[quadrant]

Do you think the outcome will be any different if self-determination is conducted “legally” (whatever that means) and “slowly”? Why put the people of Crimea through months and maybe years of suspense, if the outcome is going to be the same?
The longer this issue drags out, the greater the probability of bloodshed. I should think that events in Syria have taught you (and the world) the problems that arise with prolonged civil strife.
Isolate and encircle Russia? Are you mad? Do you really believe that such a geopolitical alliance could be constructed and maintained? Are you willing to bear the cost of such an alliance?

[annalex]

Why put the people of Crimea through months and maybe years of suspense, if the outcome is going to be the same?

The benefit of legality is legality itself, that is why. This is the same benefit as in earning the money to buy a bicycle instead of stealing it.

Besides, that the outcome would be the same is itself a proposition in need of a proof. A legal referendum in a calm atmosphere when all the sides have time to campaign and debate, and there is no foreign occupation is the only possible proof that indeed a majority of Crimeans want to secede.

Which, by the way, would not automatically give them that right. Generally speaking a part of national sovereignty, by definition, is territorial integrity.

The longer this issue drags out, the greater the probability of bloodshed.

The longer the RF occupation lasts, the greater is the probability of bloodshed. Remove the war criminals without insignia, wherever they came from, and voila -- no possibility of bloodshed.

Isolate and encircle Russia? Are you mad?

That is what you do with rogue nations. I am not mad. It worked fine in the first Cold War, which we won. We'll win the second one as well: Putin's regime will go down.