A better title would be who won the game of chicken?
Only the players know for sure, and they're not talking.
I refer to Abu Dhabi's last minute 10 billion dollar loan to Dubai, allowing Dubai to escape default for now.
The game of chicken models two drivers, both headed for a single lane bridge from opposite directions. The first to swerve away yields the bridge to the other. If neither player swerves, the result is a costly deadlock in the middle of the bridge, or a potentially fatal head-on collision. It is presumed that the best thing for each driver is to stay straight while the other swerves (since the other is the "chicken" while a crash is avoided). Additionally, a crash is presumed to be the worst outcome for both players. This yields a situation where each player, in attempting to secure his best outcome, risks the worst.
The stakes of the actual game in this case of course include bystanders like the bond holders, and any adverse macroeconomic effects that might arise from a collision. As Bertrand Russell put it,
As they approach each other, mutual destruction becomes more and more imminent. If one of them swerves from the white line before the other, the other, as he passes, shouts 'Chicken!', and the one who has swerved becomes an object of contempt. As played by irresponsible boys, this game is considered decadent and immoral, though only the lives of the players are risked. But when the game is played by eminent statesmen, who risk not only their own lives but those of many hundreds of millions of human beings, it is thought on both sides that the statesmen on one side are displaying a high degree of wisdom and courage, and only the statesmen on the other side are reprehensible.
If you're like me, you'd say it was of Dubai's making (along with its not so innocent bondholders who believe Abu Dhabi would bail them out in case of default). But others take the view that given potentially adverse effects of delay, Abu Dhabi have should immediately said it would bail out the bond holders. And still others, like me again, think Dubai should have offered some of its crown jewels (Emirates Airlines, for example) as a collateral for an emergency loan from Abu Dhabi. But none of that happened, at least until the 14th of December: Abu Dhabi and Dubai were locked in a game of chicken.
So the game of chicken was played. Given that there was not a collision, there are two essentially possibilities: (1) Abu Dhabi played chicken and made a no-strings loan to Dubai, or (2) Dubai played chicken and offered collateral for the loan.
No video embed available, but
click here to see how James Dean played the game of chicken in the movie Rebel without a Cause. Here's the trailer to the movie:
