If you were in charge of Russia and wanted to expand into Ukraine, how much Ukrainian territory would you take?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
20,996
SoCal
#1
If you were in charge of Russia and wanted to expand into Ukraine after the Maidan Revolution occurred there in 2014, how much Ukrainian territory would you take? (Note: I am not necessarily saying that such expansion would have been completely moral; rather, I am simply assuming for the sake of argument that you would indeed want Russia to expand.)

Personally, I would probably aim to capture the blue areas on this map up to the Dnieper River:



This map above shows the Russophone percentage in each Ukrainian oblast. Basically, my approach would result in the five most Russophone oblasts in Ukraine (Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Kharkiv, and Zaporizhia Oblasts, with a Russophone percentage of 77%, 75%, 69%, 48%, and 44%--and of course Sevastopol city's 90% Russophone percentage) being annexed to Russia. I would presume that there would be a decent chance that a majority of the population will eventually support Russian rule even if they would not have done so immediately. Support for Russian rule significantly went up in Crimea after the Russian annexation there in real life.



I would also aim to advance up to the Dnieper River in southeastern Ukraine (albeit not in northeastern Ukraine due to the much smaller percentage of Russophones there) in order to have a more defensible border. An added bonus of this strategy is that Russia is going to acquire a land bridge to Crimea in this scenario. Finally, while I would not aim to outright annex it to Russia, I would want to capture the southwestern part of Odessa Oblast (42% Russophone) in order to have Transnistria annex this territory (comprised of the city of Odessa and the Budjak) so that it could have access to the sea.

In such a scenario, Ukraine would still have a narrow access to the sea in the Mykolayiv area. However, the lion's share of the heavily Russophone areas in Ukraine are going to end up under Russian rule--with some of the remainder ending up under Transnistrian rule. Also, due to expanding up to the Dnieper River in southeastern Ukraine, Russia is going to have a more defensible border with Ukraine than it would have otherwise had. Also, unlike in real life, Russia is actually going to get a land bridge to Crimea in this scenario.

Anyway, what are your own thoughts in regards to this?

Also, for the record, I previously created a couple of threads here about post-1991 events and thus I hope that creating this thread in this section of this forum is OK. It's never been entirely clear to me whether the post-1991 rule also applies to this section or whether this section is exempt from this rule.
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
20,996
SoCal
#2
Here's a more detailed language map of Ukraine:



As well as a language map of Ukraine that takes population into account:



The first map distorts the actual weight of Ukrainianophone rural areas; they are territorially large but have a much smaller population in comparison to the largely Russophone cities in southeastern Ukraine.
 
Dec 2017
801
-------
#10
None! It will be a burden. Ukraine is a shadow of it was during soviet era in terms of industrial, research and military potential. Entire country made a contribution in the development of Ukrainian SSR. Russia should not take any. Russia has many problems of its own.
 

Similar History Discussions