Trying to predict the longer-term outcome of the conflict using 2030 as a cut off date sufficiently in the future hopefully.
There is a good chance that Russia and Ukraine disagree about the border. For example, Ukraine has not accepted the Crimea annexion in 2014. Instead defacto control is sufficient for resolution but it requires 6 months of cease-fire (if not peace).
The current goal of Ukraine is Pre-2014 border, i.e. Crimea is part of Ukraine again. The current goal of Russia is that Ukraine gives more territory to Russia than Crimea, e.g. Luhansk and Donetsk.
More fineprint from comment discussion:
If Ukraine controls only a minor part of Crimea, I'd still resolve as "Pre-2022".
If Ukraine-controlled landmass is roughly the same as "Pre-2022" then I would resolve it as such, even if the landmass is not all Crimea.
If Crimea becomes an independent state, it will hopefully clearly pick a side and we can resolve it as part of Russia or Ukraine
Related questions
My prediction is that Manifold users will underestimate the odds of Russia holding more territory in Eastern Ukraine.
This is because West cares more about things surrounding Eastern Ukraine, such as public opinion and information warfare, successfully driving Russia out of Kyiv and central Ukraine, and other factors, than territory control in Eastern Ukraine. This limits the usefulness of Eastern Ukraine as a Schelling point for countries around the world to assess how Western power has changed over the decades as corruption and stagnation sets in governments everywhere (for example, economic strength and stability are well-known to be great indicators of how US-China affairs are going, much better than other factors like naval presence).
“'Those discussions [about peace talks] are starting... '
Such a negotiation would likely mean giving up parts of Ukraine to Russia...
... aimed at shoring up Ukraine’s position in any future negotiation.
In Politico, December 27 [https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/27/biden-endgame-ukraine-00133211]
Some arguments for "No cease-fire"?
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-ramping-up-war-production/32658857.html
I made a market that uses the new unlinked multiple choice markets to get a more granular view of the possible borders: https://manifold.markets/Shump/after-the-war-in-ukraine-ends-which
Also, my policy is to never bet on long-term markets, but this market (not the linked one) is terribly wrongly priced. I really hope it's as positive as this market shows, but I think bettors are high on copium.
@Daniel_MC no cease fire doesn't mean both sides still have fully operational armies, it can turn into guerilla warfare too
@Daniel_MC it's in America's interest for Ukraine to win and not to just see Ukraine crumble and Russia knocking on Europe's door.
@SebastianLatting Unless the US is pivoting to Asia and starts caring less about Europe. But it’s hard to estimate the timescale for that
What is clear is that the war in Ukraine is no longer a confrontation between two countries, Russia is trying to break the post-World War II order, so Russia is against the whole freedom world, whether it is the economic strength of the country, or the military strength, Russia can not compete with the freedom world，So the war went on and Russia only recognized ‘’Pre-2014: Crimea controlled by Ukraine‘’，Finally had no choice but to withdraw.But Russia is a sovereign state,so it will keep the all the current territory.
>Russia can not compete with the freedom world
This is if the free world would go all in into war economics, which will most likely not happen..
Amazed by how many people say the war won't have a 6 month cease fire by 2030 so have made my own market for when the invasion will end:
https://manifold.markets/Daniel_MC/when-will-the-russian-invasion-of-u?r=RGFuaWVsX01D
Unlikely but possible options not included: 1) a new sovereign state forms that is controlled by neither country 2) some other power controls a significant portion of territory.
Crimea has been an independent state before (1441-1783).
@mariopasquato If Crimea becomes an independent state we will probably be able to determine which side it is on. I would consider Belarus like Russia and Rumania like Ukraine. Crimea under Turkish control would be tricky though.
Does that sound like a clearer resolution criterium?
@marktweise Yeah thanks. Note btw that when the Khanate of Crimea existed it was precisely a client state of the Ottoman Empire, so Turkey.
@ErikCorry What would happen to the Russian base in sevastopol in this scenario? Arguably that was part of the reason for the 2014 invasion, I doubt they would just let it go.
@mariopasquato In a world where Russia can't hold Crimea militarily, how are they going to hold the naval base?
@mariopasquato The only reason for 2014 invasion was one crazy president. Once he will gone no one will give a damn about such a questions.
@JoshuaWilkes I am arguing that they will try to make sure they can hold Crimea, possibly prioritizing it over other regions. Of course if they are wiped out completely then they will also lose the base.
@mariopasquato I think the logisitics of holding Crimea will be more decisive than their desire to hold Crimea.
In the long run they will have to expand Novorossiysk as a replacement for Sevastopol. Sucks to be Russia with the leader they have. They could probably have kept Crimea and Sevastopol if they hadn't launched the full scale war in 2022.
@ErikCorry Supplying water to Crimean agriculture is another issue, I wonder if there is a market on that?