This market resolves YES if:
An armistice, ceasefire, or negotiated settlement is announced by both Ukraine and Russia regarding the ongoing war in Ukraine at any point between the Associated Press calling the election for Donald Trump, and April 19, 2025, 11:59 PM ET.
To count toward the resolution of this market, an armistice, ceasefire, and/or negotiated settlement must be indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict, must pertain to all theaters of military conflict between the two countries, and be declared through official channels by both countries. The specific date that such an agreement will take effect is not relevant to the resolution of this market. The only requirement is that the agreement must be announced within this market's specified timeframe.
To count toward the resolution of this market, an armistice, ceasefire, and/or negotiated settlement must be indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict, must pertain to all theaters of military conflict between the two countries, and be declared through official channels by both countries.
See also Polymarket's market.
See also:
Update 2025-07-01 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Comprehensive Ceasefire: A ceasefire that means 'nobody can fight at all for the next week' would count as a temporary end to the conflict.
Localized Ceasefire: A ceasefire that means 'no fighting in this little area but everywhere else is fine' would not count.
1,000
3.00https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-january-3-2025
"Putin and other Kremlin officials have repeatedly demanded conditions for ending the war that amount to Ukraine's complete capitulation, including the removal of the legitimate Ukrainian government and Ukraine's demilitarization."
For that reason, I think Ukraine will keep fighting even without US aid.
@TimothyJohnson5c16 agreed no permanent end to war, but ceasefire counts for purposes of this market and i view that as sooooo much more likely
@No_uh I could see a ceasefire for a limited duration, but I don't think that would necessarily satisfy the requirement of being "indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict".
@TimothyJohnson5c16 I’d argue that a ceasefire declared by both sides and applying to all theaters is, by definition, a temporary end to hostilities—even if it’s fragile. The market explicitly includes ceasefires in its wording because it recognizes that even a brief pause in all theaters meets the threshold for a “temporary end.” If the market didn’t consider a ceasefire as a form of suspension of the conflict, it wouldn’t have mentioned it at all.
@Bair yeah I think the description is excessively wordy. I feel the very nature of a ceasfire is YES resolve-worthy. the only meaning of 'ceasefire' (general term) i see as non-yes resolving is both sides literally run out of both arms, and soldiers with which to do battle, and therefore have no choice but to wait lol.
To count toward the resolution of this market, an armistice, ceasefire, and/or negotiated settlement must be indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict
Sometimes ceasefires are mere pauses to allow for negotiations or humanitarian aid (as in the Israel-Palestine conflict). Mere pauses are not intended to indicate even a temporary end of the conflict. So I disagree that just any ceasefire meeting the other conditions should count by definition.
@Bayesian Do you want to weigh in on how you plan to resolve this? It seems there's still some disagreement.
@NicoDelon
If a ceasefire applies to all fronts and is declared by both governments, that literally stops hostilities everywhere—so regardless of whether we call it a “pause,” that’s still a temporary end to the conflict. The market doesn’t require a permanent resolution; it’s enough that no shots are being fired across all theaters. Even a short-lived, comprehensive ceasefire is more than a trivial pause; it’s exactly what “temporary end” means.
@TimothyJohnson5c16 I plan to resolve this in accordance with the polymarket market since they have the same resolution criterion. I am not well versed in world conflicts and how exactly ceasefires work so I’ll at least in part be relying on other people to resolve this fairly, but my understanding is that a ceasefire that means ‘nobody can fight at all for the next week’ would count as a temporary end to the conflict, whereas ‘no fighting in this little area but everywhere else is fine’ wouldn’t count
@Bayesian To be clear, if it seems clear polymarket misresolved their market or sensible people I talk to are convinced they misresolved I will not just automatically copy polymarket’s resolution.
@Bayesian
Polymarket resolution criteria have this line:
> The specific date that such an agreement will take effect is not relevant to the resolution of this market. The only requirement is that the agreement must be announced within this market's specified timeframe.
Arguably, it doesn't matter if the sides really commit to ceasefire/pause/armistice/settlement/whatever or not, only the announcement matters, because the announcement can happen before the resolution date and the armistice - after.
@Bair What I mean is that a brief pause specifically designed to allow for humanitarian aid or negotiations, even on all fronts, does not put even a temporary end to the conflict in any meaningful sense. There’s a genuine difference between end and pause regardless of their duration. If I take a nap during my workday it’s not a temporary end of my workday; it’s a mere pause. If I call it a day at 4pm but end up working later in the evening again, I did put a temporary end to my day. Those two events strike me as meaningfully different.
@Bayesian I read the description carefully so this remark isn’t for me, but you really open yourself up to drama by keeping this title. If a daylong pause unrelated to Trump triggers a YES resolution it’s really weird for the market to be asking whether Trump will end the war. I know you’ve been there below in the comments, but I’m unpersuaded.
@Bayesian in fairness to you it now seems unlikely a ceasefire or armistice would be unrelated to Trump.
@NicoDelon This seems salient, e.g. this difference is one of the key elements in the Gaza/Hamas/Israel negotiations - will their ceasefire be intended to be temporary or intended to be permanent.
@Bayesian yeah polymarket has terrible titles. Ceasefire that doesn't end the war has always been the most likely way for this to resolve yes.
President-elect Trump picked retired general Keith Kellogg as his special envoy for the Russia-Ukraine war. Earlier this year, Kellogg co-authored a strategy paper that proposed that the US should negotiate a ceasefire in Ukraine, continue to arm Ukraine so long as Ukraine participates in peace talks, withhold support for NATO membership for Ukraine, and offer Russia sanctions relief contingent on an end to the war.