Crimea is under "military occupation," according to Human Rights Watch - just like the (Soviet) occupation of Afghanistan!

Foreign military occupations: What do they look like and how do they make people feel? Before the Russian invasion of Crimea, it was nearly impossible to know.

Since the end of the Cold War, all military conflicts have been "humanitarian interventions," or "regime changes," or "operations for enduring freedom," or "R2P" (not to be confused with a video game console, R2P is a hip acronym for Right to Protect, which is an esoteric way of saying "merciless bombing campaign," because there is simply nothing more protective or liberating than a NATO bomb. This is true even when only 29 of 121 liberated areas could be classified as "sympathetic to liberation").

Angry mobs in Occupied Crimea

So imagine the horror of television viewers around the world when they were presented with the graphic images of euphoric flag-waving crowds, unexploding cars, droneless skies -- even a referendum. Human Rights Watch has a name for this madness:

Human Rights Watch applies the international law of occupation to Russian forces in Crimea. Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, territory is considered “occupied” when it comes under the control or authority of foreign armed forces, whether partially or entirely, without the consent of the domestic government. This is a factual determination, and the reasons or motives that lead to the occupation or are the basis for continued occupation are irrelevant.

Commanding words from an organization which has the following to say about the 13-year-and-still-going-strong freedom bakesale in Afghanistan:

Human Rights Watch, consistent with our position of neutrality in armed conflicts, takes no position on the legality under international law of military operations by US, NATO, and other coalition partners in Afghanistan

Or to put it slightly differently, "Human Rights Watch takes no position on anything that has happened in Afghanistan since 1989."

Search for yourself: According to Human Rights Watch, the last occupation of Afghanistan was of the "Russian variety." And who could say otherwise?

But let us refocus our attention on the current Russian Occupation. Many foreign journalists have traveled to the Occupied Territories, returning with ghastly tales of uncomfortable hotel rooms. Here is NPR's hardened war correspondent David Greene answering questions about his dangerous assignment in Crimea:

Q: What were your favorite and least favorite parts of the trip? A: Favorite: singing "Pink Houses" by Mellencamp at a Crimean karaoke bar. Least favorite: we stayed at a really awful, Soviet-style hotel with smoke filled hallways, creaky elevators and really, really, really thin walls.

We hope he filed a formal complaint with the Better Business Bureau and the International Criminal Court.

Most of us can sympathize with Greene's "thin wall" trauma, but purely for fun's sake let us see what happens when a similar question is asked to Ben Anderson, who wrote a book about his experience embedded with US and British troops in southern Afghanistan:

Q: What was the best thing you witnessed in Afghanistan? A: Tellingly, I can’t think of a single great moment where I saw something that really gave me hope that we might be achieving anything.

Yes, it's pretty clear which of these two gentlemen returned from an occupied country.

Sanctions aren't enough. It's time to R2P Crimea.

