They know the answer already, and are probably both trying it.
In US terminology, since that’s the language I know, they try for “competition” rather than “conflict”. The difference being whether they respect each other’s sovereignty for the most part while trying to bury the other, and don’t take straight-up military actions.
To achieve this, you provide a long series of “offramps” - opportunities to pause and de-escalate - on the path between peace and MAD, and ensure there is no benefit to either party to do any specific escalation. Mistakes will happen, both deliberate and accidental, but they’re very unlikely to all happen at the same time, so even if things get tense there’s offramps left, and game-theoretically they will take one because nobody wants a full-scale nuclear conflict.
They know the answer already, and are probably both trying it.
In US terminology, since that’s the language I know, they try for “competition” rather than “conflict”. The difference being whether they respect each other’s sovereignty for the most part while trying to bury the other, and don’t take straight-up military actions.
To achieve this, you provide a long series of “offramps” - opportunities to pause and de-escalate - on the path between peace and MAD, and ensure there is no benefit to either party to do any specific escalation. Mistakes will happen, both deliberate and accidental, but they’re very unlikely to all happen at the same time, so even if things get tense there’s offramps left, and game-theoretically they will take one because nobody wants a full-scale nuclear conflict.