If we just looked at the quantitative work on intervention and conflict duration (this was my dissertation), I would expect the conflict to be significantly longer in duration than the average conflict. I think that is correct, but it isn't very specific. If I tried to approach the question of timing with bargaining theory, negotiation starts when there is a burst of new information that clarifies the likely outcome for conflict participants. Right now, I think both sides are waiting for the US election in November. I would not expect to see anything before that (which means another brutal summer). If Ukraine gains some ground or if Russia faces internal turmoil and Biden wins re-election, I think there is a chance of serious talks in December about Russian withdrawal. Without that set of events, I suspect we are looking at a much longer timeline. This is a pretty rough attempt to provide some guidance on time. Another way to approach it would be to recognize that this is a war of attrition and to project trends. I don’t have a good sense of the burn rate of equipment and soldiers both sides are experiencing. Now that the US has passed the aid bill, I suspect both have the resources to fight for another 18 months if they wanted to, but that is speculation without having done the real work.
I enjoy listening to your opinion. My top three favorite videos are Guevara on Guerrilla, Key Factors in International Politics, and Radicalization, Profiles, Risk Factors, and Social Dynamics. While taking IRLS210 I read about former Ukraine President Leonid Kuchma and his success during the first year implementing monetary, trade, and fiscal reforms with help from the IMF, EU, USAID, and Philanthropist Mr. Soros. The top scenario in the example slide is very interesting, if that became Russia’s goal and if Ukraine were to lose all its territory, how likely is it for Ukraine’s military to consider the idea of obtaining and using a WMD on Russia? Ukraine’s conflict is sad and very complicated to predict. At the beginning, it looked as simple as calling heads or tails in a flipping coin contest; however, the coin is standing and spinning instead of landing on either side. How Ukraine Became a Market Economy and Democracy by Anders Åslund - Chapter Three
First off, thank you for the kind words. I'm glad folks find these useful or at the very least interesting. Ukraine pursuing WMD is an interesting question. It would clearly be a violation of the NPT but the NPT allows states to withdraw if needed to secure their national defense. Having had a powerful, nuclear armed neighbor strip territory from you twice in 10 years would probably qualify. Also, Ukraine has a nuclear industry that would give it a leg up in developing a bomb. I don't think this would be Ukraine's first preference....but if the conflict ends without EU, NATO security guarantees (probably including a tripwire force stationed on Ukraine's eastern border), there would be a strong incentive for Ukraine to develop an effective deterrent. I suspect that the US and the EU would strongly discourage this not because Ukraine wouldn't be justified in seeking WMD, but because of the destabilizing effect such weapons might have. The balance would strongly favor Russia in a nuclear exchange and Ukraine having a small arsenal would be an invitation for a preemptive nuclear strike by Russia...ugg...the whole thing is really messy.
"I'm going to take Trump at his word." - That's your mistake, prioritizing words over actions. Actions matter more than words. Trump has proven that in reality, in his actions, he's a better friend for Ukraine than Biden or Obama have been. Trump cancelled Nordstream 2; Biden tried to resurrect it when he came into office. Obama cancelled deals to sell missiles to Poland; Trump resurrected that deal. While President, Trump lambasting NATO countries for not living up to their commitments to spend a minimum % of GDP on their militaries caused NATO countries to increase military spending.
Big fan. Thanks for the video!
Kindly, make a video on strategy and strategic studies
yes pls
do you know any other youtube channel that talks about strategy and international affair
Very informative
Thanks Brian, god bless our soldiers 🇺🇦
Indeed. Not a day goes by they are not on my mind.
Thanks for the video!!
Do you have any time assumptions? How many rounds/months does it need to reach the agreement?
If we just looked at the quantitative work on intervention and conflict duration (this was my dissertation), I would expect the conflict to be significantly longer in duration than the average conflict. I think that is correct, but it isn't very specific.
If I tried to approach the question of timing with bargaining theory, negotiation starts when there is a burst of new information that clarifies the likely outcome for conflict participants. Right now, I think both sides are waiting for the US election in November. I would not expect to see anything before that (which means another brutal summer). If Ukraine gains some ground or if Russia faces internal turmoil and Biden wins re-election, I think there is a chance of serious talks in December about Russian withdrawal. Without that set of events, I suspect we are looking at a much longer timeline.
This is a pretty rough attempt to provide some guidance on time. Another way to approach it would be to recognize that this is a war of attrition and to project trends. I don’t have a good sense of the burn rate of equipment and soldiers both sides are experiencing. Now that the US has passed the aid bill, I suspect both have the resources to fight for another 18 months if they wanted to, but that is speculation without having done the real work.
@@BrianUrlacherPoliSci Thank you for the detailed reply!
I enjoy listening to your opinion. My top three favorite videos are Guevara on Guerrilla, Key Factors in International Politics, and Radicalization, Profiles, Risk Factors, and Social Dynamics. While taking IRLS210 I read about former Ukraine President Leonid Kuchma and his success during the first year implementing monetary, trade, and fiscal reforms with help from the IMF, EU, USAID, and Philanthropist Mr. Soros. The top scenario in the example slide is very interesting, if that became Russia’s goal and if Ukraine were to lose all its territory, how likely is it for Ukraine’s military to consider the idea of obtaining and using a WMD on Russia? Ukraine’s conflict is sad and very complicated to predict. At the beginning, it looked as simple as calling heads or tails in a flipping coin contest; however, the coin is standing and spinning instead of landing on either side.
How Ukraine Became a Market Economy and Democracy by Anders Åslund - Chapter Three
First off, thank you for the kind words. I'm glad folks find these useful or at the very least interesting.
Ukraine pursuing WMD is an interesting question. It would clearly be a violation of the NPT but the NPT allows states to withdraw if needed to secure their national defense. Having had a powerful, nuclear armed neighbor strip territory from you twice in 10 years would probably qualify. Also, Ukraine has a nuclear industry that would give it a leg up in developing a bomb.
I don't think this would be Ukraine's first preference....but if the conflict ends without EU, NATO security guarantees (probably including a tripwire force stationed on Ukraine's eastern border), there would be a strong incentive for Ukraine to develop an effective deterrent.
I suspect that the US and the EU would strongly discourage this not because Ukraine wouldn't be justified in seeking WMD, but because of the destabilizing effect such weapons might have. The balance would strongly favor Russia in a nuclear exchange and Ukraine having a small arsenal would be an invitation for a preemptive nuclear strike by Russia...ugg...the whole thing is really messy.
@@BrianUrlacherPoliSci Thank you for the kind reply.
Sir it is a kind request to make videos on The Art Of War, Clausewitz
So I have not actually read, the Art of War by Sun Tzu or On War by Clausewitz. Maybe something to add to my summer reading list?
@@BrianUrlacherPoliScisir you may add the politics of Middle east and US foreign policy.
"I'm going to take Trump at his word." - That's your mistake, prioritizing words over actions. Actions matter more than words. Trump has proven that in reality, in his actions, he's a better friend for Ukraine than Biden or Obama have been. Trump cancelled Nordstream 2; Biden tried to resurrect it when he came into office. Obama cancelled deals to sell missiles to Poland; Trump resurrected that deal. While President, Trump lambasting NATO countries for not living up to their commitments to spend a minimum % of GDP on their militaries caused NATO countries to increase military spending.
You may be misreading my midwestern tone.