Disregarding the threats of sanctions and international ignominy, Russian President Vladimir Putin this week signed a treaty formally annexing the region of Crimea. In doing so, he reunites his country with a former province that was signed away 60 years ago to its neighbor Ukraine by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. As U.S. and Western attempts to either stop or stall Putin clearly failed, the interim government in Kiev voiced its disapproval in very strong language.

For those fearing that Crimea is merely the first course of a long meal, Putin claims he has no further aims on Ukrainian territory. Given the unique history of Crimea, neutral observers might argue that this action has all the makings of a one-off incident rather than a radical repositioning of Russian foreign and military policy toward repeated "land grabs."

Putin's speech to the State Duma on Tuesday made clear his view of the historical justifications for his actions. By referring to Crimea as an "inseparable part of Russia" in the hearts and minds of his people, he portrayed himself as someone merely resolving a historical anomaly. Putin drew parallels to the precedent set by Kosovo's separation from Serbia and suggested that it was inconsistent of the international community to permit Kosovars to choose their destiny but to deny Crimeans the same rights and prerogatives. He even threw in a reference to the reunification of Germany in 1990 for good measure.

To Putin, those claiming to be in charge in Kiev are illegitimate, having usurped the duly elected president of their country by means of a coup. To make matters worse, they include among their numbers fascist neo-Nazis, an awkward fact not widely reported in the United States.

Despite the stern words of rebuke directed at Putin, he has refused to back down. The elaborate arguments regarding international law held little weight at the Kremlin, which saw a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to correct what many Russians and Crimeans felt was a geopolitical aberration.

The "costs" to Russia of the ensuing diplomatic kerfuffle, including any eventual sanctions, are apparently ones that Putin is comfortable "amortizing" over many years to come. And he is not alone in his convictions. Members of the State Duma even went so far as to formally request that U.S. and European authorities extend their visa bans and asset freezes to include all of them, as well.

In short, the upheaval and instability in Ukraine provide a unique window in which Russia can act. It really should not come as a surprise that Putin ultimately decided to pursue his personal vision of his country's vital national interests.

The simple fact that Sevastopol serves as home to Russia's Black Sea fleet cannot be downplayed or dismissed. Crimea isn't just any bit of land full of Russian speakers. Moscow was resistant to any significant realignment of Ukraine toward the West in large part because of concerns over the security of its tenure at Sevastopol. It will be interesting to see whether having now obtained that security, Putin will resist the ultimate — and perhaps inevitable — inclusion of Ukraine into NATO.

It would seem, given the ineffectiveness of Western protests over Crimea, that the least the United States and Europe could do now would be to grant Kiev the same courtesy they have to other former communist countries. Importantly, not only are many of the old Warsaw Pact countries now full members of NATO but also three full-blown former Soviet republics — Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia — are, each of which borders Russia.

The stock markets may have punished Russian companies in recent weeks as uncertainty grew over the risks of confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, but as certainty returns to the region, these stock prices will eventually respond accordingly. The ruble is now being introduced as the official currency in Crimea. Crimean clocks are switching to Moscow time at the end of the month. Although the back-and-forth of diplomatic retaliation will continue in the weeks to come, it seems that there is little ambiguity here over the end result.

Perhaps the most important lesson of this crisis is how the impotency of the Obama administration in the area of foreign affairs has been demonstrated once again. Clearly, this was an important issue to both the White House and the State Department. Equally clearly, though, is how little regard the Kremlin had for the ability of the United States to extract any real consequences from Russia.

It is one thing to simply hope that the sound and fury of diplomacy will cause an errant country to pause and reflect. It's another thing entirely to actually have the influence and respect necessary to coerce and bend such a country to your will.

Crimea has put the relative strengths and weakness of Putin and Barack Obama on display once again.

Timothy Spangler is a writer and commentator who divides his time between Los Angeles and London. His radio show, "The Bigger Picture with Timothy Spangler," airs every Sunday night from 10 p.m. to midnight Pacific time on KRLA AM 870. To find out more about Timothy Spangler and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.