Does anybody besides Putin believe that there are no Russian soldiers in the Crimea?
I wonder where police vans are taking people right now (like those Femen protestors)?

Back on Sunday I made this observation:

Suppose Russia annexes Crimea but leaves the remainder of Ukraine alone; somebody like Klitschko gets elected president; and a unified Ukraine minus Crimea starts gradually shifting toward the European model and orbit. This will be an absolutely unacceptable outcome for Russia. But Russia doesn't necessarily have any good options itself.

Now I'm hearing some people far more knowledgeable than I presenting "Russia takes Crimea" as a possible favorable outcome for those of us who aren't exactly fans of authoritarianism.

NY Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, whose family (like mine) is from western Ukraine, says this in his column today:

Russia has just driven Ukraine into the West’s orbit and acquired a long-term headache. Russia is already pouring billions of dollars into the bits of Georgia and Moldova that it pilfered, and now it’ll have to subsidize Crimea (which depends on Ukraine for water and electricity).

Putin’s other problem: If Crimea becomes independent, its pro-Russian population will no longer vote in Ukrainian elections. The upshot would be Ukraine skewing even more to the West.

And I just heard Nina Krushcheva, professor at The New School, telling MSNBC's Chris Hayes that Russia's effective control of Crimea is a done deal, and that, if the Russian advance stops there and doesn't spread to eastern Ukraine, this is a state of affairs that the Ukrainian leadership and Europe and the USA should ultimately accept. Oh, and Ms. Krushcheva is the granddaughter of Nikita Krushschev, the Soviet premier who "gifted" Crimea to Ukraine back in 1954.