English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Understanding why the Minsk process failed is essential both for explaining why Russia invaded in 2022 and for ensuring that a new peace settlement does not prove similarly ineffective. Many analyses point to the conflicting goals of the combatants as the basic obstacle to peace. However, rationalist approaches show that some peace agreement should always be preferable to war. The commitment problem represents an obstacle to peace in Ukraine that is distinct from the territorial questions at the center of the war. The failure of Minsk reflects the actors’ inability to credibly commit to fulfilling their promises. Third-party guarantees are essential to solving the conflict, but external guarantees have their own credibility problems. Therefore, further conflict was the only route to a settlement. Unless better solutions for the commitment problem can be found, a peace deal will rely either on one side being defeated or the two sides fighting to exhaustion.

Commitment problems and the failure of the Minsk process: the second-order commitment challenge