Freedom and peace at the shopping centre: the politics of consumerism in Israel/Palestine

ABSTRACT

Shopping centres are products and indicators of consumerism. In the case of Israel/Palestine, where shopping malls have spread since the mid-1980s, they have acquired political meanings beyond the widespread conception of consumer-choice-as-freedom, as they also claim to advance coexistence in a context marked by ethnic segregation. We perceive shopping centres as ‘non-places’, following the work of Marc Augé, and analyse two overarching ideologies that coalesce in the shopping centre, in alignment with the political economy of Israel/Palestine. The first is liberal peace, which underpins the remnants of the Oslo process, but in an individualized form. The second is securitism, which presents shopping centres as a secure island in a sea of inter-ethnic violence. This image is taken apart throughout the article on the basis of ethnographic and discourse-analytical research on four sites in Israel, Jerusalem, and the occupied West Bank, focusing on the ways Palestinian consumers experience Israeli shopping centres.     

Israel and Palestine: the slow road to peace or the fast track to mutual annihilation?

This paper outlines the nature of the post World War II conflict between Israel and Palestine over land and borders. It demonstrates the weaknesses in the political systems of both countries that make it difficult to resolve outstanding differences. It examines the nature of bargaining costs, distinguishing clearly between the Coase and the Machiavelli theorem. It uses the hawk–dove game model to explain war and peace relationships between Israel and Palestine evident over the period 1948–2007. It evaluates the implications for the peace process of some future proliferation of nuclear arms that breaks Israeli nuclear hegemony in the Middle East.     

We are here,they are there: between peace and exclusion in Israel/Palestine

The purpose of this work is to offer a critique of partition, not on the basis of its impact on the relations between the sides to the dispute, but on its implications for majority-minority relations inside the (non-homogeneous) state. Using the Israeli-Palestinian example, the paper argues that the dynamics of partition idealize the notion of a homogeneous nation-state and, consequently, marginalize minorities and accentuate internal political divisions. Specifically, Israeli policymakers' ‘demographic trade-off’ between territorial compromise and a ‘Jewish state’ underscores some of the recent national tensions within Israel over the citizenship status of the minority Palestinians.     

Broadening the peace dividend

He has served as Senior Fellow at the National Commission for Economic Conversion and Disarmament.     

Violence,voting & peace: Explaining public support for the peace referendum in Colombia

How does political violence affect popular support for peace? We answer this question by examining Colombia, where in 2016 the people narrowly and unexpectedly voted against a peace agreement designed to end a half century of civil war. Building on research on the impact of political violence on elections as well as research on referendum/initiative voting in the United States, we argue that local experiences with violence and the political context will lead to heightened support for peace. We test these expectations using spatial modeling and a municipal-level data on voting in the 2016 Colombian peace referendum, and find that municipal-level support for the referendum increases with greater exposure to violence and increasing support for President Santos. These results are spatially distributed, so that exposure to violence in one municipality is associated with greater support for the peace referendum in that municipality and also in surrounding areas. Our findings have implications not only for Colombia, but for all post-war votes and other contexts in which referenda and elections have major and/or unexpected results.     

Negotiated settlements and peace referendums

Institutional innovations in conflict management have received considerable academic attention in the past decades. Yet few studies have considered the design of referendums in peace processes and the role of popular mandates in catalysing negotiated settlements. Drawing evidence from divided societies, particularly the contrasting cases of South Africa and Cyprus, the article points to the importance of ratification sequence and early mandate referendums. Specifically, it demonstrates how mandate referendums focusing initially on domestic constituencies enable leaders to pre‐empt ethnic outbidding challenges while concluding a peace agreement. An early ratification process could safeguard the peace process from unavoidable reversals in public opinion, increase flexibility as to the timing of critical decisions and maximise the credibility of leaders aiming for a negotiated settlement. The study of mandate referendums has important implications for broader research on international mediations since it suggests mechanisms by which political actors could ensure the ratification of significant treaties in global or regional politics.     

Israel and the Gulf states

Israel’s ties with Arab Gulf states have intensified in recent years, mainly motivated by the perception of a shared threat posed by Iran. Official diplomatic relations or overt military cooperation between Israel and these states are unlikely, however, so long as the Palestinian issue remains unresolved.     

The political economy of the peace dividend

We develop a model of the peace dividend and use it to predict the fiscal consequences of a reduction in the demand for military spending. The model is based on the assumption that the political process responds to political demands and costs in a way that maximizes net political benefits. The predictions of our model on how a peace dividend will be allocated over nonmilitary spending, tax relief, and deficit reduction is tested against the experience of eight major wars in United States history.     

Media framing and social movement mobilization: German peace protest against INF missiles, the Gulf War, and NATO peace enforcement in Bosnia

Abstract. How does media framing of issues affect social movement mobilization? This relationship is examined in light of the striking variation in levels of German peace protest against INF missiles, the Gulf War and the NATO peace-keeping mission to Bosnia. I argue that this variation in mobilization capacity can be explained in part by the degree of congruence between media framing and movement framing of the issues involved. Congruence between the two framings facilitates movement mobilization, whereas divergence hinders it. I compare the relative congruence between movement framing and media framing in Die Tageszeitung and Der Spiegel coverage of the three issues. I also evaluate possible alternative or complementary explanations, including public opinion, 'normalization' and elite cues, and political opportunity structure.     

Torture in Israel

Conclusion The High Court's verdict is a major step forward insofar as that the existing institutionalized GSS torture practices are declared unlawful and are no longer possible in any institutionalized form. It appears, however, likely that Israel will attempt to reintroduce the legal use of different forms of “physical pressure” under specific circumstances. The legality of these forms in Israel is then likely to be tested by a High Court of Justice which is still clearly ambivalent and far from unequivocal in declaring all forms of physical means during interrogations to be unlawful. Whereas the Court's ruling declaring the present guidelines and various practices of “moderate physical force” unlawful is a positive step from a human rights perspective and in the context of the Middle East peace process, its significance might thus eventually turn out to be less of a breakthrough than initially thought. The international community has ample reason to continue to follow Israel critically regarding possible infractions of the Convention and the ICCPR. I would like to thank Jeroen Gutter and Ian Seiderman for their assistance with this article.     

Thinking 'globally' about peace in Northern Ireland

Though many in Britain and Northern Ireland remain highly sceptical about the longer term intentions of the Provisional IRA, it is clear that its ceasefire of August 1994 represented a major turning-point in Irish history. The nature of the IRA decision however remains shrouded in controversy – made all the more controversial of course by its resumption of military activities followed eighteen months later by the announcement of another ceasefire. This article seeks to throw light on the original IRA decision by exploring some of the international pressures which led the organization to take the decision it did in 1994. While in no way seeking to downplay the importance of 'internal' factors such as war weariness and the Anglo-Irish agreement, it is suggested here that the decision itself makes little sense unless it is situated within a wider global context. It is also implied that if analysts had been more sensitive to the influence of the 'global' upon the 'local' conflict in Northern Ireland, they may have been less surprised than they were by the IRA announcement.     

Israel and the West Bank Palestinians

Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs in the region west of theJordan River have, in effect, constituted a bicommunal polityfor much of this century. Little academic attention, however,has been given to a bicommunal perspective on Israeli-Palestinianrelations. Three theoretical models for understanding bicommunalpolities are suggested at the outset of the article: dual authority,control, and shared rule. Within the control model, two variationsare identified: the joint control system that describes the1967–1976 period and the competitive control frameworkthat has replaced it. The failure of both systems of controlto provide stability and the likelihood that a dual authoritywill be unable to provide stability suggest a need to considera special version of shared rule in the West Bank.