Peacebuilding as counterinsurgency in the occupied Palestinian territory

Turner, Mandy

doi:10.1017/s0260210514000072

Cited by 51 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The perpetuation of the myth of a peace process also points to the discursive power of Western actors in being able to over-write Palestinian opinion that the peace process either did not exist or that it was so fatally damaged as to be beyond salvage. Indeed, as Mandy Turner (2014) argues persuasively, Western international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) are complicit in Israeli counterinsurgency policies against Palestinians, yet the INGOs see this (often with the best of intentions) as part of a peacebuilding programme. In other words, the key lies in the material power of external actors to endorse or maintain a particular argument.…”

Section: The Top-down Framing Of Peace and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Top-down and bottom-up narratives of peace and conflict

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on findings from the Everyday Peace Indicators project, the article considers how top-down and bottom-up narratives and understandings of conflict often differ. The article posits that top-down narratives are often the result of a peculiar framing system that imposes imaginaries on conflicts and those experiencing them. The bottom-up narratives, based on research in South Africa, South Sudan, Uganda and Zimbabwe, show that localised perceptions of peace, safety and security are not only articulated in different ways to top-down narratives but also raise different issues.

show abstract

Section: The Top-down Framing Of Peace and Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Top-down and bottom-up narratives of peace and conflict

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…14 It was also significant in the Middle East and in Northern Ireland in the 1990s, with the former eventually reverting to methodological nationalism and the latter extending further into the terrain of methodological everydayism (of which more, below). 15 In the liberal framework different forms of power and knowledge were to be aligned: power-to, as in Hobbes; 16 power over, as in Weber; 17 power despite resistance or power in concert as in Arendt; 18 and power's potentiality, as in Lukes, 19 were brought together. This led to a framework for a relatively benign and static state and international architecture based upon territorial sovereignty but domesticated by domestic and international liberal rights, which apparently minimised intervention and therefore maintained social and everyday legitimacy.…”

Section: Methodological Liberalismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interventionary order and its methodologies: the relationship between peace and intervention

Richmond

2019

Third World Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently there have been calls from policymakers around the world for practically engaged research to produce evidence-based policy for peace, security, and development. Policymakers aim to align three types of methodological approaches to knowledge about peace, security and development in international order: methodological liberalism at state and international levels, aligned with 'methodological everydayism', in order to constrain methodological nationalism. Policy operates through broad forms of intervention, spanning military, governmental, and developmental processes, which scholarship is expected to refine. Critical scholarship is sensitive about the subsequent 'interventionary order', however, often connecting methodological everydayism with global justice frameworks rather than methodological nationalism or liberalism. "Sir Philip Mitchell, later colonial governor of Uganda, Fiji, and Kenya, responded to Malinowski's claims [that the British government needed the support of Anthropologists] with great scepticism, emphatically expressing a preference for the "practical man" rather than the scientist." 2

show abstract

“…While Brazil focuses on humanitarianism as a leading principle for sustaining an image of positive and legitimate pacification efforts through its security politics, Israel's practices of securitization are more explicitly violent (Graham, 2010;Halper, 2015;Lambert, 2016;Turner, 2014). Israel uses harsh measures to control the Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories through checkpoints, nightly raids, and surveillance and actively and violently attempts to quell Palestinian protests, especially in the Gaza Strip.…”

Section: Brazil-israel Relations and The Marketing Of Urban Security Expertise By Erella Grassiani And Frank Müllermentioning

confidence: 99%

Brazil-Israel Relations and the Marketing of Urban Security Expertise

Grassiani¹,

Müller²

2019

Latin American Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The transnational (re)making of contemporary urban pacification practices, discourses, and technologies between Brazil and Israel is underpinned by coercive entanglements. The Israeli experience with the occupation of the Palestinian territories has brought the Israel Defense Forces and the country’s private security industry international recognition for their urban warfare skills and related security technologies; Brazil has recently gained international recognition for urban pacification efforts that emphasize the country’s military’s ability to combine “hard” and “soft” skills, thereby foregrounding the nexus of military and humanitarian forms of engagement on urban battlefields. Empirical findings framed by critical scholarship on pacification demonstrate how recent shifts in the military and diplomatic relations between the two countries seek to symbolically capitalize on their own and each other’s urban warfare experiences to promote themselves as security experts capable of addressing a range of future urban threat scenarios—from urban warfare to antigang and antiriot policing and peacekeeping. A reorganização transnacional das práticas, discursos e tecnologias de urbanização contemporânea entre Brasil e Israel são movidas por envolvimento coercitivo. A experiência israelense de ocupação dos territórios palestinos trouxe prestígio internacional às Forças de Defesa Israelense, bem como à indústria de segurança particular do país, em virtude de tecnologia de combate urbano. Brasil recentemente alcançou reconhecimento internacional pelos esforços de pacificação urbana, que enfatizam a habilidade das forças armadas do país em combinar “soft and hard skills”, criando assim um nexo de interação militar e humanitário no campo de batalha urbano. Observações produzidas em moldura crítica acadêmica sobre pacificação demonstram de que modo mudanças recentes nas relações diplomática e militar dos dois países visam capitalizar simbolicamente as experiências respectivas para promoverem a si mesmos como especialistas em segurança capazes de tratar uma variedade de cenários urbanos de risco—desde a guerra urbana contra gangs até o policiamento de manifestações.

show abstract

Peacebuilding as counterinsurgency in the occupied Palestinian territory

Cited by 51 publications

References 51 publications

Top-down and bottom-up narratives of peace and conflict

Top-down and bottom-up narratives of peace and conflict

Interventionary order and its methodologies: the relationship between peace and intervention

Brazil-Israel Relations and the Marketing of Urban Security Expertise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About