Skip to main content



Logic in Politics?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/12/opinion/veto-a-state-lose-an-ally.html?_r=4&emc=eta1

As we learned in class, complex political relationships can sometimes be modeled as simple two player games.  The Palestinian Authority’s (P.A.) bid for statehood to the United Nations has been in recent headlines, and has the potential to change Palestine’s relationship with not only Israel, but the rest of the world, including the United States.  Thus far, the U.S. is opposed to the U.N. voting on Palestine’s statehood, and instead favors a two-party solution based on negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.  The results of the decisions of the United States and the Palestinian Authority can be made into a payoff matrix in which the U.S.’s “strategies” would be to either support or oppose Palestine’s bid for statehood, while the Palestinian Authority’s “strategies” would be to either continue with their bid to the U.N., or withdraw it.

Palestine neither gains nor loses anything by not going forward with its plea, as that basically maintains the status quo.  This is quantified as a payoff of 0 in the matrix.  However, if the P.A. decides to continue their petition  and the United States does not support the vote, Palestine then risks losing financial aid from the U.S. and others.  This is not something Palestine would like to see, as its economy is dependent on foreign aid, so the payoff of bidding for statehood is less.  In the case that the U.S. does support the plea, then Palestinians would be able to continue receiving aid, which would provide Palestine with the greatest positive outcome of 100.

What the U.S. decides to do is more interesting, as it has a greater impact on the world.  In the case that the U.S. does not support the Palestinian plea, the op-ed article lists many negative outcomes that could occur.  One definite impact would be skepticism from other nations over America’s role in negotiating the peace process between Israel and Palestinians.  Not only would it decrease American influence and credibility in the Middle-East, the U.S. would likely lose its relationship with Saudi Arabia, a critical ally in its war against terrorism. Furthermore, if the U.S. does not support Palestine’s bid, it could lead to increased conflict in the region, undermining Israeli security, and increasing chances of another war, which is negative for the U.S as it would be forced to interfere.  Therefore, in the payoff matrix, the U.S. has the greatest negative outcome in the case that Palestine goes forward with their bid without American support so the payoff is -100.  If Palestine decides not to continue with their bid, and the U.S. continues to oppose the U.N. vote, then that also is the status quo for the U.S., so the U.S. has a payoff of 0.

One of the main benefits to the United States for supporting the P.A.’s petition would be that Palestinian statehood could offer a lasting peace between Palestine and Israel, something that has the U.S. has been trying to achieve for decades.  According to the op-ed, it would also allow the U.S. to continue to have influence over Saudi Arabia and thus the rest of the Arab world.  Lastly, supporting Palestine would be a chance to weaken Iran, which has been working with Syria to destabilize the region by supporting Hamas and Hezbollah.  The U.S. has the greatest positive payoff by supporting the P.A. if it continues with its bid so that case is quantified as positive 100. There is less of a payoff for supporting the vote (though still a positive one) if Palestine decides to withdraw, because the U.S. would earn respect from many nations for its decision to support the vote.

According to game theory, the only Nash equilibrium for the payoff matrix modeling this situation is the case where the U.S. supports the Palestinian bid for statehood if the Palestinian Authority continues with their petition.  The U.S.‘s best response to the P.A. continuing is to support the bid, while the P.A.’s best response to U.S. support is to go forward with its plea for statehood.  Hence the question is, why is the United States going against the rules of logic by not supporting the Palestinian Authority’s bid for statehood to the U.N?

The U.S.\Palestinian Authority

Bid

Don’t Bid

Support

(100, 100)

(50, 0)

Oppose

(-100, 50)

(0,0)

Comments

Leave a Reply

Blogging Calendar

September 2011
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Archives