Why Russia didn't seize eastern Ukraine while they took Crimea is a good question. I suspect the Russians lacked the troops to do so, despite Putin's boasting of how Crimea proved his military is simply awesome, now.
Russia certainly has the manpower gathered to march in now. But Ukrainians are now psychologically prepared to resist. And Ukraine's army will fight for the east:
Officially they are conducting military exercises. But with a reported 40,000 Russian troops gathered along the border just weeks after annexing Crimea, these soldiers are not willing to give up their part of the country without a fight. ...
"We are carrying out military exercises on our own soil and we don't feel any fear. Of course we understand that the integrity of our state depends on each of us, from soldiers up to officers and... we are ready in case of any aggression to defend our people."
[The Ukrainian major] won't say how many men are deployed in the region but confirms there are military exercises happening at several points along the border, a mostly invisible frontier which cuts through swathes of winter-hardened grassland and forest that were largely unguarded until now.
I just don't know how many Ukrainian troops are deployed to face the Russians in the east. Since our military judges Russia could seize their objectives in 3-5 days (saying nothing about Russia holding it, of course, or concluding the war with that success), there can't be many Ukrainian troops in the east.
Given the poor state of Ukraine's military and the need to protect the long northern border as well as Russia's new Crimea stronghold and to screen Transdniestria, I don't know how much Ukraine could safely deploy too close to Russia.
In many ways it would be better to screen the front to absorb the first Russian invasion without the army cracking under attack by being exposed to the initial attack. Deny the Russians a rapid battlefield victory and the Ukrainians can fight on. Then we'll see how awesome the Russian military really is.
And wouldn't a Russian invasion of the east just give Ukraine's army in the west the opportunity to seize Transdniestria as a bargaining chip? Last I heard, Russia's military presence in that region was pretty small--and not likely to be very good stuck at the butt end of nowhere (no offense) in the Russian empire.
But the Russians certainly are trying to maintain the threat of invading Ukraine by continuing to foment the illusion of unrest in an arc of territory that I thought was likely to be a target--the Kharkov-to-Donetz region:
Pro-Russian protesters seized official buildings in the eastern cities of Kharkiv, Luhansk and Donetsk on Sunday night, demanding that referendums be held on whether to join Russia like the one that preceded Moscow's takeover of Crimea.
I have no doubt that Russia's fingerprints are all over these seizures and declaration of an independent region.
What I don't know is whether Russia is really gearing up for stage 2 at the risk of triggering real NATO reactions or whether this is a threat to leverage acceptance of Russia's seizure of Crimea and reopening Ukrainian arms production lines to sell important systems to Russia.
I still judge the latter, but stuff happens and spins out of control, sometimes.
