Quote (thundercock @ 9 Dec 2021 20:07)
Isn't that what the Europeans wanted? I suppose it would be similar to South Ossetia in Georgia. Does that strengthen Ukraine from a pragmatic POV because they don't have to spend military/civil resources there?
The Donbass region has a lot of people and industry in it. It's a rundown shithole full of uneducated, easily manipulated idiots (not unlike the Rust Belt in the US), but it represents a significant chunk of Ukraine's population and GDP. So giving it up would be a big blow to Ukraine, even if the region is tying resources at the moment.
To be blatantly honest, I neither know what the European position on the issue is, nor what I personally would prefer to happen. The common denominator of EU countries is that the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine must not be infringed, i.e. they want no full-scale Russian invasion. But they also don't want a lengthy war on the UKR-RUS border. But at the same time, they would not be willing to send their own troops to Ukraine to help defend their territory, and neither do the United States.
It's a complicated problem and I think no one has come up with a convincing solution yet. Biden's tortured logic that "Russia-aligned parties would control the police, schools and public sector in Donbass, but this would not compromise the sovereignty and decision-making ability of the Ukrainian government" fits perfectly into this mould.