Does the Brazilian Navy need a Mistral?

Two things.  First, my latest at the Diplomat noodles on about precedent in international politics:

What precedent does the Russian invasion of Crimea set for the settlement of territorial disputes in East Asia?  We should begin with the major differences: East Asia lacks institutions similar to the European Union or NATO.  The situation of Russia, which continues to support multiple irredentist communities around its near abroad, has no easy parallel in Asia. East Asia enjoys its share of difficult, complex national relationships, but none of these are quite like those between Russia and its neighbors. We should also note that there’s a gulf between claiming that a particular act (say, the NATO led air campaign against Kosovo) caused some other event, and suggesting that the actions of a major power establish “rules of the road” that other states tend to follow.

Second, I have some thoughts about the prospect of suspending the delivery of Vladivostok and Sevastopol, a pair of amphibious assault ships the French are building for Russia:

The French are committed economically to the deal, which has supported French shipbuilding. However, as the first ship is nearly complete and the second well under way, some of the French stakeholders (primarily labor)have already been appeased. With the recent displays of Franco-US friendship, and of Franco-US cooperation in Africa, I have to wonder whether the French could be convinced to delay or suspend delivery as a response to the Russian conquest of Crimea. And especially given that the second ship is named Sevastopol, the optics of transferring LHAs to the Russian Navy right now are genuinely terrible.