Lame Duck Wisdom

Via Mike Tomasky, some words of wisdom from outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert:

Were a regional war to break out in the next year or two and were we to enter into a military confrontation with Syria, I have no doubt that we’d defeat them soundly. We are stronger than they. Israel is the strongest country in the Middle East. We could contend with any of our enemies or against all of our enemies combined and win. The question that I ask myself is, what happens when we win? First of all, we’d have to pay a painful price.

And after we paid the price, what would we say to them? “Let’s talk.” And what would the Syrians say to us? “Let’s talk about the Golan Heights.”

So, I ask: Why enter a war with the Syrians, full of losses and destruction, in order to achieve what might be achieved without paying such a heavy price?

Too bad we never quite seem to be able to get this kind of insight from an Israeli political leader actually in a position to do something. It’s worth noting, meanwhile, that Olmert’s basic point here is generally applicable and has nothing in particular to do with Israel and Syria. Under modern conditions, warfare is almost invariably a negative-sum enterprise whereas peacetime activities such as trade and tourism are positive-sum. Basically, there are a wide range of possible settlements — some more favorable to one party, others more favorable to the other party — that would be more favorable to both parties than would be an escalation of conflict. If you think, for example, about the India-Pakistan dispute over Kashmir it’s clear that the cost to both countries of the decades-worth of conflict (not only in terms of direct costs, but also things like the opportunity costs entailed by having a very poor country like Pakistan poor so much money into a nuclear arms race) is much higher than the cost of any conceivable resolution of the issue. And that’s to say nothing of the prospect that tens of millions of people will someday die in a nuclear exchange. But obsession with issues of relative gain — worry that if you settle for anything less than a maximally favorable agreement you’ll “look weak” or some such — tends to block mutually beneficial agreements.