Russia outmaneuvers the West in its own game by playing the Crimea gambit
The West, and specifically, the US, crossed the “red line” [on February 21] when they primitively orchestrated the downfall of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich to clear the road for their “puppets” to the Ukrainian leadership, Russian President Vladimir Putin told a combined session of both Chambers of the Parliament as he rationalized the decision to re-unite Crimea with the Russian Federation.
“When a spring is compressed to a limit it has no other options than to recoil,” Putin said, as he metaphorically explained that Russia has had “enough” of the West’s “ever-shifting principles” and “free interpretations of universal fundamental international norms, diplomatic treaties and UN Charter implications.”
Kremlin's arguments vs West's counterarguments
Putin’s arguments to an unbiased audience seem etched in fundamental truths and axiomatic beliefs, while the counterarguments from Brussels, other EU capitals and Washington are thin on truths, blatantly defy precedents and abrasively affront common human logic.
Otherwise, how can the West be thoroughly and unconditionally behind outrageously fascist organizations, such as The Right Sector and Svoboda (Freedom) Party in Ukraine in their quest to oust Yanukovich? These groups were the key driving forces behind the “so-called people’s protest” on Maidan Square, and both have been aptly labeled by the EU and international organizations, including some Jewish associations, as “purely extremist, homophobic and anti-Semitic” organizations. 
How come the West partnered, and is still partnering, with these forces that they themselves had declared extremist. The cooperation between these neo-fascist entities and West is better described as the “enemy of my enemy is my friend,” and this goes on to show how far the West is ready to go, including partnering with devils, if that will certainly hurt Russia’s interests.
The West’s open support was evident in the visits by different EU/US politicians to Maidan, the culmination of which was the hand feeding of the demonstrators by US envoys. Was this not outrageous, an open support for demonstrators by foreign powers, holding hands and marching together in the nation's square?
The West’s failure to honor its brokered deal
This is another issue raised by Moscow. Consequently, the Kremlin wants the February 21 agreements signed by Yanukovich and the opposition, which were guaranteed by three EU foreign affairs ministers – Germany, France and Poland – to be implemented in full.
Besides, Moscow does not understand why these guarantors had shamelessly failed to honor the agreements they had helped negotiate. Or there was never any intention to honor any agreements; the so-called negotiations and the consequent pact were just another ploy by the West to have their own agenda in Kiev.
The worrying and so far unsolved snipers issue:
It has now become a known fact that the snipers that killed both protesters and the Yanukovich’s anti-riot police officers were hired by someone among the new Kiev rulers. Any reaction from the West: None, an absolute silence.
The West has not deemed it abhorrent nor seen it as an abomination that someone among their Ukrainian partners had bankrolled murders as a form of political battle in peaceful time in the centre of Europe.
What of the recent murder of one of the Right Sector leaders, “Sasha the White”? Yes, this guy was obnoxious – both in character and actions, but do these justify an extra-judicial murder, is this the type of neo-Western democracy that EU/US are bringing to Ukraine, which they want normal people living in the eastern and southern parts of the country to subscribe to?
The Kosovo precedent:
The West, like parrot, has repeatedly claimed that the Kosovo case does not constitute a precedence for Crimea’s independence. Their arguments, or more specifically, Obama’s explanation that Kosovo’s declaration of independence was preceded by bloodshed raised eye brows in the Kremlin. So, bloodbath is needed to declare independence, Putin mocked in his Crimea speech.
The Crimea gambit:
The West had so wanted to oust Yanukovich while Putin was busy hosting the Winter Olympic Games that they did not think beyond February 23. The plan was to place Russia, as has always been the case since the demise of the USSR, before the fact, a sort of “fait accompli.”
Western leaders, now used to thinking only within the Twitter word count limit, and their secret services that have long forgotten the basis of their profession, did not see it necessary to explore all the possible reactions from Russia’s side.
The West was about to be feasting over its eventual landing Ukraine in its orbit, with prospect of extending Nato membership and some Nato warships, read "US frigates," stationed in the Crimean city ports of Sevastopol and Simferopol, one Russian politician said.
But Putin’s Crimea gambit completely spoiled the party. This is the type of the unorthodox asymmetrical reactions that Kremlin likes to talk about. As Putin put in his speech, "I don’t want to be greeted in Crimea by Nato army officials. If anyone wants to visit Crimea, they are welcome, but only as guests and not the landlord."
Web design,