Two men are offered $100,000.00 -- All they have to do to earn it is to come to
an agreement on how they will split the money among themselves.
No problem.
Except that one of the men refuses to split the money evenly. Instead, he
demands 90% of the cash or he will leave and neither of them will get anything
-- and he insists on receiving that 90% regardless of the other man's
arguments. Sure enough, realizing that the 'blackmailer' is not going to
budge, the other man realizes he has no choices other than to agree to accept
10% of the money, or leave empty-handed.
So he takes the $10,000.
And the blackmailer pockets the other $90,000.
Welcome to the pre-Trump Middle East.
Nobel Prize winner Robert Aumann described this in 2010 as
"The Blackmailer's Paradox," and explains how Israel's desire for peace with the Arabs suffers from the
same problems.
Namely:
1. There is an underlying assumption that agreements must be reached with the
Arabs at any price -- and the failure to reach an agreement is unacceptable.
2. Just like the man who accepts the $10,000 -- who sees the situation as a
one-time game -- Israel focuses on the short, immediate term instead of seeing
the immediate situation as part of the long term, and as an opportunity to
establish precedents and initiatives for another, different opportunity at
some point down the road. In the paradox above, instead of accepting the
$10,000 -- the man could have stood his ground and refused to give in, thereby
setting the groundwork for a potential opportunity that might come up later.
Aumann believes that the problem isn’t that the Israelis and Arabs don’t
want peace, but rather that the Israelis and their U.S. patron believe
they are playing a one-time game whereas the Arabs see themselves as
playing a repeated game. Jerusalem and Washington are in a hurry to
conclude negotiations immediately, whereas the Arabs are willing to wait
it out and keep playing the same game. The result is that
Israel’s concessions, or the desire to have peace now, have brought
no peace.
...“For repetition to engender co-operation, the
players must not be too eager for immediate results,” Aumann said in his
lecture. “The present, the now, must not be important. If you want peace
now, you may well never get peace. But if you have time—if you can
wait—that changes the whole picture; then you may get peace now.”
3. Like the blackmailer, the Arabs have complete and total faith in their
position, which empowers them to demand preconditions and even concessions
up front. This confidence also convinces the other side, and the West in
general, of the rightness of the Arab cause.
Meanwhile, Israel collapsed under Obama on all three points. It was
compelled to publicly state its support for a two state solution which
may-or-may-not be the best outcome for an enduring peace. It was repeatedly
pushed for “good will gestures” that showed that Israel would take immediate
action and would not walk away from the table. And far-left wing
organizations such as J Street and the New Israel Fund actively undermined
the faith and conviction that Jews have a basic human right to live in homes
that they legally purchase. [emphasis added]
The idea isn’t convincing the other guys to like you, or to even be civil to
you. The idea is to convince them that you’re prepared to walk; that you’re
thinking long-term, not just Obama’s term; that you convince yourself that
you’re playing for keeps, that you have the winning hand, that you’re the
meanest dog in the junk yard — showing your teeth, even as you smile — and
in the process you convince your opponent, too.
And that is what the Trump administration did, by taking the step which the
Obama administration never contemplated: recognizing and supporting some of
Israel's claims, while at the same time holding back on support of the
Palestinian Arabs.
In response, the Arabs did what they consistently do. They played the long
game as opposed to the one-time game -- and waited out the Trump
administration.
What Trump did was change the way the game was played.
Kind of like the Kobayashi Maru.
In the second Star Trek movie, the Kobayashi Maru is a training exercise
designed to test the character of Starfleet cadets in a no-win scenario.
The cadet is assigned in a simulation to rescue the disabled civilian vessel
Kobayashi Maru, located in the Klingon Neutral Zone, knowing that any
Starfleet ship entering the zone will cause an interstellar border incident.
The cadet crew must choose whether to attempt a rescue of the Kobayashi Maru
crew – endangering their own ship and lives – or abandon the Kobayashi Maru to
certain destruction. If the cadet chooses to attempt a rescue, the simulation
is deliberately designed to guarantee that the cadet's ship is destroyed with
the loss of all crew members.
In the movie, Captain Kirk is the only one to ever successfully complete the
mission, rescue the Kobayashi Maru, and escape the Klingons unscathed.
How?
Kirk secretly reprogrammed the computer to allow for the possibility of rescue
-- because he does not believe in "no-win" scenarios.
In going contrary to accepted wisdom, both in pursuing Middle East peace with
other Arab countries while bypassing the Palestinian Arabs and in applying
pressure on the Palestinian Arabs instead of on Israel, Trump rewrote the
accepted, calcified way of pursuing peace -- Trump basically pursued a
strategy worthy of Captain Kirk.
Source: YouTube screencap
Well, maybe not exactly.
But the degree to which Trump exploded the accepted myths by reprogramming how
Middle East peace can be accomplished can be seen in the reactions that
followed.
According to Wikipedia, while the movie itself does not discuss the consequences of rejecting the
rescue mission, it is discussed in Star Trek novels and video games that
followed -- with consequences that include the mutiny of the crew.
So while Trump has been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize (similar to Kirk
receiving a commendation for "original thinking"), there has also been a
backlash.
Øyvind Tønnesson, a former adviser and editor for the Nobel Institute's Peace
Prize section,
told Newsweek:
In principle, then, I would not rule out either Netanyahu nor Trump as
theoretically possible NPP [Nobel Peace Prize] candidates. My personal
opinion, however, is that their policies and personal records stand, for the
most part, in stark contrast to the main trajectories in international peace
politics that the NPP has followed since 1901.
To which Aumann offered the counterargument:
The Peace Prize is for peace, not for being a nice guy. It's true that it
was given to Mother Teresa and later to Obama, but neither one brought
peace. Netanyahu brought peace, and is bringing more of the same.
And it is interesting to imagine if Trump might have brought more of the
same as well.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For 20 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.
This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024
-
[image: This Week’s Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024] This Week’s
Sanity Report from Israel Dec. 22, 2024 IsraelSeen.com
This Week’s Sanity Report f...
Israel’s Anti-UNRWA Campaign is Working
-
The IDF has gathered evidence that proves that dozens of UNRWA staff
members took part in the atrocities — rapes, tortures, mutilations, murders
— carried ...
An Observation on Israelis and Archaeology
-
Ariel David of Haaretz reported on a new find, one that appears here and
deals with An Israelite Residency at Mahanaim in Transjordan?
It deals with "th...
Hamas/Gaza War Musings #36- Dangerous Surrender!
-
As a student of the Bible/Tanach, most recently Prophets/Navi, that's the
message. Gd will save us if we do the right thing. That's how we won the
1967...
One Choice: Fight to Win
-
Yesterday Israel preempted a potentially disastrous attack by Hezbollah on
the center of the country. Thirty minutes before launch time, our aircraft
destr...
Closing Jews Down Under Website
-
With a heavyish heart I am closing down the website after ten years.
It is and it isn’t an easy decision after 10 years of constant work. The
past...
‘Test & Trace’ is a mirage
-
Lockdown II thoughts: Day 1 Opposition politicians have been banging on
about the need for a ‘working’ Test & Trace system even more loudly than
the govern...