I might let Crimea go. It was Russian originally anyway. Elsewhere I would not give an inch, not even Donbas.
But if the people there don’t want to be part of Ukraine, why force them? That just guarantees future conflict.
I say let Crimea go, but Russia has to pay for it, but not Donbas or any other area. If the people don’t want to be part of Ukraine, let them emigrate to Russia.
Russia also has to pay reparations for the damage they’ve done.
What seems fair to an outside observer is not the same as what is achievable.
Russia's initial plans of a quick victory were foiled, but it is still very much in position to hold Donbas, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. Ukraine lacks the offensive weapons to take back the territory, and East of Dnipro river the logistics favor Russia; it can attack from north, east, and now south, and all that Russia needs to do to stop Ukraine from advancing is to destroy the bridges.
And who's going to force Russia to pay reparations? Historically, only countries who've been utterly defeated and captured in wars have ever had to do it. Russia is merely being inconvenienced a bit. I think something akin to USSR vs. Finland will happen... Ukraine "wins" by avoiding occupation, but has to give up huge tracts of land and access to Sea of Azov and maybe Black Sea.
I
hope that I'm wrong and that somehow NATO can provide Ukraine with enough defensive and offensive weapons to continue the fight, and that the state of Russian army is
even worse than it seems, but right now, all I'm seeing is that Russia is refocusing its war effort and trying to get their shit together, and Ukraine has not made much progress except in the outskirts of Kyiv.