RAND Corporation Solutions to the Russo-Ukrainian War

The RAND Corporation has developed multiple strategic frameworks addressing the Russo-Ukrainian War, ranging from early war termination strategies to post-conflict planning. Their comprehensive approach centers on avoiding a prolonged conflict while preparing for various post-war scenarios through diplomatic, military, and strategic policy options.

Core Strategic Framework: Avoiding a Long War

RAND’s primary position, articulated in their influential 2023 report “Avoiding a Long War: U.S. Policy and the Trajectory of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict” by Samuel Charap and Miranda Priebe, argues that U.S. interests would be best served by avoiding a protracted conflict. The costs and risks of a long war are deemed to significantly outweigh potential benefits for the United States.[1][2][3][4][5]

Four Key Policy Instruments

RAND proposes four primary policy tools the United States could employ to facilitate an eventual negotiated settlement:[5]

1. Clarifying Plans for Future Support to Ukraine

• Establishing transparent frameworks for long-term military and economic assistance
• Setting clear parameters for aid duration and scope to manage expectations

2. Making Commitments to Ukraine’s Security

• Providing concrete security assurances short of full NATO membership
• Developing bilateral security arrangements modeled on historical precedents

3. Issuing Assurances Regarding Ukraine’s Neutrality

• Offering guarantees about Ukraine’s non-aligned status
• Limiting foreign military infrastructure deployment on Ukrainian territory

4. Setting Conditions for Sanctions Relief for Russia

• Creating graduated sanctions removal tied to Russian compliance
• Establishing clear benchmarks for economic normalization

Latest Peace Framework: A Pathway to Resolution

In December 2024, RAND’s Samuel Charap outlined a comprehensive peace plan with four essential features for any sustainable settlement:[6]

1. Well-Designed Cease-Fire Agreement

• Establishment of clear demarcation lines based on current positions
• Implementation of monitoring systems using unmanned sensors across the 1,200-mile front
• Creation of demilitarized zones with specific deployment restrictions
• Third-party oversight mechanisms to assess violations and arbitrate disputes

2. Credible Security Guarantees for Ukraine

Rather than immediate NATO membership, RAND proposes alternative security frameworks:

Bilateral Security Treaties: Following models like the U.S.-South Korea mutual security treaty (1953) or U.S.-Israel agreements after the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, where Washington committed to “remedial action” if agreements were violated.[6]

EU Membership Path: Leveraging Article 42.7 of the Treaty on European Union, which provides mutual assistance obligations that are “arguably more binding even than NATO’s Article 5”.[6]

“Porcupine Strategy” Defense Model: Ukraine would adopt a multilayered territorial defense system optimized for defending controlled territory rather than retaking Russian-held areas. This includes:[7][6]

• Enhanced mine-laying capabilities
• Robust anti-air defense systems
• Distributed defensive positions
• Indigenous deterrent capabilities through strong armed forces

3. Accountability for Russian Aggression

• Maintaining select long-term sanctions until full Russian withdrawal
• Transferring frozen Russian state assets (approximately $300 billion) to Ukrainian reconstruction with Moscow’s explicit consent
• Ensuring Russia faces enduring costs to deter future aggression

4. Measures to Stabilize Russian-Western Relations

Positive Incentives for Russia:

• Assurances of Ukrainian non-alignment and neutrality
• Commitments limiting foreign forces and infrastructure in Ukraine
• Partial sanctions relief with snap-back clauses
• Parallel consultations on broader NATO-Russia security issues

Post-War Strategic Planning

RAND’s 2024 study “Planning for the Aftermath: Assessing Options for U.S. Strategy Toward Russia After the Ukraine War” examines four potential scenarios combining different war outcomes with varying U.S. policy approaches:[8][9]

Scenario Matrix:

• More vs. less favorable post-war outcomes for the U.S.
• Hardline vs. softer U.S. approaches toward Russia

Key Findings: Even in more favorable scenarios where Russia is significantly weakened, the U.S. faces complex trade-offs between containment and engagement strategies. The report emphasizes that post-war planning must begin now rather than waiting for conflict resolution.[9]

Implementation Strategy and Diplomatic Process

Phased Negotiation Approach

RAND recommends a multi-track diplomatic strategy:[6]

1. Immediate Preparatory Phase:

• Opening regular U.S.-Russia communication channels
• Building consensus among Western allies on negotiation frameworks
• Implementing de-escalation measures (prisoner exchanges, infrastructure protection agreements)

2. Formal Negotiation Structure:

• Bilateral Ukraine-Russia talks as the primary track
• Contact group involving Ukraine, Russia, key Western powers, and potentially China
• Separate parallel dialogues on U.S.-Russian and NATO-Russian issues

3. Realistic Timeline: RAND emphasizes that successful negotiations would likely require at least one year, drawing parallels to the Korean armistice talks that took two years and over 500 meetings.[6]

Critical Warnings and Limitations

Avoiding Counterproductive Measures:

• Rejecting ultimatum-based approaches that threaten aid cutoffs or dramatic escalations
• Preventing bilateral U.S.-Russia negotiations that exclude Ukraine
• Managing expectations against Trump’s “24-hour” negotiation promises

Key Impediments to Peace Talks:

• Mutual optimism about future war prospects on both sides
• Mutual pessimism about peace implications
• Lack of regular communication channels between key parties

Strategic Context: From Competition to Resolution

RAND’s approach represents an evolution from their earlier 2019 “Extending Russia” strategy, which identified Ukraine as “Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability” and recommended “providing lethal aid to Ukraine” as a cost-imposing measure. The current framework shifts focus from competition to conflict resolution while maintaining strong deterrent capabilities.[10][11]

Conclusion

RAND Corporation’s comprehensive solution framework prioritizes managed conflict termination over prolonged confrontation, emphasizing that while territorial questions may remain unresolved, the broader political and security architecture can be stabilized through creative diplomacy, credible deterrence, and graduated incentive structures. Their approach recognizes that sustainable peace requires addressing the underlying drivers of conflict through a combination of security assurances, accountability mechanisms, and strategic patience in implementation.

The organization’s recommendations reflect a pragmatic assessment that neither a complete Ukrainian victory nor a Russian capitulation is likely, necessitating a negotiated settlement that protects core Western interests while providing both sides with acceptable alternatives to continued warfare.[3][1][6]

Citations

1. https://justworldnews.org/2023/01/31/rands-latest-ukraine-assessment-assessed/
2. https://ssp.mit.edu/news/2023/avoiding-a-long-war-u-s-policy-and-the-trajectory-of-the-russia-ukraine-conflict
3. https://www.cfr.org/podcasts/long-war-ukraine-samuel-charap-and-miranda-priebe
4. https://www.scribd.com/document/867985669/RAND-Corporation-Perspective-Avoiding-a-Long-War-U
5. https://nuclear-news.net/2023/02/03/1-a-avoiding-a-long-war-the-rand-corporation-report/
6. https://www.newgeopolitics.org/2024/12/30/rand-a-pathway-to-peace-in-ukraine/
7. https://www.cfr.org/report/defending-ukraine-absence-nato-security-guarantees
8. https://www.reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/comments/1ap75y9/planning_for_the_aftermath_assessing_options_for/
9. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/west-should-brace-long-term-deterrence-russia
10. https://transnational.live/2022/03/18/a-rand-2019-report-how-the-us-unprovoked-thought-about-undermining-russia-and-used-ukraine-as-it-greatest-vulnerability/
11. https://factum.lk/peace-and-conflict/factum-perspective-overextending-and-unbalancing-russia/