‘The New York Times’ editorial: Catalan secession claims are
In its editorial on Wednesday, the prestigious ‘The New York Times’ has dissociated the current situation in Crimea and its secession from Ukraine from the independence processes in Catalonia, Scotland and Quebec. The editorial article, which demands European Union countries to impose economic sanctions on Vladimir Putin's Russia, states that the Catalans, Scots and Quebecers “have shown there are legitimate ways to raise” the secession issue. The American newspaper criticized Crimea for its “phony referendum” with a “foreordained” outcome, organised in an express way just as Russian soldiers were being deployed in the peninsula. The newspaper admits secession is a “difficult” matter but recalled that the invasion of Crimea is “illegal”, calling on the international community to react to Putin’s actions.
Barcelona (ACN).- In its editorial on Wednesday, the prestigious ‘The New York Times’ has dissociated the current situation in Crimea and its secession from Ukraine from the independence processes in Catalonia, Scotland and Quebec. The editorial article, which demands European Union countries to impose economic sanctions on Vladimir Putin's Russia, states that the Catalans, Scots and Quebecers “have shown there are legitimate ways to raise” the secession issue. The America newspaper criticized Crimea for its “phony referendum” with a “foreordained” outcome, organised in an express way just as Russian soldiers were being deployed in the peninsula. The newspaper admits secession is a “difficult” matter but recalled that the invasion of Crimea is “illegal”, calling on the international community to react to Putin’s actions.
In its editorial, ‘The New York Times’ has opposed the current situation in Crimea, particularly the Russian “illegal [use of force] under international law”, to Catalonia, Scotland and Quebec, which “have shown there are legitimate ways to raise” secession claims. The editorial stresses that the most pressing issue is not “who owns Crimea” but the Russian occupation and the current undemocratic secession process from Ukraine.
The American newspaper emphasised that secession plans include next Sunday's express “phony” referendum and a vote in Russia's Parliament scheduled on the 21st March, whose “outcomes are foreordained”. Furthermore it denounces the “non-existent "fascist" threats to the Russian population” in Crimea and how regional and Russian authorities are “refusing to recognize the interim government in Kiev”.
Occupation was decided in the name of “a special bond” between Russia and Crimea
According to the American newspaper, the deployment of forces in Crimea relies “on presumptions of special Russian privileges in its former empire”, and was also conducted in the name of a “special bond” shared between Russia and Ukraine: “Like many Russians, Mr. Putin earnestly believes” in such a close connection, but he refuses to acknowledge that “Ukraine can forge economic and social ties with the West and still retain the indisputable historic and cultural kinship to Russia”, states ‘The New York Times’.
Urging the international community to sanction Russia
The editorial has urged the international community, and particularly the European Union, to react to Putin’s illegal deployment of force and his actions to make Crimea a territory of the Russian Federation. “It is time for Europe to join the United States in [threatening Russia] with costly sanctions”, claims the newspaper, even though certain countries, such as Germany, may be reluctant to do so for economic reasons, adds the editorial article. “Financial sanctions against banks would cut Russian corporations off from sorely needed foreign borrowing”, suggests ‘The New York Times’, which also explains that the USA have already started pressuring Russia, with NATO planes flying over Romania and Poland, and the American destroyer dropping anchor in the Black Sea.
“The sooner American and European leaders can demonstrate that they are prepared to impose serious penalties — and to accept the resulting sacrifices — the better the chance that those sanctions will not prove necessary”, concludes the editorial.