The first round of review notes for this article was received in early February 2022-just two weeks before Russia's military invasion of Ukraine on February 24. We had been debating the use of the term "cold war" prior to the invasion when we were confronted with the reality of povnomasxtabna v na -a full-scale war-which physically displaced two of our authors from their homes in Kharkiv in the process. Presciently, the final note from reviewer 2 had offered: "One suggestion I might make would be to update this by tying these conversations about Ukrainian sovereignty vis-à-vis Russia to current threats to Ukrainian sovereignty from Putin's regime." Indeed. We believe that our argument is made even more prophetic, not less relevant, by Russia's violent incursion, in that our article points to the importance of the battle over discourse in geopolitics and the implications for addressing global conflict, creating livable lives, and attending to everyday trauma. Further, as of this writing, the New York Times (Myers and Frenkel 2022) reports that "propaganda" is actively being spread by Russia in several languages in Latin America and the Middle East by way of extending the war of discourse beyond traditional East/West geographies. Hence, the "cold war" is expanding, not contracting. With this article, we illuminate the centrality of voice by citizens of smaller nations and the tendency for this voice to be lost among the wielding of politics by global superpowers. We steadfastly recognize the sovereignty of Ukraine as an independent nation, including especially the importance of democratic self-determination for LGBTQI+ people in Ukraine.