Objective vs. Subjective

Objective: a source of conflicts which its characteristics are of which that stress rational behavior and focus on “interests” in the analysis of politics, domestic, or international. When different interests by different people can not be met, then the pursuit of one’s own interest does not seem irrational.

This conflict is seen as an objective conflict because it surrounds the idea of conquering an object (territory). In other words, it is seen as “givens” that exists independently from our thoughts and feelings. Anything that deals with land, wealth, and power are all “objective” ideas. They are not only seen as objective because they exist independently from our feelings but because these objects create conflicts between people because it is impossible to meet all of the demands unless there is a political process to decide who gets what.

Due to the fact that both Israeli’s and Palestinian’s are acting on behalf of their own interests rather than on behalf of emotions, then there is a higher possibility that both will be able to cooperate with one another in order to come up with a compromise that will suit both peoples. Especially since in the read world it is very rare that most conflicts are a “zero-sum” conflict.

Subjective: the source of the conflict is produced by the mind, feelings, or temperaments of the subject. This includes ideas and ideologies, perceptions and misperceptions, cultural and societal biases, and emotions and passions; in other words, anything that is derived from our mental activity.

In theory, conflicts that are subjective should be solvable because they are not considered to be a “real” conflict. In a way, it is all artificial because they are created within our minds and just as easily as the mind can create them, the mind can easily erase them.

However, our minds may be less responsive to erasing these emotions when the self is interested in the bargaining process. Even though our emotional senses are seen as “irrational”, it can still be argued that it is “rational” especially when our ideas and emotions are aggressive enough to drive us. These aggressive emotions can drive people into combats that will lead to a “lose-lose” outcome.

Therefore, the Arab-Israeli conflict is both objective and subjective!

The Zero-Sum Game

Eretz Yisrael and Filastin, by most definitions, are the same exact piece of land by borders that were created by the British Mandate of Palestine after World War I. Thus, Jews and Arabs are fighting for the same piece of territorial land to make their own state.

The winner will claim ALL of the land and the loser faces the threat of being left stateless. "Just as two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time, so two sovereign states cannot govern the same territory at the same time" (Dowty). Game theorists refer to this as the zero-sum game: whatever one side gains comes at the expense of the other (gains and losses total at a zero).

Without territorial compromise there will never be a win-win outcome where both sides will benefit. Due to the fact that this is a situation of total conflict where co-operations and negotiation between these two people is very difficult, it will result in a zero-sum outcome.

Unfortunately, there is still no winner nor a loser for this conflict that has been going on for years. If anything, the winner and loser sways back and fourth. There is yet to be a concrete winner.


Sources:

Dowty, Alan . Israel/Palestine. 2nd. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2008.