The Two-State Dilemma
A Game Theory Perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
-
- $15.99
-
- $15.99
Publisher Description
Can game theory illuminate the options in the Israel & Palestinian conflict? Michael Dan, a former neurosurgeon, examines the most intractable conflict in the world through the lens of game theory, a mathematical approach to decision-making. The Zionist dream, to create a Jewish state with a Jewish majority in the whole of Palestine, is no longer tenable. But neither is two states for two peoples. What options are left, then? The only thing that's for certain is that both sides must find a way to live together. The aim of this book is to give the knowledgeable reader of Israeli & Palestinian affairs a fresh way to look at an old and seemingly intractable conflict.
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
Dan, a senior fellow at York University's Glendon School of Public and International Affairs, debuts with a stimulating exploration of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from the perspective of game theory. He concisely summarizes a century of clashes between Jews seeking to establish a Jewish state and the Arabs living there, making the history accessible even for readers not familiar with the details. Dan examines the past and potential future using questions game theory poses notably "Who are the players? What game(s) are they playing? And what does co-operation or winning look like?" and explains proposals for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a Prisoner's Dilemma. The potential outcomes are outlined as "a one-state solution, two-state solution, a Zionist state, and an Arab state." Dan then questions the viability of a Jewish state given demographic realities such as the birthrate of Palestinians living on the West Bank and concludes that there are only two likely outcome: "either an Arab state, or a state where Jews and Palestinians learn to set aside their differences and pursue a program of reconciliation and rational co-operation," which may seem impossible or unwelcome to many. Nonetheless, Dan's logical assessment makes a strong argument against the feasibility of two-state solutions. (Self-published)
