#240 – Samuel Charap on how a Ukraine ceasefire could accidentally set Europe up for a bigger war
2026-03-24 · 76 min · 8 entities
Asserted relationships
-
0.40
evidence rules-v5
Feed category: Education
-
0.40
evidence rules-v5
Feed category: Technology
-
0.40
evidence rules-v5
Feed author/publisher: The 80,000 Hours team
-
0.40
evidence rules-v5
Feed author/publisher: The 80000 Hours Podcast
Entities found in this episode
companys 6
-
0.70
evidence rules-v5
Feed author/publisher: The 80,000 Hours team
-
0.70
evidence rules-v5
Feed author/publisher: The 80000 Hours Podcast
-
0.50
evidence rules-v5
Feed category: Technology
-
0.40
evidence rules-v5
Feed category: Technology
-
0.40
evidence rules-v5
Feed author/publisher: The 80,000 Hours team
-
0.40
evidence rules-v5
Feed author/publisher: The 80000 Hours Podcast
concepts 2
-
0.50
evidence rules-v5
Feed category: Education
-
0.40
evidence rules-v5
Feed category: Education
Episode description as stored
Many people believe a ceasefire in Ukraine will leave Europe safer. But today's guest lays out how a deal could potentially generate insidious new risks — leaving us in a situation that's equally dangerous, just in different ways.
That’s the counterintuitive argument from Samuel Charap , Distinguished Chair in Russia and Eurasia Policy at RAND. He’s not worried about a Russian blitzkrieg on Estonia. He forecasts instead a fragile peace that breaks down and drags in European neighbours; instability in Belarus prompting Russian intervention; hybrid sabotage operations that escalate through tit-for-tat responses.
Samuel’s case isn’t that peace is bad, but that the Ukraine conflict has remilitarised Europe, made Russia more resentful, and collapsed diplomatic relations between the two. That’s a postwar environment primed for the kind of miscalculation that starts unintended wars.
What he prescribes isn’t a full peace treaty; it’s a negotiated settlement that stops the killing and begins a longer negotiation that gives neither side exactly what it wants, but just enough to deter renewed aggression. Both sides stop dying and the flames of war fizzle — hopefully.
None of this is clean or satisfying: Russia invaded, committed war crimes, and is being offered a path back to partial normalcy. But Samuel argues that the alternatives — indefinite war or unstructured ceasefire — are much worse for Ukraine, Europe, and global stability.
Links to learn more, video, and full transcript: https://80k.info/sc26
This episode was recorded on February 27, 2026.
Chapters:
Cold open (00:00:00)
Could peace in Ukraine lead to Europe’s next war? (00:00:47)
Do Russia’s motives for war still matter? (00:11:58)
What does a good ceasefire deal look like? (00:18:16)
What’s still holding back a ceasefire (00:40:15)
Why Russia might accept Ukraine’s EU membership (00:47:51)
How to prevent a spiraling conflict with NATO (00:49:58)
What’s next for nuclear arms control (00:51:56)
Finland and Sweden strengthened NATO — but also raised the stakes for conflict (00:55:36)
Putin isn’t Hitler: How to negotiate with autocrats (00:58:53)
Why Russia still takes NATO seriously (01:04:33)
Neither side wants to fight this war again (01:14:04)
Video and audio editing: Dominic Armstrong, Milo McGuire, Luke Monsour, and Simon Monsour
Music: CORBIT
Transcripts and web: Nick Stockton, Elizabeth Cox, and Katy Moore