Search

This study conceptually develops and analytically examines the role and function of diasporas as audiences in the securitization process by examining the American Jewish Diaspora in Israel's securitization of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS). It argues that Israel's use of antisemitism as a metanarrative for the securitization of the BDS movement incorporates diasporic Jews as internal audiences in the securitization process. Audiences, however, are not monolithic. While homeland Jews, including both elites and the public, tend to support Israel's securitization process, American Jews are split; the elite support the process but public opinion is far less sympathetic to Israeli constructions of BDS as a threat. The disparity between audiences’ reactions weakens the support for Israel's counter-BDS policies and undermines its securitization process.

Ian S. Lustick, Paradigm Lost: From Two-State Solution to One-State Reality (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2019).

This article examines the interplay between identities, norms and power transition in the HBO series Game of Thrones. Using discourse analysis of season 7’s transcripts and viewing the show, I conclude that the most dominant themes to emerge are those related to identity and norms, in the context of hegemonic power transition. The season focuses on the impact of normative and ideational factors on how alliances operate and on the prospects of cooperation between alliances. I find that identity distributions across great powers impact the ability of characters to muster a successful challenge to the existing world order. Furthermore, I find that the survival of actors whose normative commitments are mismatched with their alliance is not guaranteed through the alliance. Thus, the show serves as an effective knowledge production site for exploring the consequences of power transition and alliance theory as power begins to transition in our own universe.

The literature on securitisation provides surprisingly little clarification on the meaning of legitimacy and how it operates in the securitisation process. Scholars repeatedly employ the term, but ...

This article addresses the Israeli demand during the 2013–14 peace negotiations that Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state within the context of securitization theory. Contrary to many readings, this article argues the demand was not merely a tactical ploy to delay or derail the peace process but rather was part of a broader process of making Israel's Jewish identity a matter of national security. The application of securitization theory beyond the liberal nation-state is also examined.

The Obama era symbolized an unprecedented downward spiral in US–Israeli relations. In the short term, one can attribute the deterioration to the difficult, at times impossible, relationship between Obama and Netanyahu, who shared different political worldviews. Washington and Jerusalem clashed over the Israeli–Palestinian peace process and what to do with Iran’s nuclear program. However, these tensions did not appear to have had any impact on the US’s commitment to Israeli security or on its view of Israel as an important strategic ally. In the long run, however, the Obama era signals a shift in US demographics that is likely to have electoral consequences in the future. As a result, the “special” relationship may be “special” no more as changing public attitudes afford the US the freedom of political action to distance itself from, and at time even collide with, Israeli policies as Obama had done.

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to develop a conflict analysis framework that better captures the complexity of conflicts in divided societies by including the differing perceptions of identity boundaries between ethnic majorities and minorities in divided societies.Design/methodology/approach– The analysis draws on the social boundaries and societal security literatures to develop a typology representing four dyads of perceived identity boundaries that illustrate the different dynamics of ethnic relations in divided societies.Findings– The exploratory cases illustrate how the perceptions of identity boundaries have implications for conflict dynamics that call for different conflict management strategies.Research limitations/implications– The empirical cases serve to illustrate the application of the theoretical framework. Policy makers devising conflict management strategies in these deeply divided societies are likely to err if differing perceptions of social boundaries are not taken into consideration. Thus, the authors provide explicit policy recommendations for conflict management in each of the dyads presented in the typology.Practical implications– Using the framework that incorporates differing perceptions of identity allows analysts to account for the impact of external actors in shaping and maintaining identity boundaries and allows for a consideration of the possible differing interpretations of the boundary held by different groups as well as the implications this has for conflict analysis and management.Originality/value– The authors develop a model that accounts for the perceptions of both the majority and the minority of the identity boundaries that separate divided societies. They account for the implications for conflict dynamics and thus for conflict management strategies of differing perceptions of identity boundaries, which provides a perspective that is both theoretically significant and policy relevant, as most policy makers assume that ethnic minorities and majorities see the social boundary between them in similar terms.

This article seeks to demonstrate how discriminatory laws, passed in Israel since the eruption of the second intifada, are part of an ongoing securitization process of the Palestinian minority in Israel. These discriminatory laws serve as part of a security practice, employed by political elites that seek to represent threats to the hegemony of the Jewish identity as existential to national security. In doing so, the Israeli authorities advance a national security policy that perpetuates the perceived threat posed to the state by the Palestinian minority. The analysis focuses on discriminatory legislation passed between 2000 and 2012 by the Israeli Knesset and the political attitudes of the Israeli public before and after the second intifada to uncover the ways in which political actors and audiences negotiate the meaning of security in Israel. Securitization theory helps explain why desecuritization of the minority is highly unlikely even in the event that the Israeli–Palestinian conflict will be resolved.

This article explores the role of law-making in the securitization of ethnic identities in Israel. The article examines the laws passed and bills proposed between 2000 and 2011 by the Israeli Knesset. The evidence suggests that despite consistent attempts to securitize the ethnic identity of the state, they have, for the most part, failed. A brief comparison between Israel and other liberal democracies also reveals that the banality of securitization, i.e. the use of ordinary rather than extraordinary measures in the securitization process, is not unique to Israel. This article demonstrates most clearly how the process of securitization contributes to the ease with which illiberal practices can creep into the democratic system without the need to resort to exceptional action.

This article applies the concept of the societal security dilemma to ethnic relations in Israel. I argue that Jews and Arabs in Israel are locked in a regular societal security dilemma in which their identity security requirements are incompatible and that the peace process between Israel and the Palestinian Authority has only served to exacerbate that incompatibility. The article highlights the process of securitization of identities, which is generally missing from the discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and ethnic relations in Israel.