The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a protracted dispute that originated between the late 19th century and the early 20th century after the rise of a Jew and an Arab Nationalist Movement in the region.
The large-scale military confrontation started in the aftermath of the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948 and continued throughout the 20th century through a series of wars, cycle of violence (intifadas) and negotiations.
At the core of the conflict there are disputes over claims of territories, security concerns and the fate of the Palestinian refugees that were displaced after the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.
SECURITIZATION THEORY
The Securitization Theory proposed by Ole Waever can be used as a tool for understanding how speech acts by authoritative actors can be used to represent some issues as security threats.
In the chapter “Securitization and Desecuritization” Weaver presented security as a discourse construct that can be manipulated by some political actors for legitimizing the application of extraordinary measures.
The application of the Securitization Theory on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict allows us to see how both sides are framing the ongoing conflict in different ways by highlighting and, sometimes, manipulating specific issues.
On one hand, Israel presents the decisions to implement security measures, such as separation barriers and military checkpoints, as a way for safeguarding its citizens' lives. Israeli Politicians discourse is trying to represent the Palestinian population and, especially, those militant groups that have developed in the last few decades (as Hamas), as a direct threat to the Jewish state stability and survival.
On the other hand, Palestinian are framing the struggle for statehood and for their own self-determination as a direct response to the Israeli oppression and occupation. Palestinian Leaders present all those actions brought about by Israeli forces against Palestinian people, as military incursions and land confiscation, as a fundamental violation of Palestinian Sovereignty.
This political discourse is used by both the camps, the Israeli and the Palestinian ones, to portray the opponent as a direct threat to their survival and, in this way, they justify their actions.
FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF SECURITIZATION
Lene Hansen’s feminist critique of Securitization theory offers a different framework through which to analyze the ongoing Isreali-Palestinian conflict.
The critique shows how the security discourse tends to reinforce “masculine norms” by fostering military solutions and marginalizing alternative approaches. The “masculinized security discourse” has managed to perpetuate throughout the decades cycles of militarization and violence. Because of this framework, non violent approaches who were advocating reconciliation and peace have been put aside.
Hansen’s framework can be used for emphasizing how differently the conflict has been impacting men and women.
Specifically, women have often suffered the most because of the harsh consequences of the conflict, by experiencing episodes of violence and displacement.
Due to their condition of increased vulnerability, there has been an exacerbation of social and economic inequalities.
Hansen’s approach, based on Intersectionality, underlines how gender can intersect with other elements, such as ethnicity, class and nationality, in influencing an individual's experiences of security and insecurity.
In particular, Palestinians women are witnessing intersectional forms of violence and oppression because of their gender and ethnicity. This condition fosters their marginalization and, thus, their vulnerability within the ongoing conflict.
Hansen’s approach serves as a fundamental approach for having a better understanding of the gendered dynamics and of the ways through which the security discourse can perpetuate inequalities.
BIOPOLITICS
Biopolitics, a concept developed by Michel Focault, is deeply focused on the mechanisms deployed by states and institutions for controlling their citizens by regulating both their lives and their bodies.
Biopolitics, in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, can be seen in several circumstances;
The most evident situation is the control of the Population brought about by Israeli Forces and authorities. Some clear examples are the regulation of people’s movements, through the establishment of checkpoints and barriers, and the access to resources and facilities.
The establishment of illegal settlements or the perpetuation of illegal deportation are two means through which Israeli authorities are trying to control the demographic composition of the territories they control, especially in the West Bank. Biopolitics strategies can be also seen in the presence or absence of hospitals, schools and basic services in the territories inhabited by Palestinians and controlled by Israeli forces.
Furthermore, in those territories the access to resources as electricity, water and supplies, is totally controlled by Israeli forces that, in this way, can totally monitor and dominate Palestinian people.
Lastly, practices such as the construction of illegal settlements in the West Bank and the blockade going on in Gaza, highly foster the securitization of Palestinian Resistance regarded as a direct response to the Israeli aggressive measures. On the other hand, the securitization process with regard to the Palestinian resistance becomes a justification for all the biopolitical measures, as surveillance and check point, that have been established to control the Palestinians.
Analyzing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict using the Paris School Approach to (in)securitization: While Israeli authorities depict the Palestinian resistance as a direct threat to the security of their citizens; the Palestinian actors (through a process of “counter-Securitization”), justify their own military resistance as only a struggle for self-determination and freedom.
SOURCES:
Foucault, Michel. The history of sexuality: An introduction. Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage 95 (1990).
Ole, Wæver. 1995. “Securitization and Desecuritization.” InOn Security, edited by Ronnie Lipschutz. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hansen, Lene. 2000. ‘The Little Mermaid’s Silent Security Dilemma and the Absence of Gender in the Copenhagen School’. Millennium 29 (2): 285–306.
Hello Alessandro! Thank you for your insightful take on the ongoing conflict. I think it is very relevant that you pointed out the biopolitical strategies used through the absence of hospitals, food, water, shelter and other basic necessities that are denied to Palestinian individuals. The blockade of food and water as well as the destruction of hospitals and other healthcare facilities in Gaza showcases a clear intent to control not only the current Gazan population, but also to ensure the destruction of any futurity said population could ever hold. Through their acts of securitization, the Israeli state has in a way, ensured that people who would be considered the 'future' of Gaza– the children– are eliminated. It highlights the state's…
Hello Alessandro! The blog post was interesting to read! You have highlighted the marginalization of non-violent approaches. Does your framework offer suggestions for alternative approaches that emphasize women's agency and perspectives? For instance, by a different perspective, I mean could Hansen's critique consider the potential impact of the conflict on Israeli women's security as well?
Hi Alessandro, very relevant issues that you have covered in this blog. I had a question regarding the line which says "In particular, Palestinians women are witnessing intersectional forms of violence and oppression because of their gender and ethnicity." Do you think, in the security discourse, the kinds of violence faced by these women are framed in a way that their racial, ethnic and religious identities are subsumed by their gender identity? Or is there a tendency where the opposite plays out, where their identities as muslims or Palestinians overshadow the kinds of insecurities they face as women?