The shape of things to come: A further dialogue

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientific

Abstract

Here we continue our debate about how the war in Ukraine might come to an end. Our differences indicate how background assumptions, anticipations of possible and likely futures, and normative assessments of the present actions are intertwined. Apart from warning about the escalatory potential, HP stresses the immense human and socio-economic costs of the war. He proposes that negotiations for a peace deal could revolve around concepts such as a 'demilitarised zone’ and an 'UN-managed territory’. TF expects a protracted war going on for several years because the conditions for a just peace are absent. At this point, our dialogue turns towards uncovering and criticising some of each other’s background assumptions and discussing the available evidence about who can be trusted. Here we see a possible role for third-party facilitators and mediators. Brazil, China, India, or Turkey may be decisive in terms of mediating the conflict and facilitating an agreement.
Original languageEnglish
JournalGlobalizations
Volume20
Issue number7
Pages (from-to)1241-1255
Number of pages15
ISSN1474-7731
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 29 Jun 2023
MoE publication typeB1 Journal article

Fields of Science

  • Commitment
  • Escalation
  • Hermeneutics
  • Logic of war
  • Nuclear war
  • Peace agreement
  • 5171 Political Science

Cite this