He says the U.S. and Europe should allow events to proceed uninterrupted in Crimea. Paul on Crimea: Why does U.S. care?

Former Rep. Ron Paul says that America’s reaction to Crimea’s vote to secede from Ukraine should be, “So what?”

“Why does the U.S. care which flag will be hoisted on a small piece of land thousands of miles away?” the Texas Republican and libertarian icon wrote in a USA Today op-ed Monday.


The comments show a contrast with the former presidential candidate and his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who is considered a potential 2016 Republican contender.

( PHOTOS: 20 great quotes on Putin and Obama)

Over the weekend, Crimeans voted to secede from Ukraine and join Russia, which the Russian government has moved to approve. American politicians have called the vote a sham, and the administration has said it does not recognize the results of the vote, placing sanctions on some Russian officials in response.

Ron Paul said at least three other regions — Catalonia, Scotland and Venice — are similarly seeking to leave their countries, and the U.S. and Europe should allow events to proceed uninterrupted there as well as Crimea, saying “self-determination is a centerpiece of international law.”

Critics point to the Russian “occupation” of Crimea as evidence that no fair vote could have taken place. Where were these people when an election held in an Iraq occupied by U.S. troops was called a ‘triumph of democracy’?” Paul wrote. “Perhaps the U.S. officials who supported the unconstitutional overthrow of Ukraine’s government should refocus their energies on learning our own Constitution, which does not allow the U.S. government to overthrow governments overseas or send a billion dollars to bail out Ukraine and its international creditors.”

( Also on POLITICO: Obama announces new sanctions)

Paul said the “minimal” sanctions from the White House is all the global economy can afford, and it is the global economy that promotes peace, not intervention.

The former presidential candidate calls himself a “non-interventionist” against the isolationist label critics affix to him, and his foreign policy views have been seen as a concern for the higher office aspirations of Rand Paul.

Monday’s op-ed from the Paul patriarch stands in contrast to recent writings and comments from Rand Paul, who has advocated for pressuring Russia on Ukraine. While Rand Paul has expressed concern about giving monetary support to Ukraine, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee member has supported sanctions and removing Russia from the G-8 . He also has invoked the legacy of President Ronald Reagan in thinly veiled criticism of other Republicans, namely Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), and their positions on Ukraine.