However, the natural barrier of the river also frees up Ukrainian forces, which can then move to the Zaporizhzhia front with the intention of driving towards the coast of the Sea of Azov. If successful, this will spilt the Russian forces and create a new pocket of isolated Russian occupiers.
I think Russia's humiliation in your comparisons was the collapse of the USSR. Hitler had huge resentment at Germany's WW1 failures; Putin loathed the USSR disbanding before becoming Russia's President. One could say Germany were "humiliated" at the end of WW2, as the Allies went and occupied them for a while. Of course no-one is going to go and invade Russia, but we need to find a way for Russia to accept it's been defeated and then help them rebuild and integrate with us, something we didn't really do with Russia in the 90s. But this is not going to happen with Putin, just like it was never going to happen with Hitler (whether he commited suicide beforehand or not).
But this is not a new issue. If Russia is to maintain a land bridge to Crimea then in the meantime it will have to maintain its occupation of Zaporizhzhia oblast (south of the river) in advance of any agreed settlement. Giving up Kherson will allow for a redeployment of forces including, apparently, some of its better units. And I suspect there may be an institutional memory of how the Volga river provided a useful defensive barrier during the siege of Stalingrad. On the Russian side the key factor is maintaining lines of supply.
Russia has, since the days of the Tsars, had a strategic need for access to the Black Sea including a suitable naval base. Geography means Sevastopol is really the only game in town. But the water supply issue means Crimea is almost unviable if separated from the southern half of Kherson oblast and the North Crimean Canal. As such the pre-February situation doesn't provide a long-term solution, hence Russia's invasion. From a crayonista type pov the pre-2014 boundaries made the most sense apart from the highly significant issue of Russia needing a viable naval base on the Black Sea. Perhaps the most stable long term solution would be a canal, possibly built with a degree of western support, connecting Rostov directly with the Black Sea but including whatever measures might be necessary to prevent such a waterway from freezing in winter. Think a 21st century version of the Kiel Canal.
That's GCSE and below level history. The Paris Peace Conference actually did Germany a few favours and they just ignored the bits they didn't like anyway, humiliation was just a convenient excuse. Hitler rising to power made WW2 inevitable, and that wasn't a guaranteed outcome of the peace of WW1.
It does? Novorossiysk is already a large port and is ice free all year round. It also has the advantage of being within Russian territory rather than occupied Ukraine. No particular reason they couldn't establish that as the main base of operations for the Black Sea Fleet.
How can anyone negotiate with a scumbag that has caused the death of thousands, ripped families apart, employed a ragbag army that rapes and pillages, in order to satisfy his ludicrous ideology ? There was a message draped over a building in Vilnius recently saying: Putin, The Hague is waiting for you. Hear hear, let's hope that comes to fruition.
They do indeed shift. However, it's dangerous to reward Russia for taking Crimea by force.
Russia was already rewarded 8 years ago when they took it and we did nothing - that’s a sunk cost.
