.
The main 'occupiers' of Crimea were its self-defense forces, consisting mainly of former members of the Ukraine armed forces. They were assisted by some of the Russian forces legally in Crimea under a prior agreement with Ukraine. I agree on the standards, but if that's all you have it's just quibbling: Crimeans showed their overwhelming desire to unite with Russia.
Russia’s actions are illegal in international law.
No they are not. Crimea's actions may have been, depending on how you feel about the legitimacy of popular rebellions. Crimea underwent a revolution in which it broke free of Ukraine. The revolution was successful, no violent resistance from the Ukrainian military. Russia redeployed troops legally in Crimea to aid Crimean self-defense forces in their efforts to establish control over military facilities. The latter did violate the terms of their deployment agreement with Ukraine, but that's pretty small potatoes. After the referendum, the newly independent Crimea asked to become part of Russia and Russia accepted that request. If Crimea had become a legitimate independent state -- and who are we to say it's revolution was illegitimate? -- then it can't be illegal simply to accept such a request.
The Crimean assembly that voted to hold a referendum was not representative.
No, it was the elected parliament and 78 out of a 100 voted in favor of holding the referendum and union with Russia.
The referendum on Sunday was held under conditions of Russian military occupation and cannot be certified as meeting international standards for elections.
The main 'occupiers' of Crimea were its self-defense forces, consisting mainly of former members of the Ukraine armed forces. They were assisted by some of the Russian forces legally in Crimea under a prior agreement with Ukraine. I agree on the standards, but if that's all you have it's just quibbling: Crimeans showed their overwhelming desire to unite with Russia.