Saturday, December 27, 2008

Palestine and the Fallacy of the Human Sunk Costs Theory


Sunk costs are, in economics, costs that cannot be recovered once they’ve been incurred, regardless of what one does afterwards (as opposed to variable costs).


A good textbook example is a non-refundable plane ticket. If you’ve already bought a non-refundable plane ticket, you can’t get your money back, even if you decide not to go.


People would tend, however, to want to go, so as ‘not to waste the ticket’. This is the fallacy of sunk costs: because you’ve already paid for the ticket regardless. So this money should not be part of your decision process anymore.


Of course, if you haven’t bought it yet, it should still be part of your decision process! Then you’d be arguing whether to pay what remains an avoidable fixed cost, still unpaid.


Of course, we all fall into the trap often. “Might as well, I’ve already paid for it” - how many times have you used this sentence?


The Palestinians, however, don’t fall for the fallacy: they do it voluntarily.


Let me explain.


Israel is constantly increasing the Palestinian death toll. Those dead, logically, can be considered as sunk costs: they are non-recoverable.


By pure economic logic, those dead must not be part of any future resistance/negotiation decision by the Palestinians.


Israel’s logic is economically infallible. The idea is simple: you’ve lost all those people already. Put them in the past. Now if you want to avoid more killed - those avoidable fixed costs - you need to play nice. Yalla, bend over.


In fact, an outside observer might agree. By throwing in terms like ‘cycle of violence’ and ‘perpetuating their own misery’, our friendly outsider may agree that Palestinians are essentially ‘bringing it upon themselves’ because ‘they can’t seem to understand that they will be hit even harder if they continue’.


This is where he’d be wrong.


Because the Israeli army isn’t Expedia.com and you don’t ‘tick the box’ where you agree on their rules of engagement. Because the 195 murdered today in Gaza are not comparable to 195 dollars paid on theatre tickets.


Nor are the other 4900 killed since the beginning of the Intifada, which is yet to come to an end.


You cannot quantify pain, humiliation, occupation. The cost was never sunk to begin with. The wound still bleeds, a day, a year, sixty years after.


Israel is playing the wrong game. Whether they genuinely don’t realise, or do and pretend not to notice, it is going to blow up in their faces eventually.


Because here, another theory will be at play - an old bit of wisdom really: “Fear he who has nothing to lose”. Battered, starved, bombed, widowed, orphaned: the Palestinians are dangerously close to that.



14 comments:

Reb Barry said...

But if the "rational man" theory does not apply to the Israel - Palestinian conflict, how should Israel react ? Just let Hamas keep shooting rockets? Reoccupy Gaza so as to be able to chase down terrorists on the ground ?

Khaled said...

The "rational man" would open the borders and would allow the residents of the Gaza strip to live as human being and At least move freely between West Bank and Gaza. 285 people died during the "cease fire" bc of the lack of the medical services.

Nobody said...

Khaled said...

The "rational man" would open the borders and would allow the residents of the Gaza strip to live as human being and At least move freely between West Bank and Gaza.


These particular human beings are too bent on freely moving in weapons and Jihadists. Also I think 300 rockets in one week is too much. They went a bit overboard with these ballistic games

Anonymous said...

All around the world, the calculus is the same. If you don't want to be bombed, don't shoot rockets at the neighbors. The calculus is the same in the WB, where Abbas seems to understand it. It's the same in Georgia, where Georgia finally figured it out. It's the same when the PKK attacks Turkey from Iraq, and Turkey responds, or when the Taleban/al Qaeda attack the US, and the US attacks Afghanistan.

Only complete morons, and the terror cells of Gaza and Hizballah, continue to think it's a great idea to deliberately shoot rockets at militarily superior neighbors. Of course they whine when the neighbors shoot back.

War isn't a game. The problem here is not that Israel does not understand the situation. Israel understands the situation very well. In all its history, Hamas has only been brought to impose calm by lethal Israeli strikes against Hamas leaders. No other method has ever brought true calm (the farcical recent one-sided calm, during which hundreds of rockets were fired at Israel and Israel did not respond, does not count). Certainly concessions have NEVER led Hamas to peace. Rather, they have increased its violence and strengthened its ability to kill Israelis and get Palestinians killed too.

Since Israel withdrew every last Israeli from Gaza, Hamas has been building up its military force, specifically with the intent to spark a war in which there would be heavy Israeli casualties (see below). Israel opened the war before Hamas was ready, and so Israel is being called "murderer" and accused of all kinds of crimes.

Yeah, poor Hamas.

I'm personally saddened that some civilians have been injured and killed in the vicinity of Hamas military installations placed in civilian areas. I blame Hamas for this, however. There is no way Israel can hit Hamas without killing civilians; Hamas has seen to that. However the vast majority of deaths have been Hamas terrorists. Given that Hamas declared war again on Israel last week, what were you or anyone else expecting?

Don't get me wrong. I like your blog generally, and I really do sympathize with Palestinian aspirations. Hamas, however, is at fault for this conflict, not Israel. Israel withdrew from Gaza. Hamas seized power in a bloody coup and has been having its proxies shoot lightweight artillery at Israeli civilians for several years. Israel very rarely responds.

I also understand that a force with no bolt-hole is more dangerous than one that can back down. Unfortunately, it is HAMAS ITSELF that has seen to it that it could not back down; many leaders, including Israeli, Egyptian, Saudi, Qatari, European, international leaders, have attempted to give it an "out", but it has insisted instead on violence and holding power in its bloody fist. Gaza is where it is now because Hamas thought it could become another Hizballah, and prefers that to creating a society that works.

Most of the blood on Hamas' hands is the blood of Palestinians who die because Hamas insists on militarily attacking a first-world country.

You ask Israel to do the impossible, Mohammed, by ignoring this.

You also weren't in Israel during the height of the 2nd intifadah. Israelis remember that only too well. Israelis know this is not a game, and things have already blown up. Hamas is dedicated to the slaughter of every Israeli Jew, and will do whatever damage it can, whenever it thinks it can get away with it. Only Israel fighting back, for once, ended the days of heavy casualties in the WB. Only Israel fighting back, for once, will do it in Gaza.

You've lived long enough in the middle east to know that despite the many admirable qualities of Palestinians, there has ALWAYS been an irrational and violent passion for revenge in Palestinian Arab culture. It shows up when two Israeli Arab clans quarrel. It shows up when a Jordanian woman dates the wrong guy and "humiliates" her brothers, and is murdered in an "honor crime". And it shows up over and over in Hamas, which believes that it can't abandon violence because to do so would betray the Cause, which fundamentally is about blood-hatred and Revenge, not land, not holy places, not improving the Palestinian lot in the world. That IS the fallacy of sunk costs, but wrapped up in so much craziness that it's impossible for most who believe in it to recognize it.

Sorry about the length of this. Thanks for the chance to respond.

- Zvi

Mo-ha-med said...

Reb Barry - no need to 'reoccupy' Gaza: it already is, and has continuously been since 1967. The 2005 redeployment didn't 'liberate' Gaza. Everything, from air/sea/land borders remain in Israeli control. The movement of persons and goods is just as impossible as it's been for a while. And the occasional 'incursion' never stopped.
How should Israel react? Well, i can tell how it shouldn't react. And mass murder is a really bad idea.

Khaled - yep. For some reason, the blockade, the starvation, etc etc - isn't considered part of the Israeli warfare against the Palestinians, despite it being probably the most wicked type of all. At least, with a building is bombed, it's bombed. But when your kid is dying because there are no antibiotics in the hospital, it takes sensibly longer.

Zvi - I could argue that the comparisons you use are pretty much all erroneous but it's not our point. Although, even when the US attacks Afghanistan and they hit civilians, at least an investigation is opened. Israel, on the other hand, cares so little for human lives it's almost embarrassing.

You refer to the recent 'one-sided calm' - what calm? Why is it so hard to see that when Israel denies medical supplies to Gaza, it is taking severe hostile action against it? Does it not count?
I think it does. It counts sensibly more than the quasi-firecrackers that those Hamas idiots have been throwing in the Negev. I don't want to engage in a gruesome body count but I will if it is the only way to convince you that Israel was never a one-sided recipient of hostility in this story, no matter how far back in time you want to go.

You are correct, Zvi, I wasn't in Israel during the height of the intifada. What I heard was gruesome. And I wish for no one to have be worried about their kids riding a fucking bus or sitting in a cafe because it might blow up.
But you know what? My gut feeling, my fear, is this is exactly what is going to happen. Again.
And I hope I'm wrong.

As usual - my thanks to all for engaging in this conversation.

Khaled said...

I totally can't understand the israeli targets nowadays. They are targetting medical supplies, fuel storage, mosques and civilians residential areas.

I watch the israeli channels and they are nothing but one sided. The israeli media mobilize during these days against "the Other". It is truly unfortunate, that the israeli "LEFT" for example Meretz is fully supporting this operation.

I don't personally think that the israeli operation in GAZA would force Hamas to stop launching attacks against ISRAEL. The equation is simple:
GAZA IS 6-12 KM wide. They have rockets that can reach somewhere between 10KM and 30KM. This means if they started launching the rockets from infront the see they can hit as far as ashkelon عسقلان.

I hope that someone in Israel would stand up and SAY no to the agression against inoccent civilans in Gaza strip. I don't support any attack that comes out of Gaza against any inoccent israeli civilian, but this shouldn't be taken as an excuse to hit Gaza the way it is being hit with right now.

Piglet said...

Basically Mohammed we are screwed if we do and screwed if we don't.Both sides I mean.
So you tell me how we 'break the cycle of violence' cos I don't know any more...

aliyah06 said...

Let me tip-toe in here:

(1) why would we open our borders to the citizens of Gaza who are dedicated to killing us? And have sent citizens in need of medical treatment through the borders equipped with suicide bomb belts and instructions to blow up the hospital waiting room?

(2) why can't the citizens of Gaza get medical treatment from Egypt, with whom they also share a border?

(3)why hasn't Hamas used all the money it gets for hospitals, medical supplies, waste-water-treatment and desalinization plants, new construction of hotels, business parks and homes INSTEAD of insisting its people learn jihad, hatred, purchase weapons on a massive scale, and keep folks pinned in slums and 'refugee camps' instead of creating jobs and neighborhoods?

(4) the blockade started with the Intifada's exercise in mass murder against civilians in buses and pizza parlors, and the screws tightened with the election of Hamas, openly dedicated to Jewish genocide. The missiles started wayyy before either of these events, so don't invert events to justify war crimes.

(5) Khaled, with respect, the targets are based on intelligence--how good, I don't know, but I know I've seen repeatedly on BBC and SkyNews the picture of the residential compound that was hit -- and lo and behold, a Grad missile blew out of the house! Imagine that--Gazans storing weapons in their homes, just like Hezbollah did! I'd bet you lunch that any mosque or 'cultural center' that was hit also had weapons in it....

Beyond this discussion, I think this whole thing is tragic. I don't want my neighbor's kid to die in Gaza; I don't want a Palestinian mother's 18-year-old Islamic Jihad recruit to die, either, frankly. They should both live long productive happy lives and die many years from now, honored by their grandchildren.

But....like the Palestinians, the Israelis feel we have nothing to lose. Hamas wouldn't renew the truce; Hamas still subscribes to the "river-to-the-Sea" contruct of Palestine; Hamas subscribes still to the Three Noes of Khartoum; Hamas is genocidal and won't quit shooting missiles at civilian targets. So, since diplomacy, embargo/blockade, isolation, truce all haven't worked -- what's left?

Reb Barry said...

Mohamed, I would say Gaza has been under siege, but not under occupation. It's a difference. The West Bank, on the other hand, has been under occupation, but not under siege.

If we agree that Hamas' attacks on Israel justify a military response--which most people would agree to, since it's hard to say you should sit around while people drop rockets on you--the question becomes what kind of military response.

One could argue that Israel should have used fewer air forces and more ground forces, which would result in lower Palestinian civilian casualties (and higher Israeli military casualties).

Either way, it's a miserable situation, war sucks, innocent people being injured sucks, let us all pray for an end to the violence all around...

Khaled said...

You know what is the Difference between Israel and Hamas?

Hamas rockets are untargetted and they can hardly cause any damage or injuries to the israeli side.... On the other hand, the israeli air strikes and operations are supposably "targetted" and they end up killing tens or in this case even hundreds hundreds of civilians.....

Personally, I think this operation would be nothing but unsuccessful.

Mo-ha-med said...

Khaled: Regarding the success or lack thereof of this war, it will be just like Lebanon'06: the actual victorious party will be forced to claim defeat, whereas the beaten party, by virtue of, well, existence, will claim victory! One thing is sure though: many will die!

Piglet: I see your point. I don't have the solution to breaking the cycle of violence (well, besides negotiations and peace talks and all those other fairy tale-concepts). What I do know is that the current offensive isn't the solution. Really.

Reb Barry: I think that both practically and legally, Gaza remains occupied. A non-occupied (ie free) country would have borders, a population, and the coercion of violence. Given that they have no control over their borders and that a foreign country can - and does- project its power within Gaza, it is not a free country.

In any case... count me in your minyan for the prayers for peace!

Aliyah06: You are always welcome to tip-toe in here. :)

1) It's not about opening YOUR borders. It's about opening THEIR borders which you control.
And I doubt the blowing hospital waiting room story - but even if it's true, the same logic would imply that I shouldn't be talking to Israelis because some of them wish my death. And there are :).

What Israel is asked to do is what international agreements it has signed preclude: allow the movement of humanitarian (allow for the creation of a 'humanitarian corridor' goes the ICRC convention, if i'm not mistaken).
Just led UNRWA feed and treat the people!!

2) Good question. There are now people entering Egypt for treatment (because of the strikes on Rafah yesterday), and a dozen Egyptian ambulances were stationed at the border and shuttling people to the hospitals.
This said - I think Egypt's response is shamefully below adequate levels.

3) What money? Banks aren't allowed to send transfers to Gaza since June 05. At work in Ramallah, we'd add projects to be implemented in Gaza pro forma, but nothing goes in anyway - nor money, nor construction materials. So we just mentioned it at the end.
You simply cannot do anything in Gaza.

And there are no jobs (50% official unemployment!!) because companies are closing: nothing to produce with, and nowhere to sell it. Farmers dumped their 07 and 08 crops of flowers in the sea because they couldn't export them. The people who have jobs are those working for the mini-government in place.

4) I'm not justifying any war crimes. And do you really want to go the 'who started it' thing? Because it's an easy but pointless argument - whether you start in 2007, 2006, 2005, 2000, 1967 or even 1948...
There are war crimes. And Israel is also guilty of these. And there is no justification for that.

5) And you're basing this assumption based on what? The need to tell yourself that the five sisters who were killed as the mosque was shot died because they were really undercover terrorists and hid weapons in their closets? I beg you to open your eyes to the eventuality - just the eventuality - that the IDF isn't always moral.

*) Israelis feeling like they have nothing to lose: I see what you mean. the feeling of being cornered. and the violent reaction that ensues. I can understand that.

But.. don't you think that the Palestinians can feel cornered too?

aliyah06 said...

Maybe you summed it up right there in your last comment--both sides feel cornered, amd each is afraid to compromise with the other? Israel has felt like it has been under seige from the beginning in 1948 (for the record, I know the Palestinians see it differently, but I'm talking about our feelings and fears) and many of us also feel that what movements have been made towards peace (Oslo, the Gaza disengagement) backfired and led to more Israeli deaths.

That's why the borders are closed--we think of them as OUR borders also, and want to keep out people we think are intent on killing us.

Here's the link on the suicide bomber trying to reach the hospital: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8330374
I don't have the answer. I don't have a solution. I was afraid it would come to this, and my feeling is that Hamas provoked it deliberately. I can only explain the fears and feelings on this side. I was more optimistic a few weeks ago, less so now.

Gila said...

commenting a bit late, but nonetheless... regarding the rational man plan--opening up the borders. This reminds me of a conversation I had with a Palestinian woman at an NGO-organized event bringing the "wounded" from the two sides together. She, predictably, argued that Israel should get rid of all of the road blocks around, say Beit Lechem and allow free, unchecked entry into Israel. My question to her: And if we do that, are YOU going to guarantee that another suicide bomber will not take advantage of this to come in and try to finish the job?

Of course, she could not. She knew she could not. And given the high percentage of Palestinians who support Hamas and terror organizations, I can see why. Open borders=bombing.

We are damned if we have the roadblocks and we are blown up if we don't. I have gone through both at this point--being damned is preferable.

I do want peace. I am willing to trade territory for it. I think building in areas which should be given back in any permanent agreement is wrong. (Not to mention stupid). By no means am I far-right. But a situation in which terror attacks are a constant threat cannot be described as "peace".

Mo-ha-med said...

An intelligent comment is never too late. :)
It's not about unchecked open borders into Israel. Although, one time, not too long ago, that was the case.

When we speak about opening Gaza's borders it's about allowing them to get out of there - not necessarily into Israel. Into the West Bank (which has been nearly impossible in the past 8 or 9 years). Into a third country: a Palestinian colleague was invited to a conference I attended in Norway, but the Israeli Army wouldn't allow her in. Etc.

No one denies the Israelis the right to protect themselves. Or to search people. But simply denying people freedom of movement is unnecessary.

As for roadblocks in the West Bank: they are really, really useless. Gosh, you have to see that. In the, what, 70 km from Ramallah to Jenin, you are stopped 3 times by the Israeli army. It takes half a day to do the trip, on a good day.
And of course you don't anywhere near Israel. So what's the purpose?? It's just punitive... Roadblocks or lack thereof have nothing to do with bombings in Israel.