[Vigilanteman]

Your map and my map in post #26 are comparing two different animals. Yours is the percentage of ethnic Russians (much smaller) where as mine was the percentage of voters who backed the Russian favored candidate in the last election.

Yours show Crimea as the only region in Russia which is clearly majority Russian. If it needs a land bridge to link it to Russia, the Kerch straight to the east is the most logical connection. However, the only natural land bridge is the region marked 14.1% ethnic Russian. If you took that region south of the Dnieper River and extended the line from the river flow to the point where it turns north at a 45 degree angle or so, then you'd take in a substantial part of the two provinces with close to a 40% Russian ethnicity.

Not ideal, to be sure, but probably better than the alternatives.

[caveat emptor]

Your map and my map in post #26 are comparing two different animals. Yours is the percentage of ethnic Russians .....

Yep. A specific response to a specific question.

Ukraine is changing. Opinions seem to be in flux. Three million ethnic Russians have re-identified as Ukrainians since 1991. My guess is that Russian speaking ethnic Ukrainians will be less inclined to support Russia after the current roughing up by Putin, but will likely have to make compromises. We'll just have to wait and see.

Whatever pressures the Ukrainians are under, they aren't stupid, and won't likely attmept to close borders, interfere with Russian year round ports in Crimea - how could they anyway, now that Russia is in control - etc.

And if there are any outrageously provocative acts committed against Russia/Russians/Russian-speakers my inclination would be to see them as a false flag ops by some of Putin's goons, excepting local uncontrollable crazies of course.