That is a bit of a false choice anyway. There are very few voices calling for an all-or-nothing orientation toward the West, even in western Ukraine. The foreign minister of France, Laurent Fabius, denied that the EU was asking for any such arrangement.
Have a look at the all-encompassing EU-Ukraine Association treaty. This "trade" treaty contains chapters on politics, foreign and security policy (which among other things contain items on military technological cooperation between EU and Ukraine, higher convergence between Ukraine and the EU in the field of foreign and security policy etc), and energy policy.
Check it out, and Mr Morrissey, if You trust the word of a French enarque I have a tower in Paris to sell you.
Also, when analyzing the run up to this conflict one must understand that Ukraine is not only divided along language borders but also in economical terms. Apart from the area around Kiev (the old spelling I'm used to), the richest areas are (surprisingly) in the east of the country. There you find most of the mining industry but also production industry and a relatively lively trade with neighbouring Russia. A "trade" deal with the EU would have caused problems with the border trade with Russia, and of course exposed the national industry to competition from EU producers. The western part of Ukraine is the agrarian part that (before they understand what CAP is) sees the EU as a wonderful market for its produce.
In other words,just as there were large conflicting economical interests between the northern and southern states of the US in the 1850's and 60's (not just the slave issue)there are real conflicting interests between the east and the west of Ukraine. Sure, language, culture, religion history all play large roles but one must not forget the economic issues. They are important.