Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:58:51.750Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ‘Question of Palestine’: From liminality to emancipation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2020

Victoria Mason Open the ORCID record for Victoria Mason [Opens in a new window]
Victoria Mason*
Affiliation:
Politics and International Affairs, College of Arts, Business, Law and Social Sciences, Murdoch University, Western Australia
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While the gravity of the injustice and inequality experienced by Palestinians is now widely documented, evidenced, and acknowledged, when it comes to action the situation appears ‘impervious’ to international law and norms of global politics, with Israel largely enjoying impunity. This article argues that this state of affairs can be most coherently understood through a critical interdisciplinary emancipatory framework centred on ‘liminality’. Referring to situations and actors ‘betwixt and between’, the framework of liminality offers significant potential for understanding how particular actors and spaces are intentionally marginalised, disempowered, and silenced within global politics and international law. Furthermore, in revealing the root causes of liminality, and the inherent vulnerability of such spaces to contestation and subversion, the framework also opens up potential pathways of transformative emancipation. Applying the lens of liminality to Palestine, it is demonstrated that Palestinians have been deliberately corralled to a liminal space within international law and global politics in order to enable an expansionist Zionist/Israeli settler colonial enterprise. After exploring how Palestinian liminality manifests in global politics and international law, the article turns to a range of efforts to subvert Palestinian liminality and assesses prospects for a teleological emancipation for Palestinians.

Keywords

PalestineLiminalityEmancipationInternational LawGlobal PoliticsCritical International Relations
Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 47 , Issue 1 , January 2021 , pp. 107 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the British International Studies Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Tilley, Virginia, Beyond Occupation: Apartheid, Colonialism and International Law in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (London: Pluto 2012)Google Scholar; King-Irani, Laurie, ‘Exiled to a liminal legal zone: Are we all Palestinians now?’, Third World Quarterly, 27:5 (2006), pp. 923–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Akram, Susan M., Dumper, Michael, Lynk, Michael, and Scobbie, Iain (eds), International Law and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Rights-Based Approach to Middle East Peace (Oxon: Routledge, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Turner, Victor, Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure (London: Routledge, 1996), p. 95Google Scholar.

3 Marks, Susan, ‘Human rights and root causes’, The Modern Law Review, 74:1 (2011), pp. 57–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Rumelili, Bahar, ‘Liminal identities and processes of domestication and subversion in International Relations’, Review of International Studies, 38:2 (2012), pp. 495–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Malksoo, Maria, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’, Review of International Studies, 38:2 (2012), pp. 481–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Neumann, Iver, ‘Introduction to the forum on liminality’, Review of International Studies, 38:2 (2012), pp. 473–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Malksoo, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’, p. 492; Rumelili, ‘Liminal identities and processes of domestication and subversion in International Relations’, p. 496; McConnell, Fiona, ‘Liminal geopolitics: The subjectivity and spatiality of diplomacy at the margins’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 42:1 (2017), pp. 139–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 The phrase the ‘Question of Palestine’ emerged after the area known as historic Palestine was placed under British Mandate by the League of Nations in 1922. The British incorporated the ‘Balfour Declaration’ – a statement of support for the establishment of a Jewish homeland within historic Palestine – at the core of their Mandate control, but attempted to acquiesce Palestinian protests by insisting Britain would act as a fair arbiter over ‘competing’ claims to the land. British control over Palestine became increasingly fraught, and in 1947 they handed the ‘Question of Palestine’ over to the successor of the League, the United Nations (UN). Later that year, the UN voted (UN Resolution181) to partition historic Palestine into two states – one Jewish and one Arab (Palestinian). In the ethnic cleansing and Israeli-Arab conflict that followed, three-quarters of Palestine's indigenous population was forcibly displaced. These Palestinians and their descendants remain refugees to this day. The ‘Question of Palestine’ then became further complicated with the Israeli military occupation of the remaining Palestinian Territories of the West Bank and Gaza in 1967 (previously controlled by Jordan and Egypt respectively). Despite UN Resolution181 voting to establish a Palestinian state, no such state has been allowed to emerge. The term the ‘Question of Palestine’ has, over the years, come to reflect the complexities of the Palestinian reality. United Nations, ‘The Question of Palestine’ (n.d.), available at: {https://www.un.org/unispal/history/}.

7 Ophir, Adi, Michal Givoni, and Hanafi, Sari, ‘Introduction’, in Ophir, Adi, Givoni, Michal, and Hanafi, Sari (eds), The Power of Inclusive Exclusion: Anatomy of Israeli Rule in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (New York: Zone Books, 2009), pp. 15–30 (p. 15)Google Scholar.

8 Zuriek, Elia, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine: Brutal Pursuit (London: Routledge 2016)Google Scholar; Wolfe, Patrick, ‘Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native’, Journal of Genocide Research, 8:4 (2006), pp. 387–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Shalhoub-Kevorkian, Nadera, Security Theology, Surveillance and the Politics of Fear (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015)Google Scholar; Veracini, Lorenzo, Israel and Settler Society (London: Pluto Press 2006)Google Scholar.

9 Shalhoub-Kevorkian, Security Theology, p. 5; Wolfe, ‘Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native’; Veracini, Israel and Settler Society; Tilley, Beyond Occupation.

10 Nathaniel Berman, ‘Annexation in the Shadow of the Law – Part 1’, International Commission of Jurists (21 May 2020), available at: {opinojuris.org/2020/05/21/annexation-in-the-shadow-of-the-law/}.

11 I thank the RIS anonymous reviewer for their insight clarifying this point.

12 McMahon, Sean, Discourses of Palestinian-Israeli Relations (New York: Routledge, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Neve Gordon, ‘From colonization to separation: Exploring the structure of Israel's occupation’, in Ophir, Givoni, and Hanafi (eds), The Power of Inclusive Exclusion, pp. 239–68 (pp. 250–1).

13 I thank the RIS anonymous reviewer for their feedback developing this point.

14 King-Irani, ‘Exiled to a liminal legal zone’, p. 930.

15 Rajagopal, Balakrishnan, ‘Counter-hegemonic international law: Rethinking human rights and development as a Third World strategy’, Third World Quarterly, 27:5 (2006), pp. 767–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Falk, Richard, (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance (Oxon: Routledge, 2014)Google Scholar.

16 Thomassen, Bjørn, ‘Thinking with liminality: To the boundaries of an anthropological concept’, in Horvath, Agnes, Thomassen, Bjørn, and Wydra, Harald (eds), Breaking Boundaries: Varieties of Liminality (Oxford: Berghahn, 2015), pp. 39–60 (p. 39)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Malksoo, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’; Rumelili, ‘Liminal identities and processes of domestication and subversion in International Relations’; Neumann, ‘Introduction to the forum on liminality’, pp. 473–9.

17 Ophir, Givoni, and Hanafi, ‘Introduction’, p. 20.

18 Ibid.; McMahon, Discourses of Palestinian-Israeli Relations.

19 I thank the RIS anonymous reviewer for their feedback on this point.

20 McConnell, ‘Liminal geopolitics', p. 141.

21 Ibid., emphasis added.

22 Turner, Ritual Process, p. 95.

23 Turner, Victor, Blazing the Trail: Way Marks in the Exploration, of Symbols, ed. Turner, Edith (Tuscon and London: The University of Arizona Press, 1992), p. 49Google Scholar; Szakolczai, Arpad, ‘Living permanent liminality: The recent transition experience in Ireland’, Irish Journal of Sociology, 22:1 (2014), pp. 28–50 (p. 33)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24 Turner, Ritual Process, p. 95.

25 Ibid., pp. 167.

26 Eisenstadt, Shmuel, ‘Comparative liminality: Liminality and dynamics of civilisation’, Religion, 15:3 (1985), pp. 315–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 Bhabha, Homi, Nations and Narration (Routledge: London, 1990)Google Scholar.

28 Said, Edward W., Representations of the Intellectual (London: Vintage, 1996), p. 49Google Scholar.

29 Bauman, Zygmunt, ‘After the patronage state: A model in search of class interests’, in Bryant, C. G. A. and Mokrzycki, E. (eds), The New Great Transformation? Change and Continuity in East-Central Europe (London: Routledge, 1994), pp. 15–17Google Scholar.

30 Malkki, Liisa, ‘National geographic: The rooting of peoples and the territorialization of national identity among scholars and refugees’, Cultural Anthropology, 7:1 (1992), p. 34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Thomassen, ‘Thinking with liminality’, pp. 39–60 (p. 40).

32 McConnell, ‘Liminal geopolitics’, p. 141.

33 Norton, Anne, Reflections on Political Identity (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988)Google Scholar.

34 Neumann, Iver B.. ‘Self and Other in International Relations’, European Journal of International Relations, 2:2 (1996), pp. 139–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Bahar Rumelili, ‘Liminality and the perpetuation of conflicts: Turkish-Greek relations in the context of community building by the EU’, European Journal of International Relations, 9 (2003); Malksoo, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’.

36 Higgot, Richard A. and Nossal, Kim Richard, ‘The international politics of liminality: Relocating Australia in the Asia-Pacific’, Australian Journal of Political Science, 32:2 (1997), pp. 169–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Horvath, Agnes, ‘Tricking into the position of the outcast: A case study in the emergence and effects of communist power’, Political Psychology, 19:2 (1998), pp. 331–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 McConnell, ‘Liminal geopolitics’.

39 Yanik, Lerna K., ‘Constructing Turkish “exceptionalism”: Discourses of liminality and hybridity in post-Cold War Turkish foreign policy’, Political Geography, 30:2 (2011), pp. 80–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Kocadal, Özker, ‘Emerging power liminality in peacebuilding: Turkey's mimicry of the liberal peace’, International Peacekeeping, 26:4 (2019), p. 431CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Yang, Guobin, ‘The liminal effects of social movements’, Sociological Forum, 3 (2000), pp. 379–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42 Malkki, Liisa, Purity and Exile: Violence, Memory and National Cosmology among Hutu Refugees in Tanzania (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1995), pp. 2–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43 Thomassen, ‘Thinking with liminality’, p. 39; Malksoo, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’; Rumelili, ‘Liminal identities and processes of domestication and subversion in International Relations’; Neumann, ‘Introduction to the forum on liminality’.

44 Malksoo, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’, p. 481.

45 Ibid., p. 482.

46 Ibid., pp. 481–3.

47 Rumelili, ‘Liminal identities and processes of domestication and subversion in International Relations’, pp. 493–7.

48 McConnell, ‘Liminal geopolitics’, p. 150; Neumann, ‘Introduction to the forum on liminality’, p. 477.

49 Malksoo, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’, p. 493; Rumelili, ‘Liminal identities and processes of domestication and subversion in International Relations’; Neumann, ‘Introduction to the forum on liminality’.

50 McConnell, ‘Liminal geopolitics’, p. 150.

51 Ibid., p. 149; Malksoo, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’, p. 484.

52 Rumelilli, ‘Liminal identities and processes of domestication and subversion in International Relations’, p. 497.

53 Ibid., p. 504.

54 King-Irani, ‘Exiled to a liminal legal zone’.

55 Bhungalia, Lisa, ‘A liminal territory: Gaza executive discretion, and sanctions turned humanitarian’, GeoJournal, 75 (2010), pp. 347–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 Pace, Michelle and Pallister-Wilkins, Polly, ‘EU-Hamas actors in a state of permanent liminality’, Journal of International Relations and Development, 21:1 (2018), p. 224CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 See, for example, Booth, Ken, Theory of World Security (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Booth, Ken, ‘Security as emancipation’, Review of International Studies, 17:4 (1991), pp. 313–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jones, Richard Wyn, ‘On emancipation: Necessity, capacity and concrete utopias’, in Booth, Ken (ed.), Critical Security Studies and World Politics (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2005), pp. 215–36Google Scholar; Tickner, J. Ann, A Feminist Journey through International Relations (New York: Oxford University Press, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tickner, J. Ann, Gender in International Relations: Feminist Perspectives on Achieving Global Security (New York: Columbia University press, 1992)Google Scholar; Murphy, Craig, ‘International relations and responsibility in an unequal world’, Development and Change, 37:6 (2006), pp. 1293–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Linklater, Andrew, Critical Theory and World Politics: Citizenship, Sovereignty and Humanity (London: Routledge, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hayward Alker, ‘Emancipation in the critical security studies project’, in Booth (ed.), Critical Security Studies, pp. 189–214; Burke, Anthony, Beyond Security, Ethics and Violence: War Against the Other (Oxon: Routledge, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Burke, Anthony, Lee-Koo, Katrina, and McDonald, Matthew, Ethics and Global Security (Oxon: Routledge, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Falk, Richard, Achieving Human Rights (Oxon: Routledge, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Falk, (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance; Falk, Richard, Palestine: The Legitimacy of Hope (London: Just World Books, 2014)Google Scholar; Falk, Richard, A New Geopolitics: A Forecast for the Future (London: Zed Books, 2018)Google Scholar.

58 Falk, (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance; Wyn Jones, ‘On emancipation’, pp. 215–36; Booth, ‘Security as emancipation’; Alker, ‘Emancipation in the critical security studies project’.

59 Booth, ‘Security as emancipation’, p. 319.

60 Tickner, Gender in International Relations, pp. 127–44.

61 Burke, Beyond Security, Ethics and Violence, pp. 20–1. I would also like to thank the anonymous RIS reviewer for helping to elucidate this point.

62 Wyn Jones, ‘On emancipation’, pp. 229–30, emphasis in original.

63 Burke, Beyond Security, Ethics and Violence, p. 21, emphasis added.

64 Falk, Achieving Human Rights; Falk, (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance; Falk, Palestine; Falk, A New Geopolitics.

65 Burke, Beyond Security, Ethics and Violence, p. 20.

66 I thank the anonymous RIS reviewer for assisting to hone this point.

67 Shayan, Fatemeh, ‘Interdisciplinarity and the emerged shift in the study of International Relations’, Millennium, 41:3 (2013), pp. 669–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Aalto, Pami, Harle, Vilho, and Moisio, Sami (eds), International Studies: Interdisciplinary Approaches (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Aalto, Pami, Harle, Vilho, and Moisio, Sami (eds), Global and Regional Problems: Towards an Interdisciplinary Study (Farnham: Ashgate, 2012)Google Scholar.

68 Burke, Beyond Security, Ethics and Violence, p. 2.

69 Foucault, Michel, ‘Truth and power’, in Faubion, James D. (ed.), Power: Essential Words of Foucault 1954–1984, Vol. 3 (London: Penguin, 2002), p. 133Google Scholar.

70 Gramsci, Antonio, Prison Notebooks (New York: Columbia University Press 2011)Google Scholar.

71 Foucault, Michel, The Will to Knowledge: A History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, trans. Hurley, Robert (London: Penguin, 1978), pp. 138–40Google Scholar. See, for example, Zureik, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine.

72 Agamben, Giorgio, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Agamben, Giorgio, The State of Exception (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2005)Google Scholar.

73 Agamben, Homo Sacer, p. 183; Gordon, ‘From colonization to separation’, p. 256.

74 Mbembe, Achille, ‘Necropolitics’, Public Culture, 15:1 (2003), pp. 39–40 (p. 12)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

75 Ibid., p. 27, emphasis in original.

76 Ibid., pp. 11–40.

77 Ibid., p. 27.

78 Said, Edward W., Orientalism (London: Vintage, 1979)Google Scholar; Said, Edward W., The Question of Palestine (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980)Google Scholar; Said, Edward W., Culture and Imperialism (London: Chatto and Windus, 1993)Google Scholar.

79 Said, Orientalism; Said, The Question of Palestine; Said, Culture and Imperialism.

80 Butler, Judith, Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence (London: Verso, 2004), p. 91Google Scholar.

81 Ibid., p. 57.

82 Ibid.

83 Marks, ‘Human rights and root causes’; Rajagopal, ‘Counter-hegemonic international law’; Antony Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Anghie, Antony and Chimni, B. S., ‘Third World approaches to international law and individual responsibility in internal conflicts’, Chinese Journal of International Law, 77 (2003), p. 102Google Scholar; Kennedy, David, A World of Struggle: How Power, Law, and Expertise Shape Global Political Economy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Singh, Prabhakar and Mayer, Benoît (eds), Critical International Law: Postrealism, Postcolonialism, and Transnationalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Falk, Richard, ‘The power of rights and the rights of power: What future for human rights’, Ethics and Global Politics, 1:1–2 (2008), pp. 81–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

84 Anghie and Chimni, ‘Third World approaches to international law’, p. 102.

85 Burke, Beyond Security, Ethics and Violence, p. 10.

86 Anghie and Chimni, ‘Third World approaches to international law’, p. 102; Anonymous RIS reviewer.

87 Anghie, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law.

88 Thank you to the anonymous RIS reviewer for this point.

89 Falk, Achieving Human Rights.

90 Rajagopal, ‘Counter-hegemonic international law’, p. 775.

91 Falk, Achieving Human Rights; Falk, (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance; Falk, Palestine; Falk, A New Geopolitics.

92 Robert R. Saunders, ‘Between paralysis and practice: Theorizing the political liminality of Palestinian cultural heritage’, Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress (2008), p. 472.

93 Ibid.

94 Ibid.

95 Ibid., pp. 474; Allen, Lori, The Rise and Fall of Human Rights: Cynicism and Politics in Occupied Palestine (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2013), p. 114CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Saunders, ‘Between paralysis and practice’, p. 472; Gordon, ‘From colonization to separation’, pp. 254–5.

96 Mason, Victoria, ‘The liminality of Palestinian refugees: Betwixt and between global politics and international law’, Journal of Sociology, 56:1 (2020), pp. 84–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

97 Saunders, ‘Between paralysis and practice’, p. 472. For discussions of the application of the Geneva Conventions in the OPT, see Orna Ben-Naftali, Aeyal M. Gross, and Keren Michaeli, ‘The illegality of the occupation regime: The fabric of law in the occupied Palestinian territory’, in Ophir, Givoni, and Hanafi (eds), The Power of Inclusive Exclusion, pp. 31–88; Gordon, ‘From colonization to separation’, pp. 248–50.

98 Kaufman, Edward and Bisharat, Ibrahim, ‘Introducing human rights into conflict resolution: The relevance for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process’, Journal of Human Rights, 1:1 (2002), pp. 71–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hajjar, Lisa, ‘Human rights in Israel/Palestine’, Journal of Palestine Studies, 30:4 (2001), pp. 21–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Omar Dajani, ‘“No security without law”: Prospects for implementing a rights-based approach in Palestinian-Israeli security negotiations’, in Akram et al. (eds), International Law, pp. 184–206.

99 More, Ann Le, ‘Killing with kindness: Funding the demise of a Palestinian state’, International Affairs, 81:5 (2005), pp. 981–99 (p. 988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gordon, ‘From colonization to separation’, p. 245; Ben Naftali, Gross, and Michaeli, ‘The illegality of the occupation regime’, pp. 31–88.

100 Ben-Naftali, Gross, and Michaeli, ‘The illegality of the occupation regime’, p. 45; UN OCHA, ‘50 Years of Occupation: 1967–2017’ (East Jerusalem: UN OCHA, 2017)

101 Peteet, Julie, ‘Camps and enclaves: Palestine in the time of closure’, Journal of Refugee Studies, 29:2 (2015), pp. 208–28 (pp. 209–10)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ben-Naftali, Gross, and Michaeli, ‘The illegality of the occupation regime’; Gordon, ‘From colonization to separation’, p. 260.

102 Peteet, ‘Camps and enclaves’, pp. 209–10; UNOCHA, ‘50 Years of Occupation’.

103 Mbembe, ‘Necropolitics’, pp. 23–4.

104 Tilley, Beyond Occupation, p. xi.

105 ‘Security Council Veto List’, UN Dag Hammarskjöld Library, available at: {https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick}.

106 Peter Beaumont, ‘US abstention allows UN to demand end to Israeli settlements’, The Guardian (24 December 2016), available at: {https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/23/us-abstention-allows-un-to-demand-end-to-israeli-settlements}.

107 Akram, Susan and Lynk, Michael, ‘The wall and the law: A tale of two judgements’, Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 24:1 (2006), pp. 61–106 (p. 62)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

108 Ibid., p. 96.

109 Ibid., p. 85.

110 Ibid., p. 103.

111 Ibid., p. 98.

112 Malksoo, ‘The challenge of liminality for International Relations theory’, p. 484.

113 Zureik, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine, p. 72.

114 Ibid.; Shalhoub-Kevorkian, Security Theology, p. 5; Wolfe, ‘Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native’; Veracini, Israel and Settler Society.

115 Zureik, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine, p. 51.

116 Ibid.; Wolfe, ‘Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native’; Veracini, Israel and Settler Society.

117 Zureik, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine, p. 51.

118 For in-depth discussion, see Zureik, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine; Wolfe, ‘Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native’; Veracini, Israel and Settler Society; Tilley, Beyond Occupation.

119 Masalha, Nur, Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History (London: Zed, 2018), pp. 313–14Google Scholar; Khalidi, Rashid, The Iron Cage: The Story of the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood (Beacon Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Mansfield, Peter, A History of the Middle East (3rd edn, London: Penguin, 2010), p. 162Google Scholar.

120 Masalha, Palestine, pp. 313–14; Khalidi, The Iron Cage; Mansfield, A History of the Middle East, p. 162.

121 Zureik, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine, p. 53.

122 Ibid., p. 54; Khalidi, The Iron Cage.

123 Zureik, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine, pp. 59–63.

124 Pappé, Ilan, ‘Clusters of history: US involvement in the Palestine Question’, Race & Class, 48:3 (2007), pp. 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

125 Barghouti, Omar, ‘BDS: “Upholding international law, asserting Palestinian rights”, Palestine Yearbook of International Law, 17 (2015), pp. 115–36 (pp. 129–30)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

126 Khalidi, Rashid, Brokers of Deceit: How the US Has Undermined Peace in the Middle East (Boston: Beacon Press, 2013)Google Scholar; Falk, Palestine, pp. 139–70; Chomsky, Noam, Fateful Triangle: The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians (Cambridge: South End Press, 1999)Google Scholar.

127 Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Art1/4); Mason, Victoria and Falk, Richard, ‘Assessing nonviolence in the Palestinian rights struggle’, State Crime Journal, 5:1 (2016), pp. 163–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

128 This right to armed struggle is also an established norm of international law. Any resistance must, of course, conform to international law, and therefore certain acts – such as attacks on civilians – are illegal and/or may comprise acts of terrorism. Mason and Falk, ‘Assessing nonviolence in the Palestinian rights struggle’.

129 Busbridge, Rachel, ‘Israel-Palestine and the settler colonial “turn”: From interpretation to decolonization’, Theory, Culture & Society, 35:1 (2018), pp. 91–115 (pp. 97–8)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

130 Ibid.

131 Makdisi, Saree, ‘Spectres of “terrorism”’, Interventions: International Journal of Postcolonial Studies, 4:2 (2002), pp. 265–78 (p. 266)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McMahon, Discourses of Palestinian-Israeli Relations.

132 Gordon, ‘From colonization to separation’, p. 244; Yehouda Shenhav and Yael Berda, ‘The colonial foundations of the state of exception: Juxtaposing the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories with colonial bureaucratic history’, in Ophir, Givoni, and Hanafi (eds), The Power of Inclusive Exclusion, pp. 355–6; Makdisi, ‘Spectres of “terrorism”’, p. 266; McMahon, Discourses of Palestinian-Israeli Relations.

133 Makdisi, ‘Spectres of “terrorism”’, p. 266.

134 McMahon, Discourses of Palestinian-Israeli Relations; Tony Klug, ‘Antisemitism: the Middle East Connection’, Open Democracy (5 March 2015), available at: {https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/north-africa-west-asia/antisemitism-middle-east-connection/}.

135 Ibid.

136 Said, Orientalism.

137 Ibid., p. 27. For a discussion of how such stereotypes remain pervasive today, see Morey, Peter and Yaqin, Amina, Framing Muslims: Stereotyping and Representation after 9/11 (Harvard: Harvard University Press, 2011)Google Scholar.

138 Burke, Beyond Security, Ethics and Violence, pp. 199–200.

139 Zureik, Israel's Colonial Project in Palestine; Shalhoub-Kevorkian, Security Theology.

140 Mbembe, ‘Necropolitics’, p. 24.

141 Ibid., pp. 29–30.

142 Ophir, Givoni, and Hanafi, ‘Introduction’, pp. 22, 18.

143 See reports by the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC); the UN ‘Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied since 1967’; Amnesty International; Human Rights Watch; B'Tselem; Breaking the Silence.

144 Judge ad hoc of the ICJ, John Dugard, for example, has provided clear evidence that the majority of the ‘inhuman acts’ outlined in Article II of the ICSPA are carried out as part of the Israeli occupation. While Israel is not a party to ICSPA, the prohibition of Apartheid is widely regarded as a jus cogens (non-derogable preemptive) norm of international law. (Yearbook of International Law Commission, ‘Draft articles on Responsibility of States’). The crime is also prohibited under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) (which Israel is a signatory to) and is treated as a distinct crime against humanity under the Rome Statute of the ICC. Dugard, John and Reynolds, John, ‘Apartheid, international law, and the occupied Palestinian territory’, European Journal of Human Rights, 24:3 (2013), pp. 867–913Google Scholar; Richard Falk and Virginia Tilley, ‘Israeli Practices towards the Palestinian People and the Question of Apartheid’, Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) (Beirut, 2017), E/ESCWA/ECRI/2017/1, available at: {https://electronicintifada.net/sites/default/files/2017-03/un_apartheid_report_15_march_english_final_.pdf}; Tilley, Beyond Occupation; Ophir, Givoni, and Hanafi (eds), The Power of Inclusive Exclusion.

145 Gordon, ‘From colonization to separation’, p. 256.

146 Butler, Precarious Life, pp. xiv–v.

147 Ibid., pp. 35–6.

148 Ibid.

149 Falk, Achieving Human Rights, p. 91.

150 Burke, Beyond Security, Ethics and Violence, p. 91.

151 Falk, Achieving Human Rights, p. 91.

152 Falk, Achieving Human Rights; Falk, (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance; Falk, Palestine; Falk, A New Geopolitics.

153 King-Irani, ‘Exiled to a liminal legal zone’, p. 935.

154 Ibid., p. 930.

155 Ibid.

156 Ibid., p. 931.

157 Ibid., p. 933.

158 Soeren Kern, ‘The UK's Selective Application of the Universal Jurisdiction Law’, Gates Institute (22 November 2010), available at: {http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/1671/uk-universal-jurisdiction-law}.

159 King-Irani, ‘Exiled to a liminal legal zone’, pp. 933–43.

160 Alexandra Malatesta, ‘UK passes law limiting arrests under universal jurisdiction’, Jurist (16 September 2011), available at: {http://jurist.org/paperchase/2011/09/uk-passes-law-limiting-arrests-under-universal-jurisdiction.php}.

161 Burgis-Kasthala, Michelle, ‘Over-stating Palestine's UN membership bid? An ethnographic study on the narratives of statehood’, European Journal of International Law, 25:3 (2015), pp. 677–701CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

162 While Israel is not a member of the ICC, due to Palestine's accession, the Court has jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed on Palestinian territory, including by Israel.

163 Peter Beaumont, ‘ICC to investigate alleged Israeli and Palestinian war crimes’, The Guardian (21 December 2019), available at: {https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/dec/20/icc-to-investigate-alleged-israeli-and-palestinian-war-crimes}.

164 Ben Doherty, ‘Australian government tells ICC it should not investigate alleged war crimes in Palestine’, The Guardian (10 May 2020), available at: {https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/10/australian-government-tells-icc-it-should-not-investigate-alleged-war-crimes-in-palestine}.

165 King-Irani, ‘Exiled to a liminal legal zone’, p. 930.

166 Falk, Achieving Human Rights, pp. 13–24; Falk, (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance.

167 Mason and Falk, ‘Assessing nonviolence in the Palestinian rights struggle’.

168 Falk and Tilley, ‘Israeli Practices towards the Palestinian People’.

169 Ben-Naftali, Gross, and Michaeli, ‘The illegality of the occupation regime’, pp. 67–8.

170 King-Irani, ‘Exiled to a liminal legal zone’, p. 930.

171 Falk, Achieving Human Rights; Falk, (Re)Imagining Humane Global Governance; Falk, Palestine; Falk, A New Geopolitics.

172 Cohen, Stanley, ‘Government responses to human rights reports: Claims, denials, and counterclaims’, Human Rights Quarterly, 18:3 (1996), pp. 517–43 (p. 538)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

173 Merry, Sally Engle, ‘Transnational human rights and local activism: Mapping the middle’, American Anthropologist, 108:1 (2006), pp. 38–55 (p. 41)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

174 Busbridge, ‘Israel-Palestine and the settler colonial “turn”’, p. 99.

175 Barghouti, Omar, Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS): The Global Struggle for Palestinian Rights (Chicago: Haymarket, 2011)Google Scholar.

176 Nathan Thrall, ‘BDS: How a controversial non-violent movement has transformed the Israeli-Palestinian debate’, The Guardian (14 August 2018); Barghouti, Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS); Lim, Audrea (ed.), The Case for Boycotts Against Israel (London: Verso, 2012)Google Scholar; McMahon, Sean F., ‘The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions campaign: Contradictions and challenges’, Race and Class, 55:4 (2014), pp. 65–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

177 Thrall, ‘BDS’.

178 Ibid.

179 Ibid.

180 BDS National Committee (BNC), ‘Racism and Racial Discrimination are the Antithesis of Freedom, Justice & Equality’, BDS website (n.d.), available at: {https://bdsmovement.net/news/%E2%80%9Cracism-and-racial-discrimination-are-antithesis-freedom-justice-equality%E2%80%9D}; See also Hanan Ashraw, ‘Is a boycott of Israel just?’, New York Times (18 February 2014); Barghouti, Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS); Lim (ed.), The Case for Boycotts Against Israel (2012).

181 BNC, ‘Racism and Racial Discrimination are the Antithesis of Freedom’.

182 Mearsheimer, John and Walt, Stephen, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy (London: Penguin, 2007), pp. 188–96Google Scholar; Beinart, Peter, The Crisis of Zionism (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 2012), pp. 54–8Google Scholar; Pappé, Ilan, Out of the Frame: The Struggle for Academic Freedom in Israel (London: Pluto, 2010), pp. 175–6, 179–80, 194, 198Google Scholar; Abraham, Matthew, Out of Bounds: Academic Freedom and the Question of Palestine (New York: Bloomsbury, 2014)Google Scholar; Butler, Precarious Lives, pp. 101–27.

183 Tilley, Beyond Occupation, pp. 54–5; Tovah Lazaroff, ‘Netanyahu: A Palestinian state won't be created’, Jerusalem Post (8 April 2019).

184 Tilley, Virginia, The One State Solution: A Breakthrough for Peace in the Israeli-Palestinian Deadlock (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; James Ron, ‘Palestine, the UN and the one-state solution’, Middle East Polity, XVIII:4 (2011), pp. 59–67; Yousef Munayyer, ‘There will be a one-state solution: But what kind of state will it be?’, Foreign Affairs, 98:6 (2019), pp. 30–1; ‘The One State declaration’, Electronic Intifada (29 November 2007), available at: {https://electronicintifada.net/content/one-state-declaration/793}.

185 ‘The One State declaration’.

186 Ibid.

187 Michelle Alexander, ‘Time to break the silence on Palestine’, New York Times (19 January 2019).

188 Busbridge, ‘Israel-Palestine and the settler colonial “turn”’, p. 98; Mason and Falk, ‘Assessing nonviolence in the Palestinian rights struggle’.