Game of chicken

Game theory in action

In the mid-20th century, game theory gained significant traction. This field developed numerous theories and practical frameworks aimed at describing and, ideally, predicting the behavior of actors, particularly in international relations.

Many are familiar with the "prisoner’s dilemma," where rational, self-interested choices lead to unfavorable outcomes. Equally well-known is the "game of chicken," often used to describe the Cuban Missile Crisis. The game metaphorically represents a contest to see which of two drivers speeding toward each other will veer off first.

It is widely believed that during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Khrushchev was the first to "swerve." For Putin, this historical moment appears to have become a personal fixation. He seeks to "replay" not only the Cold War and the collapse of the USSR but also the Cuban Missile Crisis and the détente. The "gray bureaucrat" sees himself as superior to the Soviet-era party elite and is determined to show he would never flinch.

How dangerous could this prove to be?

Bully's stick

Nuclear blackmail has always been a tool in Russia's arsenal of aggression. In 2022, as the Ukrainian Armed Forces pushed Russian troops back from Kyiv, Chernihiv, Sumy, and Kharkiv, advancing in Kharkiv and Kherson regions, the Kremlin began rattling its nuclear saber so convincingly that then-British Prime Minister Liz Truss (according to British media) reportedly worried about the trajectories of radioactive fallout.

However, the firm stance of nuclear powers prevailed. Not just the U.S., France, and the U.K., which experts believe warned of devastating conventional retaliation, but also China and India, which outlined the prospect of Russia’s total isolation and agreed to include the inadmissibility of nuclear weapons use or threats thereof in G20 summit documents.

For two years, the intensity of nuclear blackmail significantly waned. Analysts even speculated about a "boiling frog" scenario: Russia becoming so weakened that, should Putin decide to use nuclear weapons, the system would be unable to execute the order—either due to technological limitations or human factors, as seen during the collapse of the USSR.

However, the intensity of sanctions proved insufficient to bring Russia to this level of degradation by 2024.

Nonetheless, the Russian leadership, having imposed a "long war" on the world, found itself trapped in a scenario that seems straight out of game theory textbooks.

Colossus with feet of clay

Russia's economy is working "for war" more intensively than the more powerful and stable Soviet economy. Losses of up to a thousand contract soldiers a day put immense pressure on the fear-based system driving them into "meat assaults." Time is not working against Russia - it will simply run out for Russia. Therefore, its strategy is total exhaustion and despair for Ukraine and its allies. The "bulldozer tactic" is in motion, slowly advancing.

Russia is not interested in a ceasefire in the style of Korea or Finland, where the West agrees to the occupation of currently occupied Ukraine but prevents the conquest of the rest. As Putin openly stated at Valdai, he did not come for Donbas, Crimea, and a land corridor. He is resurrecting an empire. A "frozen conflict" with effective guarantees of aid to Ukraine would mean the end of these dreams, just as the Minsk agreements halted the 2014-2015 blitzkrieg.

Thus, neither Trump nor even Xi currently have arguments that would outweigh for Putin the loss of the purpose of his existence.

So the question should not be "how to stop the war," but "how to stop Russia."

Coward’s bulldozer 

To stop the bulldozer, its mechanism must be worn down and deprived of fuel and motor oil. This means new opportunities for Ukraine on the battlefield and tougher sanctions against the Russian economy.

The Kremlin understands this. That’s why they nervously react to any signs of increased Western support for Ukraine. That’s why the nuclear threat is back on the table. They’ve rewritten their nuclear doctrine. They are threatening with wunderballistics (somewhere towards parts of Ukraine not covered by Western air defense — because those systems were designed, in part, to fight large missiles).

In game theory terms, Putin has gotten behind the wheel of the "chicken mobile" and swerved into the oncoming lane. Where will this lead?

So far, Western governments are operating within the paradigm of avoiding nuclear escalation. Therefore, the arguments that at least three times a lack of resources prevented Ukraine from achieving decisive advantage, if not victory - are not without merit.

Read also: Moscow targets Western minds with Rubezh missile

The risk of escalation is assessed by people who still operate within the logic of the Cold War era. Therefore, the West is restrained by self-imposed limitations, stemming from a reluctance to be drawn into the conflict and transitioning from "supporting Ukraine" (by providing what can be given) to "defeating Russia" (with corresponding ambitious goals and significantly higher demands on the economy, military-industrial complex, and defense and security sectors).

As a result, Russia and its authoritarian allies are one step ahead in escalating the conflict compared to the West. Moreover, one of the fields of conflict is Russia's attack on Western societies, their morals, and values through the support of populist movements, which have become the "ugly crocodile" of the modern political landscape. These movements significantly degrade the quality of governance and politics where they succeed and divert forces and resources in places where they are still vying for power.

In the analogy from game theory, Putin is pressing the gas pedal, while his counterparts are trying to avoid a collision. Putin's KGB training taught him to exploit the "weaknesses of democratic systems," and he is doing just that.

Russia is attempting to corner Western countries into a zugzwang, a choice between "bad" and "worse." They are trying to tie aid to Ukraine and pressure on Russia to the supposedly "increased danger for Western countries." They are spreading a thought virus about "peace" at the cost of conceding Ukraine to Russia’s "sphere of influence." However, this path creates even greater global threats and makes escalation inevitable.

The threat of using nuclear weapons is rightfully considered a separate category of unacceptable actions. If nuclear blackmail becomes the norm, the rational course for any country capable of acquiring nuclear weapons would be to do so.

This, in turn, raises the risk of using this weapon, its use by terrorists, various accidents, sources, and similar threats. It also nullifies the political weight of alliances and the reputation of Western countries, and the "civilized approach" that is based on the "renunciation of the use of force or the threat of such use." The world is returning to the chaos of the "law of the strong," and in the future, Western countries will have to fight - whether in a full-scale or hybrid manner - simply for their existence, place, and role in the world.

Read also: How Ukraine's Kursk operation shattered Russia's hopes to freeze war

There is a serious issue with these conclusions, even though they are quite logical. The conclusion drawn from them is the need for a significant change in the behavior, priorities, and policies of Western countries. It requires stepping out of the comfort zone, reviving defense-industrial complexes, and increasing defense spending within GDP and the budget.

The motivation for such changes may lie in the situation in Ukraine. When the Russian-imposed feeling of Russia's "invulnerability" and the "hopelessness" of resistance gives way to an understanding of victory as the stopping of the aggressor. The "bulldozer" of Russian aggression may not be diverted—but it can be stopped.

This creates quite specific conclusions and tasks for Ukraine.

Unity as necessity for survival

In 2021-2022, the prevailing expectation around the world was the collapse and disappearance of Ukraine. The Ukrainian Armed Forces and society surprised the world. This surprise was enough to garner systemic support.

However, it was not enough to stop the bulldozer. As a result, fatigue is accumulating, and overcoming it requires a "new miracle."

And now, the "miracle" must be performed by the Ukrainian political class.

By coming together, uniting, and responding to the country's threats. Breaking the chain of "inevitability" that Russia is tightening, fostering a sense of "futility."

The state of affairs in Ukraine demonstrates that the methods familiar to the current government no longer work. The decision-making and implementation system has exhausted itself and fails to provide adequate responses to the challenges at hand.

A government of national unity is not about satisfying politicians' ambitions. It is a tool for coordinating actions and optimizing the use of the resources available to society. Ukraine can no longer operate under the principle of "the pianist plays as he can." The capacity to "win despite the odds" has been exhausted—because the enemy has superior resources, while allies require additional motivation to provide further support.

Thus, Ukraine can win only by achieving unity not at the level of slogans and chants of a TV "marathon," but through the identification of optimal political and managerial decisions and directing resources towards their implementation.

This is the only path to a scenario where Putin and his accomplices face a "prisoner's dilemma" in The Hague, betraying one another. Other scenarios are grim for the world and mortally dangerous for Ukraine.

Source

About the Author. Rostyslav Pavlenko, Ukrainian politician, political scientist, political strategist, and lecturer. Member of Parliament of Ukraine in the IX convocation.

The editorial board does not always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.