Obviously the author advocates supporting Yanukovich (as he is the lawfully elected President of Ukraine) and for jailing all the protesters (because they are doing undemocratic things and violate human rights of pretty much anyone.)
Or perhaps the author means that an armed mob is a source of democracy and human rights? Then he should go to Northern Ireland and shout there, from the rooftops, about his support for united Ireland. I'm sure he could find a gun there and march against the Limey. Go get them! Or he can go to sunny Spain and tell Spaniards that they are so wrong about oppressing those nice guys from Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (also known as ETA.) If he does that, perhaps his fate would be a good lesson to others.
World is full of conflicts. However it is usually wrong to use force to resolve them. Force is not out of the question, but it is reserved for situations of life or death, when nothing else can possibly work. This is not the case in Ukraine. Ukraine has a fairly elected President; a functioning Parliament; and the police that is *still* reluctant to shoot at the protesters, even though they take incoming fire themselves. I can understand that there are many in Ukraine that are unhappy about the laws that the elected President and Parliament are promoting. But... they lost the elections. Democracy requires them to accept the loss, and next time try to do better. Nowhere in democratic rule books it says that if you lose the elections you are entitled to organize riots and fight the police until your demands are met. There is only one book that approves this method. It's called Mein Kampf.
I doubt he supports Scottish independence. If the UK lost all those Labour voters, they’d never have lefties in power again... oh wait, they’d still have the Conservative party. Never mind.