Game theory: Indecision as strategy or even applied theology?

Why taking your time syncs up with with a foundational concept in negotiation.  (It is also a great management strategy when dealing with too many decisions and issues.)

This is analogous to a lot of real-life situations. Usually, we’re faced with a number of options we might pursue, and we may be more or less indifferent to which of them we end up with. If we are making the choice within a group (a company, a set of friends, a family), we may find that others have the power to block whatever option we select. Indeed, we may find that other group members tend, in a dialogic reflex, to react to our preference for one option by vocally supporting a different one. Someone who recognises this tendency may react by making sure they keep several viable choices open, so that they will still be satisfied with whichever option the opponent decides not to block. Or they may delay statements of preference until the opponent has committed to blocking one option. Fortunately, once an opponent has blocked an option, they tend to be stuck with their block; it is usually hard for an opponent who has just resolutely committed to striking down option A to turn around and blast option B a moment later.

Indeed, the most effective tactic of all may be to ensure one has several equally good (or bad) options and to tentatively hint at a preference without formally committing to it, and then to let it dangle for some time, hoping that the opponent decides to use up their “block” and leave the other options freely available. It may even be a good idea to provoke the opponent’s antagonism, making it appear that a block on this choice would be a severe defeat. The objective is to get the opponent to limit their freedom of movement by committing to a block, while maintaining one’s own freedom of manoeuvre by refraining from commitment.

via Game theory: Indecision as strategy | The Economist.

And now for something completely different…a Mormon doctrine take on applying game theory and the Prisoner’s Dilemma, a good starting point for understanding negotiation strategy:

The biggest breakthrough in the iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma came in the early 1980s when political scientist Robert Axelrod sponsored a series of Prisoner’s Dilemma tournaments in the early 1980s. The setup was very simple: a bunch of computer programs were to be matched against each other in a series of repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma games, and the winner would be the program that garnered the most total points over the span of all the games. A wide variety of incredibly sophisticated and complex strategies were submitted, many of which relied on attempting to learn the strategy of the other computer programs to subsequently exploit it. What stunned the researchers, however, was that the very simplest programs (comprising just 4 lines of code) was also the most successful. The program was called simply tit-for-tat. All it did was this: start out by cooperating and then, on every subsequent game, simply repeat whatever the opponent had played in the previous game. The explanation for exactly why this simple strategy was so successful is complex, and it basically launched the study of evolutionary cooperation, but it boils down to this: be nice but provocable.

via A Game Theoretic View of the Atonement | Times & Seasons

Brazil Banking on a New Opportunity

Business grows when opportunities for lower-performing or less viable opportunities open up.  In the case of investment banking, Latin America is ripe for Brazil–even as its economy is only slowly recovering from what FT.com calls a potential “lost decade.”

Roberto Sallouti, chief operating officer of BTG Pactual, said the current trend was similar to what happened during the 2008-9 financial crisis, when many global banks pulled back from Latin America and left space for local firms to grow.

“The other guys are still there,” Mr. Sallouti said, “but we are eating into their market share.”

While the Latin American economies are not as robust as they once were, the region generated over $1.6 billion in investment banking fees last year, according to Freeman Consulting Services, an investment banking advisory firm based in New York.

via In Latin America, Brazilian Banks Fill Void Left by Global Giants – NYTimes.com.

200 Years After Battle, Some Hard Feelings Remain – NYTimes.com

In Waterloo’s commemoration some see “British triumphalism,” a historical battlefield, and  war that Germany doesn’t have to apologize for.  But Belgians (and the French) are not so keen on the idea:

While the battle ended two centuries ago, however, hard feelings have endured. Memories are long here, and not everyone here shares Britain’s enthusiasm for celebrating Napoleon’s defeat.

Every year, in districts of Wallonia, the French-speaking part of Belgium, there are fetes to honor Napoleon, according to Count Georges Jacobs de Hagen, a prominent Belgian industrialist and chairman of a committee responsible for restoring Hougoumont. “Napoleon, for these people, was very popular,” Mr. Jacobs, 73, said over coffee. “That is why, still today, there are some enemies of the project.”

via 200 Years After Battle, Some Hard Feelings Remain – NYTimes.com.

German Election Analysis: What Merkel’s Win Means

Merkel won the election and has been hailed as the most powerful woman in the world, “one woman to rule them all” and Europe’s new speed dial number (a la Henry Kissinger)–showing the staying power of Europe as well as the oft-debated notion of austerity.

Now she must govern, and a grand coalition with the Social Democrats looks likely–a move that could weaken their own party–but ultimately could lead to stability at home:

Chancellor Angela Merkel at the head of a coalition with the Social Democrats? It is a pairing Germany has seen before, most recently from 2005 to 2009. And now, it is looking increasingly likely that a redux is looming — to the point that prominent SPD politicians are starting to draw their red lines for European policy.

via Social Democrats in Germany Demand More Social Europe from Merkel – SPIEGEL ONLINE.

What are the broader issues, especially across Europe? Take a look at CFR.org’s very useful Issue Guide with links across a variety of media sources on domestic politics, Greece, and foreign policy.  Meanwhile, the Anti-European party is alive and growing, and Merkel may be strong at home but standing more alone across Europe.  Even so, Gideon Rachman sees her as a visionary leader–something needed in a time of economic and political crisis across Europe.

Love at Home? Internally a major challenge of this potential alliance is whether the SDP will be overshadowed by joining in a coalition–this being the party that was once the most powerful worker’s party in the world. But as FT.com’s Jakob Augstein observes (free registration required), “Germany is a representative democracy and the truth is that Ms Merkel also lost on Sunday. Her centre-right coalition failed to get the majority needed for another term.”  Again, what does this mean for her ability to govern?

 

Roger Cohen: Why Greece Is Not Weimar

Are we watching the slow train wreck of Europe–with all the portent for interstate conflict and turmoil?  Or, as Roger Cohen argues–will Greece be ok?

These are familiar insinuations. It is well known where they can lead. The neo-Nazi Golden Dawn party is rising, from a negligible fringe group in 2009 to what is almost certainly the country’s third political force today, representing close to 15 percent of the vote, according to polls. If the most acute phase of Greece’s economic crisis has passed, the most acute phase of its political trial is upon it.

I have little doubt that if Greece were not part of the European Union, with the protection and example afforded by this much maligned democratic club, it would have tumbled into catastrophe by now, much as a humiliated Germany did after 1918. Europe has been Greece’s protector even as the single euro currency has been its tormentor.

via Why Greece Is Not Weimar – NYTimes.com.

Diplomatic Options With Syria and Iran: And Will There Be a Handshake?

It has been a crazy political week for the US and other major actors in the Middle East.  But diplomacy has a chance as the contours are starting to come into view:

Without much warning, diplomacy is suddenly alive again after a decade of debilitating war in the region. After years of increasing tension with Iran, there is talk of finding a way for it to maintain a face-saving capacity to produce a very limited amount of nuclear fuel while allaying fears in the United States and Israel that it could race for a bomb.

Syria, given little room for maneuver, suddenly faces imminent deadlines to account for and surrender its chemical weapons stockpiles — or risk losing the support of its last ally, Russia.

For Mr. Obama, it is a shift of fortunes that one senior American diplomat described this week as “head spinning.”

via Quick Turn of Fortunes as Diplomatic Options Open Up With Syria and Iran – NYTimes.com.

Today, France indicated that Iran must be part of Syrian peace discussions, but, of course, with preconditions.

Another issue brought up in Mark Landler’s Diplomatic Memo: will there be a handshake between President Obama and Iranian President Rouhani?  And, not to be outdone–the Borowitz Report, from the literary magazine’s version of Colbert/Stewart:

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Republican leaders warned the newly elected Iranian President Hassan Rouhani that they would frown on his shaking hands with President Obama at the United Nations today, saying that any embrace of Obama would signal that Iran was not serious about abandoning extremism.

“We welcome President Rouhani’s moderate rhetoric,” said Senator Rand Paul (R-Ken.). “But those words are rendered hollow if he is willing to shake the hand of a notorious extremist.”

“This is a man who has enslaved his people, saddling them with a health-care law not of their choosing,” said Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tex.). “The President of Iran should think twice before shaking hands with a man like that.”

China’s Drones of Its Own

Drone wars have reached an early stage of maturity with China beginning to include them in their mix of national security power tools.

Chinese officials this month sent a drone near disputed islands administered by Japan; debated using a weaponized drone last year to kill a criminal suspect in Myanmar; and sold homemade drones resembling the Predator, an American model, to other countries for less than a million dollars each. Meanwhile, online photographs reveal a stealth combat drone, the Lijian, or Stealth Sword, in a runway test in May.

via Hacking U.S. Secrets, China Pushes for Drones – NYTimes.com.

Some suggested in a recent Kennedy Center panel discussion that drones pose less of a challenge in the mode of warfare than a broader consideration of the overall strategy of conflict.  Are we heading toward a Blade Runner era of battle?

The Boy Who Stood Up to Syrian Injustice – NYTimes.com

How one boy chose to stood up to Assad, the Syrian dictator–a tale from Nicholas Kristof, NYT columnist:

Muhammad, now part of the growing Syrian refugee diaspora in Jordan, still weighs less than 100 pounds and looks like a shy middle schooler. It’s hard to imagine him confronting a playground bully, let alone the nation’s tyrant.

Maybe the story of these children’s courage can help build spine in world leaders, who for two and a half years have largely averted their eyes from the humanitarian catastrophe that is Syria. The agreement on chemical weapons may be a genuine step forward, but it does not seem particularly relevant to Syrians suffering from more banal methods of mass murder.

via The Boy Who Stood Up to Syrian Injustice – NYTimes.com.