This article is brought to you by American Purpose, the magazine and community founded by Francis Fukuyama in 2020, which is proudly part of the Persuasion family.
The war in Ukraine is spreading and, like quicksand, dragging in more and more countries. When the first missile fell on Poland in 2022, the world held its breath, waiting to see if NATO’s Article 5 would be triggered. Now, ships attacking off Romania and Bulgaria for two weeks straight, armed men crossing into Latvia from Belarus, and drones galore along the eastern border, generally do not even elicit a murmur. The more we try to contain this war, the further it spreads.
We got here in large part because Russia has worked out that Europe will keep playing by the rules, whatever Russia does. Its modus operandi is fairly simple: It uses the protections offered by the civilized Europe it detests so much, such as courts. Several Russian oligarchs have successfully argued their cases against sanctions in European courts. Russian money frozen in Europe is not being used to help Ukraine win for fear of (wait for it) Russia taking European countries to court! We have a rogue state attempting to massacre an entire nation on European soil, having broken the UN Charter and every rule of war, and we are worried about being sued. Russia discards its obligations but hangs on to those protections.
Comparisons with the eve of the Second World War are common. As the historian Timothy Snyder put it, we are now in 1938, but Czechoslovakia has decided to fight. So how do we make sure September 1, 1939 does not happen again?
Persuasion is a registered nonprofit that relies on reader support to pay our staff and keep our content free for everyone. If you value our work and want to fight for liberal values wherever they are threatened, please become a paying subscriber today!
The answer lies in the prisoner’s dilemma, the best-known model in game theory. And no, this is not just another rallying cry against appeasement. It is about strategy, and about the fact that Europe is ignoring its most basic principles.
What Is The Prisoner’s Dilemma?
In 1950, as the Cold War set in and both superpowers acquired nuclear weapons, mathematicians at the RAND Corporation devised a simple game to explore how two rivals with opposing goals and values could avoid destroying each other: the prisoner’s dilemma. Two accomplices, held in separate cells, can either cover for each other or rat each other out to the police. If both stay silent, both get a light sentence. If both betray each other, both get a severe one. But if one betrays the other while the other covers for him, the traitor walks free and the one who did not break faith bears the full punishment. Each is tempted to betray the other, yet if both do that, they both lose.
In 1980, the political scientist Robert Axelrod set out to discover what happens when this game is played not once, but over and over. He had computer programs play it against each other, 200 rounds at a time. In each round, a player could “cooperate” or “defect.”
The results were very simple. A player who always cooperates, facing an opponent who always defects, loses every round. The most successful strategy turned out to be never defecting first but instead answering every defection in kind. That shows defecting does not pay, and gives the opponent every reason to return to cooperation.
Let’s apply this to our world. In order for the 200-odd countries in the world to coexist without a common sovereign who could punish them, they have to follow rules that come down to two main principles: do not kill and do not steal. Each keeps to them on the understanding that everybody else will do the same. When one country does not abide by the rules that constrain the others, it gains an unfair advantage. That is exactly what Russia has been doing: disregarding the rules while counting on Europe to keep its promises, follow its procedures, and protect Russian rights, whatever Russia does.
For Europe, defecting would mean refusing to be a “sucker” who keeps granting Russia the protections of rules it has abandoned.
We Really Should Know Better
Consider the remilitarization of the Rhineland in 1936, the annexation of Austria in 1938, and the takeover of the Sudetenland and then the rest of Czechoslovakia. On every single occasion, Germany’s actions amounted to defection from agreements and customary international law. And in every single one of those cases, Britain, France, and the League of Nations played nice—or, in game terms, cooperated. This did not stop Germany; it only made it stronger.
Another great example of the prisoner’s dilemma in play is the Cold War. For almost half a century, global stability rested on the understanding that any attack would be answered in kind.
When the Cuban missile crisis struck in 1962, both sides escalated, Moscow first and Washington in response, until they realized that they would both lose. When one side returned to cooperation, the other did the same.
The starkest contrast is Finland and the Baltic states. In World War II, Russia did not annex Finland as it annexed the Baltic states. What made the difference was that when Russia sent its troops into Finland, the Finns fought back. As a result, Finland kept its independence (albeit limited) because it answered defection with defection, refusing to accept occupation, whereas the Baltics ended up in the prison of nations for 50-odd years, because they cooperated against defection.
If we look back at Russia’s actions and Europe’s responses, a certain pattern emerges.
Europe: Sucker
The first real post-Cold War example of defection by Russia was the 2008 invasion of Georgia. By and large, the international community cooperated: Russia did not lose anything as a result of this breach of rules. Indeed, in March 2009, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov with a large red button as a symbol of the Obama administration’s “reset” in relations with Russia.
Then came 2014: the annexation of Crimea, soldiers in eastern Ukraine, and the downing of MH17. Russia defected, and the West… imposed limited sanctions, agreed to build Nord Stream 2, forced Ukraine into two Minsk agreements, and wined and dined Putin while telling the President of Ukraine to just go away and comply with the rules. You could say the West cooperated with extreme prejudice.
After that, in 2022, came the full-scale invasion, and with it the destruction of Mariupol and Bucha, including the killing of tens of thousands of civilians, countless apartment buildings folding under a barrage of bombs, and civilians buried under the rubble or burning alive. Prisoners of war were tortured to death and bodies returned with vital organs missing. All illegal and outside any set of rules. Yet the West (back then this still included the United States) insisted that its response stay within the rules—and even well short of what the rules allowed—so as not to anger Russia. Russia kept defecting, and Europe and the United States kept cooperating.
Every single time, Russia defects. It has not cooperated even once. Whereas Europe has cooperated almost without fail, just as Moscow expects it to do.
We’re expanding our events offerings! Please check out our events page to join Book Club, Ask the Author, and Intellectual Bootcamp—and to watch recordings of recent events.
Holding oneself to a high standard in a cooperative environment is one thing. Doing it in a situation where it only feeds the crocodile that will eat you anyway is really stupid. Chickening out only makes you the victim, especially if the other side is rattling the nuclear saber.
It Wasn’t Us
Just recently, Mikhail Zvinchuk, founder of the Russian propaganda outlet Rybar—identified by British and American authorities as a key player in Russian hybrid operations—was detained in Montenegro, a NATO country. Instead of swapping him for one of the multitudes of hostages Russia is holding, Montenegro just expelled him.
Poland has initiated a process of creating a “pre-war state,” which, in the absence of a full state of war, will allow it to act faster to defend against threats. Russia has been waging war on Europe for years, while Europe has remained bound by the rules of peace, which restrict its ability to exercise self-defence. Measures that would be illegal in peacetime become legitimate once a country admits it is under attack. A “pre-war state” could show the rest of Europe a way to bridge that gap.
And while we are at it, Europe should stop telling Russia the truth. Russia cheats anyhow, yet Europe continues to keep its word, every single time. Europe should start saying one thing and doing another, exactly as Russia does. This way Russia will not be able to plan ahead, because it will not know what Europe will do. Only then can Europe get a different response.
According to the entire body of international law, what Russia has done to Ukraine and its people is illegal. You cannot hide behind the same international law to let Russia get away scot-free just because it has nuclear weapons. If Russia wants to avail itself of legal protections, it first has to obey the rules. This is not rocket science. Either Russia is violating international law and has to pay for it, or we should just admit there is no international law. And in that case, Russia cannot use it to demand the protection of its state assets. Russia’s frozen assets should be used to fund Ukraine’s—and therefore Europe’s—defence.
Ultimately, none of this is new. The prisoner’s dilemma has been researched ad nauseam by political scientists and think tanks alike, applied to most major conflicts, and taught to all international relations students. The conclusions are clear: the side always cooperating against the side always defecting loses. Always. Yet Europe is behaving as if it has got a dispensation from a higher power, and this time it will be different. It won’t. If Europe wants Russia to start cooperating, it will need to learn the art of defection.
Ines Burrell is a geopolitical analyst and political risk consultant based in the UK. Born in the Baltics, with a degree in International Relations from the University of Exeter, she writes and gives live commentary on European security and Russia.
Follow Persuasion on X, Instagram, LinkedIn, and YouTube to keep up with our latest articles, podcasts, and events, as well as updates from excellent writers across our network.
And, to receive pieces like this in your inbox and support our work, subscribe below: