I believe the benefit is making the situation more dangerous and unpredictable, which increases the gravity of the concessions Europeans are willing to make just have it all stop.
I can kind of believe that, except I still think it makes more sense for the losing party to do this as a signal that they will go scorched earth if they lose.
Even if we stipulate that “Russia has consistently applied wanton violence as a tool in this war”, it doesn’t follow that they would also do something that would be very risky to themselves when they are about to get everything they want. If makes more sense that the losing party would get desperate and want to send a signal that they would go scorched earth if they lose.
Some questions came up in my mind as soon as I saw this in the news this morning:
I believe the benefit is making the situation more dangerous and unpredictable, which increases the gravity of the concessions Europeans are willing to make just have it all stop.
I can kind of believe that, except I still think it makes more sense for the losing party to do this as a signal that they will go scorched earth if they lose.
Russia has consistently applied wanton violence as a tool in this war. This is a threat to Ukraine: take a bad deal or things can get worse for you.
Even if we stipulate that “Russia has consistently applied wanton violence as a tool in this war”, it doesn’t follow that they would also do something that would be very risky to themselves when they are about to get everything they want. If makes more sense that the losing party would get desperate and want to send a signal that they would go scorched earth if they lose.