Using Game Theory to Predict Negotiations in the Russo-Ukrainian War
In class we discussed how game theory can be applied towards outcomes with prison sentencing by using the prisoner’s dilemma example. Depending on one prisoner’s answer, someone will get a longer or shorter sentence. We defined certain strategies as having the best response. The same reasoning can be applied in negotiations. One wants to figure out their opponents strategies and best responses in order to know how to react. In this article, game theory is applied to negotiations between the Russians and Ukrainians. The article mentions wins and losses in the eyes of each side. Both opponents have different definitions of success and failure in terms of war, and they both have different standards for what they are willing to lose.
The article describes that currently Russia and Ukraine are in a ‘zero sum scenario’. This means that a loss for one party is a win for the other. They also discuss what the payoff is for each party. Russia’s payoffs started out as a Moscow controlled Ukraine. Now they have shifted to just continued war by slowly weakening Ukraine or possibly breaking it up into territories. Using game theory the article determines that it is unlikely that Putin will ever admit that he has lost the war. They also deem it unlikely that Ukraine will accept any territorial gains to be seen as wins.
This article shows that using game theory can have real implications on negotiations. Modern day politicians use game theory in many situations, not just in terms of war. Laws can be passed using strategy and weighing the outcomes and payoffs of the opponent. Knowing how to guess the moves of your opponent based on game theory and strategy can have a wide variety of applications.