https://dgap.org/en/research/publications/preventing-next-war
With its imperial ambitions, Russia represents the greatest and most urgent threat to NATO countries. Once intensive fighting will have ended in Ukraine, the regime in Moscow may need as little as six to ten years to reconstitute its armed forces. Within that timeframe, Germany and NATO must enable their armed forces to deter and, if necessary, fight against Russia. Only then will they be in a position to reduce the risk of another war breaking out in Europe.
A few clarifications, from the comments below:
Europe:
Europe = the 27 EU countries + Norway, UK, Switzerland + The Balkans + Moldova (this is still open for discussion)
Not Europe = Belarus, a Russian ally - Transnistria, a Russian ally
Ukraine = is excluded, because it already is under Russian attack
Attack (also: offensive):
An aggressive projection of armed forces to occupy or recapture territory, gain an objective or achieve some larger strategic, operational, or tactical goal. Offensives can be waged on land, at sea, in the air or as part of a combined arms manoeuvre.
(So this has to have some critical mass. Not just a temporary, limited skirmish.)
What to do with "never":
It feels right to include "never" as a separate possibility. Russia may never attack, either because it's not their intention, it is above their capabilities, or there is sufficient deterrence. Resolution: When 2034 comes with no Russian attack, then both "2034 or later" and "never" will be accepted as correct. But it might be even more subtle:
Russia has not attacked, but looks strong and aggressive - then I would recognize both "after" and "never" because you cannot tell the difference yet
Russia has not attacked but looks weak and unwilling (for example: Chechnya has split off, Belarus has become friends with NATO, civil war etc.) - then I might recognize "never" only
1,000People are also trading
Second early resolution alert!
I'm closing my long time prediction questions, because I don't believe in the usefulness of those long time predictions anymore. A poll would be more useful for those.
So I want to close this question prematurely. It's based on my previous analysis, but als these RAND predictions:
Polymarket:
Polymarket | NATO article 5 before March?
This is my resolution proposal, maximizing the chances of invasion:
Other predictions on Manifold:
Will Russia launch a military attack against Poland by the end of 2039?
18 18%
Will Russia attack Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia or Estonia) by 2030?
28 11%
Will Russia launch a full scale military attack against Poland by the end of 2029?
13 10%
Will Russia launch an invasion against at least one of the Baltic states by February 2029?
33 20%
Will Russia launch a military invasion of a NATO country by 2033?
46 14%
Will Russia launch a military invasion of Kazakhstan by 2033?
8 16%
If I hear no protest or better proposals this week (ending the 19th March) I intend to resolve this like this. It is based on the general feeling of the relevant Manifold markets:
Otherwise I will resolve N/A.
My reason, see previous posts. I have more experience on Manifold now and I'm not willing anymore to make very long bets.
From Manifold:
Will Russia launch an armed attack against a NATO member by the end of August 2024? = 3%
Will Russia attack a NATO country this year? = 4%
Will Russia launch a military attack against a NATO member by the end of 2024? = 5%
Will any NATO country engage in military conflict with Russia in 2024? = 10%
Will Transnistria be annexed by Russia until EOY 2025? = 15%
Will Russia invade a NATO country before 2026? = 5%
Will Russia militarily seize Narva, Estonia before 2030? = 4%
Will Russia attack Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia or Estonia) by 2030? = 16%
Will Russia launch a military invasion of a NATO country by 2033? = 16%
I've been thinking about this question an I think it's way too far out into the future. It's impossible to predict and will be a hassle to resolve. Who knows, I may be off Manifold by that time. Manifold may have stopped ( I hope not). I have more prediction experience now and would make this an entirely different question.
Should I go for N/A?
Or resolve by current percentage?
Or something else?
@uair01 you don't have to resolve, because if you stop using manifold by then, then mods will resolve this.
Market is not about resolution, it is about tracking how percentages move.
Just a random opinion:
Vladimir Putin is waging war against Ukraine and he will next attack Europe, says Andrei Illarionov, formerly a Senior Policy Adviser during Putin's early period as President. Illarionov recollects how it was to work with Putin and explains what the West must do, now, if it wishes for peace in the West.
‘I Worked With Putin: Here’s What You Don’t Know About Him’ - YouTube
@a2bb The article says: The window for a possible Russian attack will open as soon as Russia believes that an attack, for instance on the Baltic states, could meet with success.
I think the Wikipedia text can work:
An offensive is a military operation that seeks through *** an aggressive projection of armed forces *** to occupy or recapture territory, gain an objective or achieve some larger strategic, operational, or tactical goal. Offensives can be waged on land, at sea, in the air or as part of a combined arms manoeuvre.
@loftarasa I'm open for suggestions. My dilemma: if we want to make predictions that are relevant for policy makers, then they will be long term sometimes. But then resolution is also a long term thing. And the long wait is not fun and not practical.
BTW: If Russia attacks next year there will be a YES resolution for "before end of 2029".
@Daniel_MC Yes you are right! I'll see if I can correct that. But I fear there's no Edit button for that.
@uair01 Another point, what is Europe for the purposes of the question? (Since Ukraine is part of Europe, I would argue it has already happened). Do you mean EU? Or NATO part of Europe? Something else?
@Irigi I proposed to define Europe as:
The 27 EU countries +
Norway, UK, Switzerland +
The Balkans +
Moldova (this is open for discussion)
Excluded are:
Ukraine, is under Russian attack
Belarus, is Russian ally
@uair01 Also, the closing date is end of 2033. How will you decide between never and 2034 or later at that time?
@theshortbread I see your point. But it does not feel right not to include never. If predictions should be useful for decision makers then the possibility of Russia never attacking, because it's not their intention, should be included.
@uair01 Proposal:
When 2034 comes with no Russian attack, then both "2034 or later" and "never" will be accepted as correct.
@loftarasa I see, you would then resolve N/A. I see your point, but personally I think there are two possibilities at the closing date of the bet:
Russia has not attacked, but looks strong and aggressive - then I would recognize both "after" and "never" because you cannot tell the difference yet
Russia has not attacked but looks weak and unwilling (for example: Chechnya has split off, Belarus has become friends with NATO, civil war etc.) - then I might recognize "never" only