Would eastern and western Ukraine be better off going their separate ways?

[politicus]

Depends how it is divided, but I tend to think so. All though regarding the southern regions it would be problematic for Ukraine to lose so much of the Black Sea coastline.

[politicus]

No one really wants this to happen.

Very true.

And yet it still seems like the logical conclusion in the long run. Countries that are so clearly divided are difficult to hold together. Especially because the two parts are roughly equal in strength.

What do you see as the alternatives? Will the East and South become more Ukrainian in time?

[politicus]

No one really wants this to happen.

Very true.

And yet it still seems like the logical conclusion in the long run. Countries that are so clearly divided are difficult to hold together. Especially because the two parts are roughly equal in strength.

What do you see as the alternatives? Will the East and South become more Ukrainian in time?

They are quote Ukrainian as it is. They just have a somewhat distinc view of what it means.

Yeah, thats an important point. To clarify a bit: In a late 90s paper British Ukraine-expert Andrew Wilson predicted Ukrainian identity could move in three different directions.

1. A Canada-like state with its own Russophone or Ukrainophone Quebec. In this case either the Gallician version of ethnic anti-Russian Ukrainian nationalism or the Donbass/South/Crimea russophones are marginalized, but left in control of their own province(s). At this point the marginalization of Gallicia is off the table.

2. Slow Ukrainization leading to a consolidation around Dnieper-nationalism i.e. an identity that recognizes the importance of shared East Slavic traditions and history, but considers the Ukrainian language to be central to Ukrainian identity.

3. A continuation and redefinition of the overlapping Ukrainian and Russian identities that currently make up the "other Ukraine." (his name for the panslavist (and/or more or less Russophile) Ukrainian identity where language isn't an important identity marker).

What I mean by Ukrainization is the spread of Dniepr nationalism to parts of the east and south diminishing the "Other Ukraine" and perhaps leading to "Quebec-status" for Crimea and Donbass in the end.

[politicus]

Joking aside OTL border while not perfect, was not a bad choice, yes I personal think that Denmark should have adopted an Eider border after WWII (without expelling the Germans and it should respect their right to their own language) where we could have gotten away with it. But with hindsight it was no disaster that it didn't happen.

In fact, there was quite a movement after WW II to also have Holstein returning to Denmark, along the lines of "What has becoming part of Germany brought us - two World Wars and economic hardship afterwards". The movement was rather short-lived and died out with the German "Wirtschaftswunder", but as I have mentioned elsewhere, there were definitely worse places to live in than 18th century Schleswig-Holstein under Danish rule. Had Denmark not allied with Napoleon, and refrained from the stupid "Danisation policies" after 1848, the border would probably still be on the Elbe (and you speaking German as well as you speak Danish, or we both speaking some kind of "Platt"). Note also this:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altonaer_Freiheit

I remember us derailing another perfectly good thread (about Germans in America) on this subject, so I wont do it again, but you are wrong on at least two points in this post.
So I am making a post about Schleswig-Holstein on the history board and would suggest a mod moves yours and Ingemanns posts to there.