Thread by @olga_chyzh

Why Russia and Ukraine CANNOT reach a stable peaceful settlement. #PutinsWar will go on as long as the very last soldier is standing. The reason is that every point of negotiation is plagued with commitment problems. 1/n
#StopPutin #StandWithUkraine

I previously explained that the cause of this war is an information failure.

https://twitter.com/olga_chyzh/status/1502785540428644359?s=20&t=Kv7MDjQpdBb52ScOu89h4Q

The reason why a mutually respected peaceful settlement between Russia and Ukraine is NOT possible is what political scientists call a commitment problem.

A commitment problem arises when the agreed division of the pie alters the post-division distribution of power in favor of one party. This is the case when the points of negotiation themselves are a source of future power: e.g., strategic territory, weapons.

If the pre-settlement and post-settlement distributions of power do not match, then whoever is made stronger by the settlement cannot credibly commit to the settlement a posteriori. In the picture, the rise of A comes from the terms of the settlement.

That is, once the settlement is finalized, the side that came away stronger will now be in a position to demand an even bigger chunk of the pie. Understanding this prevents the side that will come away weaker from committing to the settlement in the first place.

E.g. Ukraine’s demand that Russia give back Crimea, if granted, would weaken Russia’s ability to attack Ukraine in future wars. Control over Crimea gives Russia an offensive advantage: it allows for bringing reinforcements/supplies from the South, in addition to the East & North.

For Russia, Crimea is also a major source of power in absolute terms (not just against Ukraine). It gives them access to warm water ports, which is key to maintaining their naval power—a sine-qua-non for their major power ambitions.

Russia’s demand to demilitarize Ukraine is equally a non-starter. Ukraine limiting its military would give Russia an edge in a future war. Absent credible security guarantees from NATO or others, demilitarization for Ukraine is equivalent to agreeing to give up its statehood.

Another Russian demand—that Ukraine give up its aspirations to joining NATO—is something Ukraine could agree, but cannot commit to. This concession is unenforceable, and Russia knows it. Even if Ukraine puts this in its constitution. Even if NATO puts it in their charter.

Charters and constitutions change. No matter what it promises today, there is absolutely nothing that can guarantee that Ukraine and NATO will not resume negotiations in the future. They could just wait for a time when Russia is too weak to react.

That Ukraine cannot credibly commit to NOT join NATO means that the only way Russia can ensure such a commitment is by force—by physically taking control of the Ukrainian government and preventing it from joining NATO. Hence, the current war.

The next Russian demand---“protections for the Russian speakers”---is also not something Ukraine can grant. Because we are NOT talking about simply respecting people's right to speak Russian here (that is already protected).

Benign at first glance, what “protections for the Russian speakers” actually entail is allowing pro-Russia political parties (Kremlin saboteurs) in Ukraine’s government and Russian-language TV channels (Kremlin propaganda)—both long-term Kremlin tools to destabilize Ukraine.

The final demand is the status of Donetsk and Lugansk oblasts--two of the poorest Ukrainian oblasts even before the 2014 Russian invasion.

Post-war rebuilding of these territories will cost a fortune. Installing any type of order after 8 years of lawlessness will require tremendous resources. Yet whichever country gains control of them in the end will still come away stronger.

These territories provide a buffer between Russia and the rest of Ukraine. Giving up these territories for Ukraine would increase the vulnerability of the next eastmost oblasts to future Russian aggression—next time Russian forces would get to start closer to Kyiv.

For Russia—who certainly has no plans of rebuilding Donetsk or Lugansk oblasts or absorbing them into Russia—having two unstable puppet-states along the Ukrainian border would be a major strategic win.

In summary, granting any of Russia’s demands would further weaken Ukraine (and strengthen Russia) in this already unequal fight—it would not stop the war, at least not for long.

However outnumbered and outgunned, today’s Ukrainian military is still in a stronger position than it would be, should Ukraine grant any of Russia’s demands.

Short of (currently unfeasible) 3rd-party involvement—e.g., NATO troops to deter future Russian invasions—Ukraine’s best shot to maintain sovereignty is to keep fighting until every last Russian is expelled. To do so, it needs offensive weapons that the West is slow to give.

Western sanctions will weaken Russia’s economy and military—but in months or years, not days or weeks. Despite sanctions, Russia can fund this war for quite some time. Putin will NOT stop until he physically runs out of soldiers—and he has a population of 140 mln to draw from.

And I know I didn't mention "de-nazification," but that is because it's not a real thing.