@42irrationalist Yeah the "actually leaves the city" is in the description. if he's leaving troops behind or as it's reported in this article Russia's Wagner army starts handing Bakhmut over to regular troops | Reuters

that wagner's are still in the city, i think this has to be a no actually.
Edit: I think the phrase "actually leaves the city" makes it clear that they have to physically depart. Otherwise, it could have been understood that handing over their positions to the army was enough. Repositioning to another part still in the city is regrouping. I can't unsee the "actually leaves the city" part.

@johnleoks it would be great if you could provide clarity on how you'll determine the threshold for leaving?

I can see absolutist perspectives of '0' Wagner people allowed but it also seems, given that is a war, etc, that a reduction of like 90% would also count as 'leaving the city' since I suspect there's a ton of collaboration and mixed responsibles.

@42irrationalist This is fairly obvious is it not? If they are leaving forces in Bakhmut then they haven't left the city. How can anyone argue otherwise?

@johnleoks I think this is a sensible way to resolve the market, but I also don't think it's obvious. If they pull out 90% of forces and 10% are still there in a transitionary role, some people might think of that as a withdrawal, some not. (And btw my position on this market would benefit from you resolving the way you said, but I just am pointing out that it's by no means obvious.)

Just to give a different example, if we look at a question like "Will the US withdraw from Iraq in 2021?" - there are still US forces there, even though they don't have an official combat mission, so is that a withdrawal or not? Kind of unclear.

In July 2021, President Joe Biden announced that he would end the U.S. combat mission in Iraq by the end of 2021, with remaining U.S. troops serving in an advisory and assistance role.[7] The U.S. combat mission formally concluded on 9 December 2021, with 2,500 U.S. troops remaining in the country.[1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_of_United_States_troops_from_Iraq_(2020%E2%80%932021)

@johnleoks

If they only left 5% of their forces then they have largely left the city, no? What if it's 1% or 0.1%? I'm not splitting hairs trying to argue some technicality, "some forces left" is a likely scenario now.

> How can anyone argue otherwise?

Prigozhin might. Watch the guy.

@jack If there was only one condition that they withdraw, then it would have been possible to have a more loose interpretation. However, the second condition of "actually leave the city" is clear and specific in what needs to be accomplished for the yes resolution.

There's still 6 days left. It could all change.

@higherLEVELING The condition is "[Wagner group] actually leave the city" and the problem is that the group isn't all in one place. Some of them may stay while some of them leave.

One reasonable interpretation is "All of Wagner group actually leave the city", but it's not explicitly stated and other interpretations are possible.

@jack I don't have time right now to look at things properly but another interpretation of "actually leave the city" is just that it's not enough for Prigozhin to say they're withdrawing, they also have to do it.

@jack But the Wagner group is in one place. The Wagner group is located in Bakhmut. They may be dispersed throughout the city, but they are present in the city. The question on June 1st is: do they remain in Bakhmut?

I think the default interpretation of "Wagner group actually leaves the city" as "the entire Wagner group departs from the city" and not as "a portion of Wagner group exits the city". I think if it was intended to be "some of", the default when referring to a group, is to assume it as meaning the whole group.

@higherLEVELING I don't agree that's the default interpretation - see my example above about US withdrawal from Iraq. The default interpretation there appears to be that the US did withdraw, even though some forces remained.

@NamesAreHard I agree it's about whether they actually leave. The tricky question is about whether a partial withdrawal counts

@jack I think the example you're giving is missing the other part to this though. If the only condition was that Wagner withdraws, then I think comparing the US withdrawal from Iraq, with troops being left behind counting as a withdrawal, could apply here, and would resolve no. but the second condition needs to be added. If you add that the US have to actually leave Iraq. I don't see how you could resolve that as no if there were troops still in iraq. It would have to resolve as yes

@jack My point is that under that interpretation, the "actually leave the city" part has been included only in order to clarify this and adds no further semantic information about whether a partial withdrawal counts (as opposed to @higherLEVELING's interpretation where the existence of that part is important). My default interpretation on the partial withdrawal question is that it should count if most of them leave and the line is drawn somewhere over 75% for what "most" would be.

@NamesAreHard might it not be the case that there is an epistemological element to this? If Wagner performs a total withdrawal, it's quite probable that on June 1 there will still be a few mercenaries there whose truck broke down, or who are still performing some sort of handover task, or who are just straggling because discipline is poor. That might cause this question to resolve NO according to a 'hardline' interpretation, but in reality it is incredibly unlikely that we would know they were there.

If we, outside of the situation, have knowledge that Wagner mercenaries are still in Bakhmut it seems to suggest that it's situationally or militarily relevant that they are still there, which in turn suggests a NO resolution on the grounds that an announced withdrawal didn't represent the facts on the ground.

@NamesAreHard I agree, we were making the same point.

@ShadowyZephyr I bet on this thinking that if they have substantially reduced their footprint or are substantially in the process of withdrawing their presence. I hope that's how it's interpreted.

@higherLEVELING Sorry, I didn't see this comment, this is essentially what I was asking. Is it about averaging the start and end dates, the official end date, the date when most troops have left, or what?

@TorBarstad "between May 25 and June 1"

@ShadowyZephyr Yup. I thought the URL might be embedded, so that this would be visible without clicking the link.

@TorBarstad

So, that’s still 6/7 days in May

Another part of the ISW update states:

Wagner forces are unlikely to successfully conduct a controlled withdrawal from Bakhmut while in contact with Ukrainian forces within five days without disrupting the Russian MoD’s efforts to prepare for planned Ukrainian counteroffensives. Wagner forces are unlikely to establish adequate defenses or consolidate recent gains in Bakhmut sufficient to forestall Ukrainian counterattacks by May 25 even if Prigozhin’s announcement of Wagner’s withdrawal is true. Ukrainian forces are still in Khromove and Ivanivske and are engaging Russian forces in and near Bakhmut. Ukrainian artillery can still target Russian forces in and around Bakhmut. Withdrawal in contact with the enemy is an exceedingly difficult task that the Wagner Group’s forces are unlikely to perform well within Prigozhin’s five-day time frame.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-20-2023

Institute for the Study of War

Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin declared victory in Bakhmut City on May 20 and announced his intent to withdraw from the city on May 25. Prigozhin claimed that Wagner Group forces completely captured Bakhmut City on May 20, seizing the last

@AlexbGoode Only if the handover means that they will no longer be in Bakhmut.