If it is a federative (or confederative for that matter) government it can annex states.
As BREXIT shows the states no longer have sovereignity as they cannot exercise their right to leave.
The new forces are under the command of the EU body, this is a fairly standard way to form armed forces historically.
The western powers in Europe, especially those in NATO are by far more agressive (we can count from the number of wars of agression they fought) and revisionist (we can count from the number of regime and border changes they have enacted post cold war).
Which is why Russia and Russian allies need strong internal (to fight against subversion, look at for example how Yeltsin got his 2nd term) and external (to deter agression, particularly in the form of a Lybia or Kosovo style air campaign) security. And that is what we exercise against (for example within Zapad-2017).
I am can ask atleast one person on this image:
who happened to be one of the decisionmakers (with Putin) during the Crimea crisis. So in a way, yes I do have a degree of the internal knowledge of the conflict, not that this matters, as any normal observer could generate a nuanced view of the conflict, which began with the 2nd regime change operation in Ukraine, then lead to Crimean referendum and the separate uprising in Donbas, which was carried out by local and non state-actors and were caused by internal Ukrainian problems.
Yet the polls resulted in the majority, which supports the referendum result and does not even require a nuanced understanding of how referendum went (ie how different ethnic groups participated in it). And as we have seen in Kosovo, etc, the referendum does not have to be legal within the country, due to the duality of the international legal system. Not that this stops the West from applying double standards when it suits them.
Well, what I have said is true, would you like me to present evidence towards the points I have made.