Israeli-Palestinian Conflict through the Lens of the Infinite Game
- Young Diplomats Society
- 41 minutes ago
- 4 min read
By Jeff Zhou
Introduction
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains one of the most enduring and complex disputes in modern history, shaped by more than a century of violence and unhealed wounds. The most recent flashpoint was the 7 October attack coordinated by Hamas, which resulted in the deaths of 1,195 people and triggered Israel to retaliate with strikes on the Gaza Strip. While a ceasefire has since been declared, prospects for a lasting resolution remain uncertain.
However, a narrow path to peaceful co-existence still exists, which hinges on whether Israel chooses to continue playing a finite game or shift toward an infinite one. This one decision will have wide-ranging consequences for both sides.
Finite vs. Infinite Games
American academic James P. Carse first introduced the concept of finite and infinite games, which was first introduced by and later popularised by best-selling author and motivational speaker Simon Sinek. At a high level, finite games (e.g. baseball) follow static rules and the main objective is to win, while infinite games (e.g. geopolitics) are played for the purpose of continuing play.
The finite-infinite relationship is often seen in the corporate world, where many businesses “play to win” by generating more profit than competing firms or achieving quarterly OKRs. Despite this, companies with a long-term vision and drawn-out strategy often achieve lasting success. Jeff Bezos, Founder and CEO of Amazon, constantly emphasises in his shareholder letters that “it’s all about the long term”. Billionaire investor Warren Buffett, renowned for retaining stocks for years and even decades, holds a similar view.
Another arena where the infinite mindset exists is geopolitics. During the Vietnam War, the United States focused on winning battles and gaining territory, while the Vietcong were fighting for survival - they would fight forever if necessary. Almost a decade earlier, Ho Chi Minh, leader of the Vietcong, warned French colonialists, “You can kill ten of our men for every one we kill of yours. But even at those odds, you will lose and we will win”. Had the US heeded that warning, it might never have entered Vietnam, avoiding the same disastrous fate that had previously befallen the French at the end of the Indochina Wars.
Israel is embroiled in an infinite contest, but has a finite mindset.
Similar to the Vietnam and Indochina Wars, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict bears the hallmarks of an infinite contest, not fought to be won, but to be endlessly sustained. Neither side is willing to yield or compromise, so the cycle of hate keeps spinning. Even so, Israel, especially in recent years, has often approached the issue with defined objectives, such as eliminating threats, securing borders, and launching counterattacks. These tend to be carried out with little thought regarding long-term ramifications.
For example, after Yahya Sinwar, leader of Hamas, was killed in a skirmish with the IDF last October, Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, announced, “While this is not the end of the war in Gaza, it is the beginning of the end”. Other world leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, echoed similar sentiments. However, Daniel Levy, President of the US/Middle East Project and a former adviser in the Israeli government, offered a dissenting opinion, stating, “This is like Osama Bin Laden. You kill a terrorist, and everything goes happily ever after. But this is a resistance movement rooted in its people because its people are oppressed and denied their rights”.
Levy’s assertion strikes at the crux of the issue. The Palestinians, particularly those in Gaza, consider the struggle infinite. It isn’t about fighting a single war, but about survival and the eventual freedom of the nation. Sinwar’s death has significantly weakened Hamas’s leadership, but it has also fueled a surge in martyrdom and defiance. They harbour no illusions of defeating one of the world’s most technologically advanced and well-trained militaries - only of existing and resisting, much like the rice farmers who stood against the world’s top superpower nearly 50 years ago.
What happens if Israel adopts an infinite mindset?
If Israeli leadership were to adopt an infinite mindset, it would mean moving beyond a security-rooted framework. Greater investment in human capital (education, jobs, health) would provide Palestinians with the possibility for social and economic mobility. Media and public discourse would focus on how two peoples can coexist within a shared historical space, rather than perpetuating a historical narrative of bitter enemies.
This is not to say that Israel can simply choose an infinite mindset and shift course overnight. Deep-seated trauma and decades of betrayal from both sides have led to an atmosphere of mistrust. Additionally, it can be argued that Hamas often prioritises short-term gains over key strategic goals and engages in zero-sum thinking that rejects Israel’s right to exist. An infinite approach can’t disregard these complexities, but can challenge the status quo of assuming the conflict as unwinnable and perpetual.
As the conflict in Gaza continues, the human toll remains deeply personal. Families are torn apart, and communities are left grieving. The emotional aftermath of such loss can leave lasting impacts on individuals and future generations, perpetuating a cycle of trauma and violence. Pursuing a long-term resolution does not mean forgetting the past or excusing past actions; rather, it calls for a commitment to shaping a future where enduring peace and mutual understanding are possible.
Jeff Zhou possesses a strong track record in the venture capital and technology sectors. As Principal at Untapped Ventures, he has facilitated $20M+ in venture funding and oversees a diverse portfolio of 32 AI startups, driving strategic investment and go-to-market execution. His expertise extends to public-private partnerships, having co-designed the Untapped Future of Work Accelerator with the City of Burbank, a program that supports AI-driven workforce innovation.
Outside of work, Jeff contributes to AI governance by advocating for responsible AI deployment. Fluent in Mandarin and with global experience across North America, Asia, and Europe, he brings a multinational perspective to AI’s role in shaping the future of industries and infrastructure.
Comentarios