Obama: fine words and a touch of game theory

Sir, Departing from the tone of his previous narrative, alienating Israeli leadership and public alike, on his recent trip to Israel President Barack Obama used a combination of empathy, basic needs theory and even some game theory to make the case to young Israelis that a peace agreement with the Palestinians would be in their best interests; that they could, indeed, “be the generation that permanently secures the Zionist dream” (“Obama urges Israel to support peace deal”, report, March 22).

Mr Obama directly challenged his young audience at the Jerusalem Convention Center to put themselves into the shoes of Palestinians and see the world from their eyes, including children who are denied the opportunities and advantages that Israelis enjoy, such as freedom from “the presence of a foreign army that controls the movements of [their] parents every single day”. He also argued that “just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people in their own land”; that they too “deserve justice and self-determination”.

Perhaps the most compelling part of Mr Obama’s text was his nuanced use of the prisoner’s dilemma and its inherent clash between individual self-interest and collective welfare, to demonstrate that “the only way for Israel to endure and thrive as a Jewish and democratic state is through the realisation of an independent and viable Palestine”. He made the critical point, therefore, that the outcomes of Israeli and Palestinian decisions are co-determined – each depends on and is influenced by the other.

Given the frequency and intensity of the applause that Mr Obama received throughout his speech, including for every reference he made to the need for Palestinian justice and self-determination, it is clear that he connected powerfully and emotionally with his young audience and may even have convinced them that peace is indeed possible and that they must push their political leaders to achieve that heretofore illusory goal.

Clearly, much depends on the Palestinian reaction and maintaining this momentum, including, as Philip Stephens argues in “The Middle East needs more than fine words” (March 22), keeping the US in the game: “The imperative ... is US leadership [and] sustained presidential engagement.” Otherwise, whatever chances there are for a two-state solution to emerge from a reset of the Israeli-Palestinian talks will disappear. Mr Obama has definitely made a good start.