The Failure of Bargaining Theory: A Look at the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

According to the bargaining theory of war, war is never the ideal solution because it costs both sides money, resources, and lives (Shirk, 2014). Therefore, a deal is always preferable to rational actors, and all conflicts can be divisible in order to avoid these costly wars (Shirk, 2014). Wars start, then, because of imperfect information, commitment problems, and the inability of states to mitigate anarchy (Shirk, 2014). However, this theory is far too theoretical to apply to most real world situations, and fails to account for highly complex conflicts.  The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is just one example of an issue that the bargaining theory has no answer for.

            Israel is a small nation located east of the Mediterranean, and the world’s only Jewish state (Beauchamp, 2014). Palestinians, the Arab population that originates from the land now controlled by Israel, refer to this territory as Palestine, and want to establish their own state of that name on some or all of the same land (Beauchamp, 2014). Israel was established because European Jews fleeing persecution wanted to return to their ancestral homeland and create a Jewish state. Israelis believe that Jews deserve their own state in their ancestral homeland, and need such a state to escape the rampant anti-Semitism in the world (Beauchamp, 2014).  Palestinians view this Zionism as a direct threat to their existence and a means of disenfranchising Arabs. They believe the land was rightfully theirs before the influx of European Jews in the 20^th century (Beauchamp, 2014).  Therefore, the aims of each side are directly in conflict with each other. One side cannot be appeased without the other side being frustrated.

This conflict cannot be easily divided because both sides will only be satisfied when they have achieved all of their goals in their entirety. For the Israelis, this means the establishment of a Jewish state free of Palestinian aggression. For Palestinians, this means the dissolution of any Jewish state and the return of land that they believe was rightfully theirs. For both sides, this means controlling Jerusalem and the West Bank, which are home to some of the holiest sites in both Islam and Judaism (Beauchamp, 2014). These are crucial aspects of the demands of each side, and neither is willing to compromise on these disputes. Therefore, fighting continues in the region today.

One proposed solution is called the “two-state solution,” which would create two separate states and therefore divide the conflict like bargaining theory would suggest. However, Israelis and Palestians have been unable to reach a two-state agreement for years because the goals of each side are in such direct conflict. The alternative solution is a “one-state solution,” which would merge Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip into one country (Beauchamp, 2014). But this plan is similarly insufficient and undesirable to both sides. If the new state were to become a democracy, Arabs would outnumber Jews, therefore eliminating the chance for a Jewish state (Beauchamp, 2014). In order to secure a Jewish state under these terms, Palestinians would need to be forced out of the region or denied the right to vote, which and “virtually the entire world, including most Zionists, reject this option as an unacceptable human rights violation” (Beauchamp, 2014).

The sources of disagreement between Israel and Palestine cannot simply be explained as “imperfect information” or “commitment problems.” In reality, there is no such thing as perfect information. There is no universal law stating who the land “rightfully belongs to,” and therefore each side believes the land to be theirs. And while it is true that the Palestinians have failed to produce credible commitments, disregarding Israeli authority and breaking cease-fires, as I have explained, the root of the problem is much deeper than one side going back on their word. 

I am not attempting to espouse my support for one side or the other in my explanation of this conflict. I am also not proposing a solution that I think would end this constant fighting. However, I am arguing that if the international community hopes to end this conflict without one side attempting to eliminate the other, it must employ more creative ways of addressing the issue.

Sources:

Beauchamp, Z. (2014). Everything You Need to Know About Israel-Palestine. Vox.com. Retrieved from http://www.vox.com/cards/israel-palestine/intro.

Shirk, M. (2014). Lecture 9: War.