JERUSALEM -- Excuses that students use for not handing assignments in on time have changed over the years. The old ''my dog ate my homework'' has long been replaced by "the computer wouldn't let me save/print my work.''
I thought that grandparents' excuses were out as well. No more, ''my grandpa was throwing up blood all night'' or the ultimate, mother-of-all excuses: ''My grandma died.'' Except that last week my friends told me about a young lady who used to baby-sit for them, who, quite unlike her, didn't show up in time. When she finally arrived, she had the weirdest excuse of them all: "We were celebrating because my grandpa had just won the Nobel Prize!''
Turned out that the baby-sitter was actually telling the truth. She is the granddaughter of Robert (Yisrael) Aumann, a professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, who, together with Thomas Schelling, a professor at the University of Maryland (and emeritus professor at Harvard), won the 2005 Nobel Prize in economics for their work on game theory.
Aumann was cited by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences for his analysis of ''infinitely repeated games'' to identify what outcomes can be maintained over time. He showed that cooperation is less likely when there are many participants, interactions are infrequent, the time horizon is short and others' actions cannot be clearly observed.
''Insights into these issues help explain economic conflicts such as price wars and trade wars,'' said the citation.
Part of a hawkish group
Aumann becomes the eighth Israeli to receive the prestigious prize. What makes his winning a doubly special event is that the Nobel Prize in economics has been dominated by Americans: In the last six years, only one non-U.S. citizen, Finn Kydland of Norway, who teaches economics at the University of California, Santa Barbara, has won the prize.
Journalists in Israel were quick to ask Aumann if his work could be applied to conflict resolution not only in economic spheres but also in situations such as the Middle East's. He didn't rule it out.
''I think game theory creates ideas that are important in solving and approaching conflict in general,'' he said. But I think he was just trying to be polite to the press. Actually, he belongs to a well-respected hawkish group of Israeli professors who stand firmly against any concessions to the Palestinians. He expressed quite pessimistic views on the future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Now, I know that the guy has just won a Nobel Prize, and I haven't. And I admit that I know little about game theory. Yet what I hear from him is that for a conflict to be resolved, you need the following:
- few players, not many;
- frequent interactions;
- a long time horizon;
- the ability to observe other actors' activities.
We actually have all these elements in our conflict with the Palestinians, and what we lack, we can produce.
We have several major players: The Israeli people, Ariel Sharon, the settlers; the Palestinian people, Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), Hamas; the United States; world public opinion; the Arab states, and others. Seems like a lot, yet with a show of leadership, the number of players can be reduced or, conversely, their impact minimized.
This is exactly what Ariel Sharon has accomplished with his brilliant disengagement from Gaza: The Israeli public supports him, in the United Nations he is received as a hero, the settlers had to comply, Jordan and Egypt are stepping in to help.
If Abbas contributes his share, dismantles Hamas and starts a serious nation-building in Gaza, then we will enter a new phase, when together we