Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
1. I don't know anything about Zelezny either. Do you mean https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Zelazny?
2. And this bears on Ukranian election because...
Zemansky Zelensky

Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
the doctrine against "aggressive war" is something Russia has used to its advantage and its erosion reduces that advantage.
Isn't it the other way around?


The idea is interesting, so I'd like to try to reproduce what a case might look like for a gambit almost crazy enough to work.

Ukraine relinquishes all claims to Luhansk/Donetsk (but not Crimea), as well as ceasing hostilities and maintaining only a reduced defensive posture along the border. Luhansk and Donetsk are on their own.

Russia has no more frozen conflict in the East, and therefore loses a potential casus belli. Further, it must decide if it's willing to prop up Luhansk/Donetsk indefinitely with its resources when there is no longer a larger aim - barring total reincorporation of Ukraine into the Federation. (Population of L/DPR more than 10X population of South Ossetia/Abkhazia or 8X population of Transnistria.)

Russia cuts L/DPR loose. If leadership wants to join Russian Federation, either the people vote against or Russia rejects them. After years, tired of being a shithole-tier pseudo-country, L/DPR petitions to rejoin Ukraine. Russia resists because it likes having a buffer between Europe-oriented Ukraine and itself. A compromise is reached for Luhansk and Donetsk to accede as special autonomous and demilitarized zones.

???

Negative gearing


Of course, besides being incredibly risky for Ukrainian integrity, there is still no prospect of restitution for the seizure of Crimea, it likely doesn't help Ukrainian strategic posture if Ukraine does want to join NATO after all (continuing Russian incentive to undermine Ukraine) - and this kind of grand maneuvering is only politically feasible in a videogame anyway.