IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/fubsbe/337470.html

Narratives as separating equilibria on the origins of the Ukraine war

Author

Listed:
  • Corneo, Giacomo

Abstract

NATO enlargement and Russian annexation of Crimea marked crucial turning points. According to one narrative, the Russian occupation was part of a plan to re-establish dominion over Eastern Europe. According to a rival view, it was an attempt to counter a U.S. plan to subjugate Russia. I scrutinize the logical requirements of those narratives in a multi-stage game of incomplete information that produces equilibrium play such that first NATO is enlarged and then Russia attacks Ukraine. The two competing narratives correspond to two different separating equilibria. Conditions for their existence inform about the consistency and plausibility of the associated narratives.

Suggested Citation

  • Corneo, Giacomo, 2026. "Narratives as separating equilibria on the origins of the Ukraine war," Discussion Papers 2026/4, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:fubsbe:337470
    DOI: 10.17169/refubium-51306
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/337470/1/1962060306.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17169/refubium-51306?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1991. "Perfect Bayesian equilibrium and sequential equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 236-260, April.
    2. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew W. Postlewaite & David Schmeidler, 2008. "Probability and Uncertainty in Economic Modeling," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 173-188, Summer.
    3. Bradley C. Smith, 2024. "Commitment problems and Russia's invasion of Ukraine," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(5), pages 494-513, September.
    4. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & David Schmeidler, 2007. "Probabilities in Economic Modeling," PIER Working Paper Archive 07-023, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    5. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    6. Işıl İdrisoğlu & William Spaniel, 2024. "Information problems and Russia's invasion of Ukraine," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(5), pages 514-533, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Heyen, Daniel, 2018. "Ambiguity aversion under maximum-likelihood updating," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 80342, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Irenaeus Wolff & Dominik Bauer, 2018. "Elusive Beliefs: Why Uncertainty Leads to Stochastic Choice and Errors," TWI Research Paper Series 111, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    3. Aydogan, Ilke & Berger, Loϊc & Bosetti, Valentina & Liu, Ning, "undated". "Three Layers of Uncertainty: an Experiment," ETA: Economic Theory and Applications 274852, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    4. Wolff, Irenaeus & Folli, Dominik, 2024. "Why is belief–action consistency so low? The role of belief uncertainty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    5. Steffen Andersen & John Fountain & Glenn Harrison & E. Rutström, 2014. "Estimating subjective probabilities," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 207-229, June.
    6. Millner, Antony & Dietz, Simon & Heal, Geoffrey, 2010. "Ambiguity and climate policy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 37595, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Ekaterina Svetlova & Henk van Elst, 2012. "How is non-knowledge represented in economic theory?," Papers 1209.2204, arXiv.org.
    8. Abigail Devereaux & Roger Koppl, 2024. "The use of knowledge in open-ended systems," Papers 2412.00011, arXiv.org.
    9. Michael D. Ryall & Rachelle C. Sampson, 2017. "Contract Structure for Joint Production: Risk and Ambiguity Under Compensatory Damages," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(4), pages 1232-1253, April.
    10. Loïc Berger & Massimo Marinacci, 2020. "Model Uncertainty in Climate Change Economics: A Review and Proposed Framework for Future Research," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(3), pages 475-501, November.
    11. Massimo Guidolin & Francesca Rinaldi, 2013. "Ambiguity in asset pricing and portfolio choice: a review of the literature," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(2), pages 183-217, February.
    12. Diederik Aerts & Emmanuel Haven & Sandro Sozzo, 2018. "A proposal to extend expected utility in a quantum probabilistic framework," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(4), pages 1079-1109, June.
    13. Ilke Aydogan & Loïc Berger & Vincent Théroude, 2023. "More Ambiguous or More Complex? An Investigation of Individual Preferences under Uncertainty," Working Papers of BETA 2023-10, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. Constantinos Antoniou & Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & Daniel Read, 2015. "Subjective Bayesian beliefs," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 35-54, February.
    15. Binswanger, Johannes & Salm, Martin, 2017. "Does everyone use probabilities? The role of cognitive skills," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 73-85.
    16. Qi, Jin & Sim, Melvyn & Sun, Defeng & Yuan, Xiaoming, 2016. "Preferences for travel time under risk and ambiguity: Implications in path selection and network equilibrium," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 264-284.
    17. Li, Wenhui & Wilde, Christian, 2020. "Belief formation and belief updating under ambiguity: Evidence from experiments," SAFE Working Paper Series 251, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2020.
    18. Lars Peter Hansen, 2013. "Challenges in Identifying and Measuring Systemic Risk," NBER Chapters, in: Risk Topography: Systemic Risk and Macro Modeling, pages 15-30, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Raphaël Giraud & Jean-Marc Tallon, 2011. "Are beliefs a matter of taste? A case for objective imprecise information," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(1), pages 23-31, July.
    20. Ilke AYDOGAN & Loïc BERGER & Vincent THEROUDE, 2023. "More Ambiguous or More Complex? An Investigation of Individual Preferences under Model Uncertainty," Working Papers 2023-iRisk-02, IESEG School of Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H8 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues
    • N4 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation
    • Z1 - Other Special Topics - - Cultural Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:fubsbe:337470. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwfubde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.