Peace in Ukraine Won’t Look Like You Think

In this episode of the “At the Boundary” podcast, host Jim Cardoso speaks with strategy expert Tad Schnaufer, PhD about the launch of his GNSI Research Initiative titled: “Path to Durable Peace in the Ukraine War.” The series will feature scholars and experts analyzing the question: What would a durable peace in the Ukraine war actually look like?

Drawing on firsthand experience in Eastern Europe and military service with the Florida Army National Guard, Schnaufer explains why ending the war between Ukraine and Russia will be far more complex than signing a ceasefire agreement. The discussion explores the realities on the battlefield, the failures of past negotiations like the Minsk agreements, and why true peace could require decades of costly deterrence, peacekeeping forces, and political commitment from Western allies.

Whether you follow international relations, military strategy, or current events, this episode provides essential context for understanding how the war could end — and what comes after.

Links From the Episode:

• JSS Call for Papers

• Tampa Summit 6 Registration 

• International Security Experience 

GNSI on X
GNSI on Linkedin
GNSI on YouTube

At the Boundary  from the Global and National Security Institute at the University of South Florida,  features global and national security issues we’ve found to be insightful, intriguing, fascinating, maybe controversial, but overall just worth talking about.

A "boundary" is a place, either literal or figurative, where two forces exist in close proximity to each other. Sometimes that boundary is in a state of harmony. More often than not, that boundary has a bit of chaos baked in. The Global and National Security Institute will live on the boundary of security policy and technology and that's where this podcast will focus.

The mission of GNSI is to provide actionable solutions to 21st-century security challenges for decision-makers at the local, state, national and global levels. We hope you enjoy At the Boundary.

Look for our other publications and products on our website publications page.

Transcript

SPEAKERS

Tad Schnaufer, Jim Cardoso

Jim Cardoso  00:12

Jim, hello everyone. Welcome to this week's episode of at the boundary, the podcast from the global and national security Institute at the University of South Florida. I'm Jim Cardoso, Senior Director for GNSI, and your host for at the boundary. On today's episode, we're excited to be kicking off our latest research initiative here at GNSI, the path to durable peace in the Ukraine war. Our guest today will be Dr Tad schnaufer, the architect of that research initiative, join us in just a couple of moments. Few things we want to remind you about. First, however, applications have closed for GNSI is last study abroad opportunity in the UK this summer, the International Security and Intelligence Program is a world renowned learning opportunity in Cambridge, UK every summer, and as part of our partnership with ISI, we'll be sending students there for four weeks this summer. We've had an incredible group of applicants. This year, we'll be announcing the students selected for ISI, as well as our DC experience. Over the next couple weeks, we're also putting out a call for papers to the world's leading deterrence experts on behalf of the Journal of strategic security, the GNSI academic journal, we're seeking submissions for an upcoming special issue on the evolving landscape of nuclear and conventional deterrence. There are many topics to write about deterrence in modern geopolitics, missile defense, emerging technologies, alliances, historical perspective and many more. Submission deadline is September 1, with a publication target date of December 1. You can find additional information on the JSs website that special issue will be an extension of genocide Tampa summit six, which is less than a month away, cracks in the lamp, freeing the nuclear Genie promises to be one of the more impactful summits. Yet, there are so many important questions surrounding this conference. Are we entering a new age of nuclear proliferation? Is the golden dome a dream or the next evolution of national security? How do modern nuclear energy technologies impact military strategy and operations? We got a lineup of speakers and discussion panels to answer all of those questions. You can register now for the conference, which takes place March 24 through the 25th here at USF, at our website. Okay, let's welcome our guest today, Dr Ted schnaufer, Ted's GNSI strategy and research manager and frequently on the interviewer side of the microphone for our what's really happening video series today, we'll switch him to the hot seat to kick off our newest GNSI Research Initiative, the path to durable peace in the Ukraine war. Tad has spent considerable time in Ukraine and Eastern Europe over his career, both as an academic and as an officer in the Florida National Guard Ted. Welcome to the at the boundary. Great to be talking with you today. Excited to be here. Jeff, excellent. I briefly touched on your interest in Russia and Ukraine. So tell the audience a little bit more about your experience in Ukraine.

Tad Schnaufer  03:14

Yeah, it goes. It dates back to December of 2014 so I was in New York City at the time, I got to New York, I think in actually, about a year prior to that, and watch a number of events unfold in Ukraine. Obviously, the Euromaidan protests of starting in December of 2013 into the spring of 2014 so we're seeing all this unrest in Kyiv. You're seeing Russian influence there. Then we see, you know, the Russian annexation of Crimea, and that really sparked my interest, and actually was one of the motivating factors for me to go back to get my master's degree, eventually, at NYU, and then to travel there, as I was looking on my master's degree, and then my master's thesis, which was on Russia's hybrid warfare in Ukraine. So as I saw the events unfolding there, a lot of things stuck out to me as first, obviously the Russia, Russia's aggressive actions, and then the peace process that started then is still, you know, obviously under discussion now with the Minsk one agreement in August of 2014 and then the minx two agreement in February of 2015 which coincide, like I said, I was in Ukraine as a student researcher, if you will, December of 2014 into January 2015 including in the eastern city of Mariupol, which was not too far from the front lines. I then followed up with that trip with a trip that summer. So after the minx to peace agreement in summer of 2015 as a student researcher,

Jim Cardoso  04:46

okay, but then you also had some follow on experience as well, obviously, when during your time and the in the National Guard, right?

Tad Schnaufer  04:52

Yes, yeah. And then so after those two, you know, following those two peace agreements, how they you know, Bailey held together a line. Line of contact in eastern Ukraine, starting in 2015 you really see, you know, the tensions and the conflict simmer all the way up to about the full scale invasion of 2022 so I arrived as a member of the Florida Army National Guard and Jordan Multinational Training Group Ukraine in November of 2021 and if you remember Jim, that's when the Russians are really building up for the second time that year, and it looked like an invasion was imminent in early 2022 so I was part of that training group all the way up until February of 2022 obviously the we left about 10 days prior to the 2024 invasion.

Jim Cardoso  05:37

Because then you said, I mean, we've talked about this before, didn't you say that even while you were there, even the Ukrainians themselves were not really convinced that a full scale invasion was about to occur. There was more of a an exercise or a threat, but not that they were actually rolled across the border.

Tad Schnaufer  05:52

Yeah, I think I mean, again, just anecdotally, the speaking with Ukrainian military officers, stuff like that. I mean, most of me the thought, hey, they've already invaded. They're already in Crimea. They're already in the dumb boss, that area that they had cut off in 2014 or, you know, it would just be very foolish for them to do that. Why would they? Why would they actually fully invade? That's just, you know, kind of

Jim Cardoso  06:13

nuts. Well, the Russians may be asking themselves

Tad Schnaufer  06:17

that question. And typically in war, war start because of miscalculations. And there was a gross miscalculation of what they thought they could achieve. So, yeah, so it was a it was tough times in Ukraine in the build up. And I think President Zelensky, at the time was also trying to not instill, you know, hysteria across the country. So try and say, yeah, they are building up on the border. But perhaps this is just another build up. The Russians have done this multiple times throughout the last 30 years, and the Soviets did it all the time in the Cold War. Yeah.

Jim Cardoso  06:45

So beyond this personal experience, what's your motivation to plunge into this project?

Tad Schnaufer  06:49

Well, the there's a lot of talk about, What does peace look like in Ukraine? Why is the peace process over the last 30 years really failed since, since Ukrainian independence, uh, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, you see this constant Russian pressure on the Ukrainian political system, as well as his identity as an independent country, going back, you know, particularly to the Orange Revolution in 20 22,004 and then obviously the more direct Russian threats, starting in 2014 So this pressure about on an independent Ukraine, or Ukraine as a state, which Putin is often called. You know, the Ukrainians and Russians are one people. They're one state. Ukraine's really not even a country. You know, they pretty much, they're supposed to be part of Russia. So how do you get a actual durable peace in a conflict where you have both sides on both extremes of the spectrum, where you have one pretty much wanting to conquer the other and not respecting it as a state, the Russians and Ukrainians seeking sovereignty and independence. So you really there's no way to splice that pie. That's, you know, it's either all or nothing from both sides.

Jim Cardoso  07:56

Yeah, it seems very intractable differences between the two. Yes, go ahead.

Tad Schnaufer  08:00

Yeah, yeah, no, I exactly. I mean, it's intractable. There's no, there's no easy way to, you know, a lot of peace deals. You splice, oh, you just take a couple provinces, or maybe you, you know, we pay you so much money, or whatever it may be. In this case, it's really coming down to the fundamental, you know, ability of Ukraine to exist as a sovereign state. And the Russians view that it shouldn't.

Jim Cardoso  08:17

It shouldn't exist at all. It's part of Russia. Yeah. You know, many people listening to the podcast or you know or viewing your research, in the future, they're going to have at least a working knowledge of the Russia, Ukraine conflict. So as someone who's both studied this issue academically and experienced it operationally, can you think of any like lesser discussed aspects of the conflict that might surprise some people.

Tad Schnaufer  08:41

I mean, the maybe not lesser discussed, but things that you have to put in perspective is just the reality on the ground that Russia is currently occupying almost, you know, a third of the Ukrainian state, and that's where the front lines are. You know, the Ukrainians have recently, just in last couple days, made some offenses that I think they've reclaimed about 200 kilometers, square kilometers, which is pretty big chunk of land, but nonetheless, well, in the current conflict, which is very slow grind. So the expectations is, you know, Ukraine should get back their land. Ukraine, you know, again, Ukraine's the victim here. Russia is the aggressor. But the reality on the on the battlefield is simply, Russia has roughly 700,000 troops in Ukraine, and they're occupying, like I said, a significant chunk, a chunk of Ukraine. So what does a peace deal look like? How do you actually get to a peace if you're trying to say Ukraine deserves all of its land back when it's just simply not in a position to do that?

Jim Cardoso  09:35

Yeah, yeah. The working title of your project, so it's the path to durable peace in the Ukraine war, but you also looked at potentially calling it the price of credible peace. And I want to it's not the title, but I think it's interesting that it was considered, because that's an interesting turn of phrase, credible peace at. Think, and I think that'll probably pop up in the research discussions to come in the future. What's that maybe it becomes the title? Maybe become, maybe change, yeah, because it's a working title. So the title may change between the time we record this and the time the this actually goes forward. But let's talk about what does a credible, credible

Tad Schnaufer  10:15

piece look like. Well, and this was actually inspired that that title and that concept was inspired by other peace situations that we see around the world, but particularly focusing on Europe. But just look at, you know, Kosovo, for example, we've had, we, as in the West, NATO, has have, has had to maintain peace there for over 25 years. So although you have peace in Kosovo, we haven't had any major violence since 1999 since the NATO bombings of Serbia in 1999 stopping the potential, you know, ethnic cleansing or genocide, whatever might have happened if that would, if that those bombings would not take place. But at what cost? There's a price. You know, peace is not free. Peace is something that has to be achieved and then maintained. And in cases like Kosovo or even, think, Cyprus, right? Cyprus divided islands since the Turks and the Greeks fought, fought there in 1974 these peace agreements, or even, not even necessary agreements, just this ceasefire or an armistice, have stayed in place because of troops on the ground, peacekeepers or some sort of international structure to hold it. There's no simply we sign the paper, we go home, and the borders are as they are. So we likely will see something similar in Ukraine. I mean, that it's going to be a costly piece. And are the Europeans, perhaps, with supports from the Americans? Are they going to be able to support that? The Ukrainian economy certainly post, even if the war ends tomorrow, is going to have a very difficult time supporting the current army size that it has of roughly 800,000 soldiers. So how do you maintain that size, or a deterrent threat for a further Russian incursion without the European help? And that's going to take you know that that threat might last for decades. So who's going to pay that price? And again, even in Kosovo, you know, the US have recently talked about withdrawing its contingent from that Kosovo peace operation, which is roughly 5000 troops. Now it was 50,000 in 1999 and in Cyprus, you know, the UN has its peacekeeping operations there, again, just kind of keeping it in the European neighborhood. There's plenty of other peacekeeping operations around the world. I mean, think of the Korean Peninsula, the threat it still remains of North Korea, since they obviously invaded 1950 and that has cost the United States a significant amount of money. And then troops, you know, you have always have at least 30,000 ish American troops in South Korea, if not more, to maintain that peace. So peace is not something to think is just a piece of paper or an agreement. It's, there's a lot that comes after it.

Jim Cardoso  12:45

So you would say, like, the the credibility aspect of it is, I mean, it has to be durable, and that's where the credibility lies that, I guess, people think that, oh, we can, you know, set some kind of peace accord in place and it's all over, we're good to go. And that's, that's just not a credible view of what's going to happen, and people need to wake up to that reality.

Tad Schnaufer  13:03

Yeah, the reality is, this is going to be very costly. It's going to take a lot of endurance of the Western nations, even after Ukraine's been again. Ukraine's been under attack, and, you know, under this Russian influence, at least since 2014 in a direct, kinetic way. So a lot of European nations, I think, between the sanction regime, the amount of money that they've given, obviously, the United States as well, is getting a little bit of Ukraine fatigue, like, Okay, we've been dealing with this issue for, you know, now over a decade. You know, going back to that whole idea of peace is not cheap. So What price are we willing to pay once this war ends? And what prices do Ukrainians going to be willing to pay? You know, they're going to likely have to likely have to give up some territory if they're going to end it anytime soon, unless there's some sort of huge, you know, black swan event, the Russian government collapses. And not unheard of, you know, 1917 you have these, you know, you have the Russian Empire collapse, or even the Soviet Union, where maybe that's an option, but most likely not. It's just going to continue to be a slow grind. So how do we get that price to a point where it can be maintained?

Jim Cardoso  14:04

Yeah, and there's a difference between peacekeeping and peace enforcement as well. And this could be, you know, peace enforcement, which looks a lot like war. I mean, peace enforcement and peace enforcement involves conflict. You know, I was involved in some of the peace enforcement operations in the late 90s, not, I mean, not just Kosovo, but in Bosnia, hergovina and Serbia as well, and the former Yugoslavia, and that was that looked and smelled a lot like war. They called it. Had peace in the name, but it wasn't peace. I mean, when you enforce peace, that's that's conflict. And you know, the the American people, or you know, our NATO allies, they could be in for a bit of a slog if there's going to be peace enforcement involved in that as well. Well.

Tad Schnaufer  14:45

I mean, I mean, recently, the leadership of the British and the French governments have said, you know, we will send, you know, peacekeeping force or forces to Ukraine after a ceasefire. So okay, that's that's fine, but in some ways, that actually incentivizes Russia not to end the war. So the because that means that, okay, if you guys are going to show up in force after a peace, then we need to take as much as we can now. So this, there's a lot of dynamics that play into first achieving a cease fire or some sort of armistice, where the the guns fall silent, at least for a time. And then how do you actually get a peace treaty? Which is not like you're not going to get a peace treaty, because that means that the Russians have to admit that this was a war, compared to a special military operation. Um, and a treaty gives some sort of legitimacy to a post war Ukraine. So trying to keep it at a, you know, like a junior state level, or however, the, you know, the Russians want to see it, so it's gonna be difficult, and it's and it's way more complex, and simply, who's winning or losing, and winning and losing isn't as simple as, you know, who's right or who's wrong. It's much more murky than that.

Jim Cardoso  15:46

Yeah, there's gonna be some, some diplomatic nuances are going to be required to to come to that, come to that solution at some point. So describe what the research projects can look like over the months to come. You know, what kind of research out pits Can we look for? What sub themes and who are some of your research? I'd say, Who? Yeah, who are some of your resource? Who can, who will we hear from besides yourself? Yeah, well, of course. I mean, we have some residents, not that you by yourself is not amazing and a great, great resource and expert. But you know, you bring in some other folks

Tad Schnaufer  16:14

as well. Well. Thank you for that. You're welcome. But we have, we have a lot of great resources and experts here at USF, and then the local Tampa Bay region, and then also, you know, pulling on the amazing resources of not just current diplomats or retired diplomats, academics, military leaders, all these facets that go into what a lasting piece would look like. So those are the type of individuals we try to bring in, and we're going to be inviting to speak on these issues for people who have been in the negotiating room, maybe from the organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe. So the OSCE, these people who have been involved with the talks, if we can discuss with them, what happened, for example, with the first minx one and minx two agreements? How did those play out? Why did those fail, obviously, with the 2022 invasion. And then what can we learn from this? And really put and as you know, going back to the price thing, what's the price going to be? Is it going to be a line of contact in eastern Ukraine with a couple 100,000 Ukrainians with 10s of 1000s of European troops, and who's going to foot the bill? And is there the political will there? You know, going back to basic, you know, Clausewitz teachings on war, it's, you know, you do have the capability, but that's great. Do you have the will to actually use it? And I think that's going to be the biggest challenge, is sort of the Europeans or the Americans could, could push a lot of troops in there after a conflict, but who's got the will to do that?

Jim Cardoso  17:38

And it is a long term will as well. And political systems change over time. I'm sure you know, the US has changes every four to eight years, I mean, but and other NATO members as well, it changes over and you get different political leaders with different views on what what right looks like, and our support for that.

Tad Schnaufer  17:53

So we're going to talk to these experts again, whether they have practical experience in the diplomatic or military realms, or they're more theoretical on the academic side. On one, what can we learn from other similar type peace negotiations, slash peace setups, again, Kosovo, Cyprus, maybe Korea. And then also look at past, you know, Russian operations, whether looking at Transnistria and Moldova or the Georgian conflict of 2008 what's Russia likely to do post conflict and what needs to be put in place, and just being realistic about it again. So you know, a lot of the talk is that Ukraine should get a lot of stuff back, but the reality on the ground is going to likely be different, that the Russians still maintain their advantage on the ground. Now maybe they're losing in the sense that their economy is destroyed and their international pariah, all these type of things, but in the peace negotiations, they still think they have a shot of winning.

Jim Cardoso  18:44

Yeah, yeah. So, you know, you talked about at the beginning, you're going to dive into some of the recent peace processes. Kosovo Gaza is another one. I guess you're going to, I mean, obviously that's still developing itself very much. So, you know, lessons learned from these peace processes can be very valuable. But also, I guess, you know, looking at past experiences can maybe yield some red herrings that can lead you down, like, Oh, this is, this is the way to go. But each situation is slightly different. Is there any that you can kind of highlight, maybe some, some, some warning signs, I guess, from previous peace process that we need to be cognizant of as we explore the peace process, what it could look like in Ukraine.

Tad Schnaufer  19:22

Well, actually, with just like with the beginning of war is typically made, whoever the aggressor is, typically make some sort of miscalculation based off of imperfect information and some sort of bias. Actually, the same process works in the reverse way. As war starts to break down and diplomacy begins, diplomats tend to be overly optimistic of what they can accomplish with a peace process. So typically it's, you know, we'll set this. We'll set up a, you know, let's just hypothetically, in eastern Ukraine, we'll set up a line of contact. We'll have some troops there, and then, you know, we'll rebuild the economy, and, you know, we'll be good to go. Well, I mean, just like in Gaza, Oregon and Kosovo, no one in 19. 99 would have thought, oh, quarter century later, you're still going to have 1000s of troops policing, you know, Kosovar neighborhoods. Again, that's costly. That's a lot of people. And that's it's being able to project that long term piece. That's really what we're trying to get at here, is that this is not going to be something that solved the next five or 10 years, even if the war ends

Jim Cardoso  20:21

tomorrow, any I know you're you're more of a Europe expert, but obviously Gaza is on the Sure, on the on the in the headlines these days. Any, I guess I would say, any alignments that you see between some of the research you're getting you've done in the past, you're getting prepared to do with what you see happening in Gaza.

Tad Schnaufer  20:43

Well, the some of the issues in comparing the two cases that Gaza's, you know, in a very much, very different political situation. Obviously, it's part of Israel, but this kind of autonomous region also, it's much smaller, and it was occupied by the Israelis for 20 years, up until, I think, 2006 or seven. So they have this much different history. You know, Ukraine's roughly the size of Texas. Is a much bigger place, has a much larger population. So just being able to manage the economic situations much different. And then, you know, the US level of influence, I think is also going to play a role, as you see the board of peace coming together, and the factors are just a lot different, yeah, so I think, I think one common thread between Gaza and Ukraine is that neither are going to just be magically over once you Know reconstruction begins or there's a firm peace settlement. And obviously with Gaza, the history is there to show you that. And with Ukraine, Russian prior action probably shows the same thing, yeah, yeah.

Jim Cardoso  21:51

I think that, um, no, I you know. I mean, these things are gonna, well, I think Gaza, I guess, is a little ahead in terms of maybe development of a potential peace process, I suppose. But it seems like these two could kind of move forward almost in parallel, and there could be, to a certain extent, two simultaneous peace processes moving forward with the participation of the United States, with the participation of allies. You know, be interesting to see what allies are more involved in this. You know, is it going to be the same allies in both there's gonna be more Middle Eastern allies involved in Gaza, Israel. This board of peace you're talking about has some some players on it that are not part of the usual team of players that are that, are that are engaged in this type of activity. So, I mean, there's gonna be a lot going on that I think the American people are gonna be seeing and wrestling with. And that'll that will, you know, just kind of impact, how they view the geopolitical environment and how that evolves in the future.

Tad Schnaufer  22:49

So, right? And that's one thing that we're trying to get after with this initiative, is uncover, what are those facets of a peace agreement on paper, as well as the actual actions, the tangible things that need to take place that will likely put Ukraine in the best position to have not only maintain its sovereignty, but also have an actual lasting peace, compared to what it had in 2014 with the Minsk agreement. So we already have an example of Russian aggression. They annex Crimea. They take, you know, a portion of the dumb boss. You have a couple peace agreements. Means one minx two. You have the Normandy format for as a which was the Russians, Ukrainians, the Germans and the French leadership constantly talking through, you know, peace plans after those two agreements. And obviously that format broke down in 2022 so what one thing we don't want to do on the diplomatic side is have an agreement, and it breaks down after, you know, eight years. And then on the military side, how do you actually create effective deterrence? The West learned a big, big lesson that the Russians are willing to use force. And again, that goes back to that just simple reality on the ground. I'll go back to Klaus with real quick of war is always an option. And I think a lot of times Western thinkers might be like, well, you know, we wouldn't do it so they wouldn't do it type thing. Well, not everyone thinks the same way. I think it was John Kerry, one of the other key diplomats in the first beginning of this, when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 or started putting large Russian forces in Ukraine, said, You know, this is not how countries act in the 21st Century. And it's and, okay, that's, you can say that. That's fine, but in the until they do, until they do, yeah, in the end, you still have to be ready for that. And again, assuming deterrence is what you want to do. And that's, again, another costly piece of, I was gonna say a costly piece of peace. But another costly aspect of peace is homonyms. They're homonyms. Yes, I'm hominizing. But a costly aspect of peace is deterrence, and that's if you're willing to do it. And deterrence isn't cheap either, as we know with, you know, whether you're talking about, you know, looking at the Cold War and the amount of money the US spent on nuclear deterrence, and, you know, conventional deterrence in Europe or again, going back to Korea, that costs a lot. Mm. Peace, and in this case, a negative piece, a piece that is just simply the absence of violence. You don't have reconciliation between the two sides. That's going to be costly, yeah,

Jim Cardoso  25:09

you know, well, first of all, you can't, can't talk about a European ground wall war without invoking Carl von Clausewitz. So that's okay that you brought his name up a few times. Homage, you got to pay homage. Yeah? You know, you gotta, gotta bow down. But also, I mean, look, it's easy in the benefit of hindsight. We're here in 2026 recording this, it's easy to look back and say, Oh, 2014 you know, with the activity that happened there, it's, it's obvious that that would just laid the groundwork for an invasion later on to happen. Okay, you with the high benefit of hindsight, it's easy to say that, just like with the benefit of high site and World War Two, it's easy to say, well, war the, you know, Versailles, the Treaty of Versailles, obviously, they laid the groundwork. Were the people the Treaty of Versailles didn't think they were doing that. And just like the people in 2014 the Minsk agreements, didn't think they were doing that either. But this is where it led. So I mean, what are the you know, what? How did we avoid making that same mistake again in 2026

Tad Schnaufer  26:04

Well, that's exactly what that's trying to find out. Yeah, but, I mean, there's some easy things to note. Obviously, there's a theoretical reality of what you think you know things are gonna how they could play out. And then there's actually what happens on the ground. And because of that. When you're looking at bargaining and peace agreements, and you have two sides that are intractable, you're just not going to get there. If you look at the minx agreements, for example, they're really not that well put together, and it just doesn't seem like either side was very happy with them. And that's why the first one failed, and a couple months later, that's why it was a number two. Yeah, that's why there's a number two that popped up. But even then that there's, you know, a conundrum there of, again, Ukrainian sovereignty and the Russians not seeing them as an independent state, or at least that they should be one. So you have these issues that really come down to, they cannot be divided up without some test of arms, really, as it was, and the Russians are willing to do that for, you know, a number of reasons. And again, if you want that not to happen. So let's say you're a Western decision maker, and you don't want Russia to continue to, you know, expand, and it's 2021 then you have to get real about deterrence, and that means putting people in harm's way and putting, you know, you know, again, maybe putting troops into Ukraine instead of what happened right before the invasion was most of the most of the most of the troops that were in Ukraine, that were on training missions or that were at embassies, everyone got withdrawn. So you're pretty much clearing the way, yeah, so you, you know, you have to risk some things again. That's why that's this idea of price and credibility keeps coming in for peace. Because if you don't have that, you're going to pay that same price. You're just going to pay it more, assuming it's in your national interest. Now you could simply say, you know, for as an American, you just say, Ukraine is very far away. Why? You know, it's not worth it to me, and that's also a fine policy. But what you probably don't want to do is be

Jim Cardoso  27:50

in the middle. Yeah, you need to, you need to commit to something. And then your your actions on the on the ground, literally here in this case, but just your actions, your operational action, need to reflect that strategy.

Tad Schnaufer  28:01

If you look at the, you know, the US right after 2014 and then the European I mean, they put in some sanctions, you know, they started up a couple training missions with you Ukrainians, things like that. But there was no, it wasn't a hard and fast, you know, shut the door and really, really, really ensure that the systems were in place to deter a further attack.

Jim Cardoso  28:21

But, well, we'll look forward to seeing what this how this research project moves forward, any kind of towards the end of the of the end of the episode today. Any, you know, the end of the conflict in Ukraine? It's been discussed, you know, it's been in academia, in the in media, talks going on right now. There's peace talks going on right now. Well, discussed topic in national security circles. Any aspects of your research project that you see as maybe unique that'll distinguish it.

Tad Schnaufer  28:49

What will make this different is one obviously going across the spectrum of practitioners, people who have been involved with the past. So not just looking at the current war, but really looking back at 2014 and even going prior to that, trying to get in the mind of some of the decision makers and trying to find those factors that inhibit a optimal policy solution, or, in this case, a peace agreement. Because what you find is you can theoretically come up with, yeah, sure. This looks good on paper. Like you said, hindsight, being 2020, but one of the things that always stop an actual, you know, why don't we have an effective piece in Kosovo? Why don't we have, like, something where you don't have to have people constantly Trooping the line in Cyprus, or in Korea, where are those factors that actually inhibit the completion or the end of either a conflict or the peacekeeping operation? Or, like you mentioned, it might be peacemaking, which? Peace enforcement, peace enforcement, which, with those things, all force, is part of the word enforcement. It looks like war. Yeah. So, so again, kind of getting trying to get out of the pie in the sky type idea of what peace might look like, or Ukraine taking back certain territories, is just simply getting to the root, okay, this would probably be the best option based off of our historical at. Evidence, what we can see what the current situation is on the ground, where the money is going to come from, but what's going to actually inhibit that? What's the challenges to, again, let's say, paying that price, or to implementing those and you know, obviously political will will be a piece of it. Obviously taxpayers don't want to pay for something that's far away from them, whether you're a Spanish taxpayer or an American taxpayer. So how does the political system deal with that? And again, this is something that plagues almost all policy issues, not just peace agreements or peace enforcement.

Jim Cardoso  30:28

Well, we're going to see a lot of great insight coming out in the next few months. I have no doubt. So any final thoughts for the audience before we end this episode?

Tad Schnaufer  30:35

No, I mean, obviously we hope the fighting ends as soon as possible, in the sakes of the, you know, the those fighting on the front lines, and that once it does end, that there's a solid agreement that it's able to carry forward, and you see the reconstruction of Ukraine,

Jim Cardoso  30:51

although it does seem that by the time you finish this research project, they will probably still, probably still be in a peace searching process, yeah.

Tad Schnaufer  30:58

Well, as we come up, I mean, we're about to hit the four year anniversary. I mean, that's what this that's what this that's one of the big things that pushed this initiative, is this is about a four years war, and it, as has been commonly noted, that's about as long as the Russians fought in World War Two. So if you look at just the length and depth of that time, although they fought in Afghanistan for longer, so it's about a decade, I think, yeah, 79 to 89 so then So, so this, this will likely continue, unfortunately, until one side on the battlefield changes. Right now, both sides have, from my perspective, have zero incentive to necessarily come to a peace terms. It's just not, yeah.

Jim Cardoso  31:34

Dr Tad schnaufer, thanks for being on at the boundary today. Thank you so much. Special. Thanks to our guest today. Dr Tad schnorfer, who's kicking off the latest genocide Research Initiative, the path to durable peace in the Ukraine war. Look for much more from him over the coming months. Next week on the podcast, we'll turn our attention to a new initiative we've been working on for the past few months, genocide, inaugural undergraduate strategy competition featuring teams from at last count, 19 schools and universities from around the globe. We'll hear from Dr Tino Perez, the chair of executive and strategic leadership at the US Army War College. He's also a GNSI non resident Senior fellow, and has been invaluable in helping us put together this strategy competition. It'll take place in April as part of genocide's International Security experience. We're looking forward to having Tino on the podcast next week. If you don't want to miss that episode or any other episode, be sure to subscribe to the podcast on your favorite podcast platform. But we do. Thank you for sharing some time with us today. You can find genus on YouTube, LinkedIn and x be sure to follow like and subscribe, tell your friends and colleagues as well. We also have a monthly newsletter, which you should sign up for immediately. All this is on our website, usf.edu/gnsi, that's

Jim Cardoso  33:01

going to wrap up this episode of at the boundary. Each new episode will feature global and national security issues we found to be insightful, intriguing, maybe controversial, but overall, just worth talking about. I'm Jim Cardoso, and we'll see you at the boundary. You you.