Elite and popular contradictions in security coordination: overcoming the binary distinction of the Israeli coloniser and the colonised Palestinian

ABSTRACT

Settler colonial theory has made a hugely significant contribution to the theorisation of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but there is a danger that its application to the specific practice of security coordination could simply render the practice as an instrument of settler colonial rule. In this article, we would like to propose the important qualification that Coordination is, in practice, deeply conflicted and subject to multiple internal pressures, which extend from elites to public opinion. In accepting that Coordination can be appropriately viewed through a settler colonial lens, we would like to argue that it can also be viewed from ‘below’, and as an object of domestic political struggle that is implicated in legitimisation processes. Coordination is therefore simultaneously renounced and retained as part of the survival strategy of assorted elite groups. In order to demonstrate this, we reference Elite theory, interviews and online materials. Moreover, internal Palestinian divides suggest that opposition is more incomplete, partial and reactive within the neoliberal and settler colonial context.

KEYWORDS:

• Neoliberalism
• Elite Theory
• Oslo Agreements
• Palestinian Authority
• Security Coordination
• Settler Colonialism

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. Palestinian security forces eventually established fifteen divisions rife with internal rivalries. Tellingly, this did not elicit considerable concern on the part of the Israeli government or the PA’s international donors (Shu’aibi 2012).

2. In responding to a wider context of continued Fatah-Hamas tensions, the PA further reiterated the deeply political character of Palestinian ‘public service’ by cutting the salaries of Hamas government employees in the Gaza Strip (Roy 2017; Tibon 2018).

3. This is consistent with Bourdieu’s (1985) use of ‘distinction’.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Nadia Naser-Najjab

Nadia Naser-Najjab is a lecturer in Palestine Studies, European Centre for Palestine Studies- Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies, University of Exeter. Nadia holds a PhD in Middle East Studies from the University of Exeter. Her recent book is entitled Dialogue in Palestine: The People-to-People Diplomacy Programme and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict . Bloomsbury Publishing. (2020).

Shir Hever is an independent economic researcher and journalist. His latest book: Privatization of Security in Israel, Pluto Press. (2017).