Ole Waever's securitization theory emphasizes the significance of presenting a problem as an existential danger in order to justify actions that would not be appropriate in other situations.
When we talk about Palestine, the securitization of the Palestinian people has contributed to the conflict by not only normalizing violence but also undermining human rights and dehumanizing Palestinians in the process. Political actors use this framework to justify extreme actions by framing them as existential threats to their communities. Each party justifies its actions by painting the other as a threat. This framing worsens tensions and makes peace attempts and efforts for peace more difficult.
Along with that, certain strategies and policies - such as the blockade of Gaza, the control of population growth, and the testing of military hardware on civilian populations - have become common as the conflict has grown increasingly securitized. The power dynamics in the region as well as the consequences of securitization on the lives and agency of Palestinians are reflected in these actions.
Michael Foucault describes biopolitics as the study of how states regulate populations and biological processes, which can have an impact on lives and movements. That includes a wide range of acts, legislation, and technology that can be used to exert control over living beings.
An example of how biopower has been used as a weapon of war can be seen in the way Palestinians have been treated by Israelis. Michael Foucault had coined the term “biopower” to characterize the state’s ability to regulate an individual’s movements, livelihoods, and general well-being. This is seen in Israel’s extensive monitoring and regulation of Palestinians’ lives. This control also applies to the Gaza Strip, where a 15-year blockade has restricted Palestinians’ freedom of movement, access to goods, basic medical needs, and even electricity and water.
According to The New Arab, referring to the Gaza Strip as an ‘open-air prison’ successfully shows the Israeli government’s intentions to transform Gaza into an easily managed population through whom they may test and enforce brutal biopolitics.
The complicated subject of Israel’s biopolitics against Palestine involves many aspects of discrimination, control, and power. This involves classifying, measuring, recording, and even disciplining the occupied Palestinian population. In the Gaza Strip and elsewhere, Palestinians’ freedom of travel, means of subsistence, and general health and well-being are all impacted by this restriction, which amounts to biopolitical control.
Over time, Israel’s biopolitical strategy for governing the Palestinian population has changed. According to Neve Gordon, Israel implemented a biopolitical approach to managing the Palestinian population early in the occupation, which allowed it to exploit the economic utility of Palestinians while granting them access to hospitals for childbirth and vaccinations to prevent disease outbreaks. However, following the first uprising, Israel reorganized its methods of managing the Palestinian population from what Gordon terms the ‘colonization principle to the separation principle’. This shift represents a transition from the politics of life (biopolitics) to the politics of death (necropolitics), where power is exercised through the facilitation of death rather than the management of life.
Israel’s biopolitics against Palestine also involves necropolitics which is the power and authority over life and death and dominion over the dead. This was seen in the example of Journalist Shireen Abu Aqleh’s murder, for which no one has been prosecuted, and wherein, Israeli police officers reportedly beat her coffin while it was being carried out for the funeral services. Additionally, the families of hundreds of people are presently still being denied access to their bodies, and their homes are being demolished in what’s seen as a form of “collective punishment”.
Lene Hansen’s perspective is another such that can be applied in an attempt to examine this conflict from a different angle. She emphasizes how important it is for security studies to consider gender. She makes the case that it's critical to consider how gender affects people's roles in war, both in favour of and against it, how security issues are discussed, and how gender affects how people perceive security risks. This basically involves taking into account how gender conceptions influence conflict's causes as well as the way we respond to it.
She also proposes incorporating these gender-related concepts into the securitization theory of the Copenhagen School, which highlights the role of speech acts in the creation of security threats.
In order to discuss this in relation to the Israel-Palestine conflict, we need to look at the ways in which gendered subjectivities are mobilized both within and outside of the conflict, as well as the ways in which language is used to characterize the conflict and its associated risks can serve to legitimize specific political constructions of gendered subjectivity. One way that language might help to the securitization of the conflict is by reinforcing gendered stereotypes about Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation.
Furthermore, she also talks about the importance of considering the role of the body in security threats and practices. This means examining how bodies are implicated in security threats and practices, and how gendered norms and expectations shape the experiences of different groups. For example, Palestinian women and girls are often disproportionately affected by the conflict, facing increased risks of gender-based violence and displacement.
Control over lives, gender relations, and existential threats are just some of the catalysts for the Israel-Palestine conflict. In order to achieve justice and peace, it is imperative to acknowledge and resolve these challenges.
References
Hansen, L. (2000). The Little Mermaid's Silent Security Dilemma and the Absence of Gender in the Copenhagen School. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 29(1), 73-95.
Abu-Ras, W., & Suyemoto, K. L. (2005). Psychological distress among Palestinian citizens of Israel: The role of trauma exposure, discrimination, and social support. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(5), 565-581.
Pappas, G., & Kassis, N. (2004). Women and war: Palestinian women in the occupied territories. Journal of Palestine Studies, 33(3), 5-19.
I like how this analysis dives deep into the messy complexities of the Israel-Palestine conflict. It's like peeling back layers of an onion to reveal how issues like securitization, biopolitics, and gender dynamics contribute to the ongoing tensions. It's not just about political rhetoric it's about how language, power, and control intersect in ways that affect real people's lives. It's a reminder that behind all the headlines and debates, there are individuals and communities whose daily existence is shaped by these dynamics.
Thank you for this insightful take on the Israel and Palestine conflict . It is interesting to see how this situation can be viewed from the lens of necropolitics and biopolitics . It would be interesting to know how these issues have been addressed in the real world , is the media covering them or has it been overshadowed by the military violence that is taking place in the region ?
Thank you for your blog. Can you examine the intersections of biopolitics, gender, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. How have the Israeli government's policies and practices targeted the bodies and reproductive rights of Palestinian women, and what are the implications for the broader conflict?
insightful take on the issue Varalika!
By highlighting the securitization of the Palestinian people and the normalization of violence as a means of justifying political actions, you have exposed the detrimental impact of framing the conflict as an existential threat. Additionally, the discussion on biopolitics and necropolitics provides valuable insights into Israel's control over the Palestinian population, shedding light on the transition from managing life to facilitating death as a mechanism of power.
The blog provides an insightful analysis of the Israel-Palestine conflict through the lenses of securitization theory, biopolitics, and necropolitics. The blog also touches upon Lene Hansen's perspective on gender in security studies but could delve deeper into the specific impacts on different gender groups within both communities. Additionally, I noticed that incorporating more recent sources and statistics could enhance the blog's relevance and timeliness.
Overall, the blog's in-depth exploration of the conflict and its theoretical underpinnings is commendable, and with a few adjustments, it could offer an even more comprehensive and balanced view of this complex issue.