Whose autonomy? Conceptualising ‘colonial extraterritorial autonomy’ in the occupied Palestinian territories
| Author | Tariq Dana,Ali Jarbawi |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/02633957221128216 |
| Published date | 01 February 2023 |
| Date | 01 February 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/02633957221128216
Politics
2023, Vol. 43(1) 106 –121
© The Author(s) 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/02633957221128216
journals.sagepub.com/home/pol
Whose autonomy?
Conceptualising ‘colonial
extraterritorial autonomy’
in the occupied Palestinian
territories
Tariq Dana
Doha Institute of Graduate Studies, Qatar
Ali Jarbawi
Birzeit University, Palestine
Abstract
The notion of ‘Palestinian autonomy’ has occupied a central position in Israel’s post-1967 strategic
planning in occupied Palestinian territories. Despite that, the notion remains understudied in
relation to the regular understanding of political autonomy and its conceptualisation and application
in theory and practice. One striking aspect of Israel’s envisioned autonomy for the Palestinians is
that it does not resemble any existing model of autonomy implemented around the world today.
This article seeks to bridge this conceptual gap by proposing the term ‘Colonial Extraterritorial
Autonomy’ as a peculiar mode of colonial governmentality that has been developed in the
aftermath of Israel’s 1967 occupation to resolve the territory/demography question in favour of
Israel colonial ambition for ‘maximum land with minimum Palestinians’.
Keywords
colonial extraterritorial autonomy, colonial governmentality, Palestine, political autonomy,
settler-colonialism
Received: 21st October 2021; Revised version received: 24th August 2022; Accepted: 26th August 2022
Introduction
In recent years, the settler-colonial turn in the studies of the ‘Palestinian–Israeli conflict’
has defied the conventional analytical frameworks that portray the conflict from the lens
Corresponding author:
Tariq Dana, Center of Conflict and Humanitarian Studies/Conflict Management and Humanitarian Action
Program, Doha Institute of Graduate Studies, P.O. Box: 200592. Al Tarfa Street, Zone 70, Doha, Qatar.
Email: tariq.dana@dohainstitute.edu.qa
1128216POL0010.1177/02633957221128216PoliticsDana and Jarbawi
research-article2022
Article
Dana and Jarbawi 107
of symmetrical power relations. Israel is identified as a settler-colonial formation, in ide-
ology and practice, because it combines policies of territorial expansion and the elimina-
tion of the natives. This is evidenced in Israel’s founding myth of the ‘land without the
people’ that guided the Zionist movement in the pre-1948 era as well as its operational
logic of ‘maximum land with minimum Palestinians’ that dominated Israel’s post-1967
strategies towards the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt). Yet, these studies acknowl-
edge the distinctive features of Israel’s settler-colonial formation, largely attributable to
the belated nature of Zionism – the ideological underpinning of the Israeli state – which
was launched in the late 19th century and was institutionalised in the form of the Israeli
state in 1948 that continued the colonisation of Palestine to date (Bishara, 2022; Shafir,
2016). Embarking on settler-colonial ventures in the age of decolonisation and interna-
tional law has restricted the eliminative logic; the core policy of classical settler-colonial-
ism. Under these temporal pressures, Israel had to replace traditional settler-colonial
strategies with alternative techniques to accomplish its goals.
The interplay of territory and demography has consistently shaped Israel’s policy
towards the Palestinians. From a Zionist perspective, the Palestinian population living in
the areas from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea constitutes a demographic threat
to the Jewish ethnoreligious character of the Israeli state. For this reason, Israel has sys-
temically sought to neutralise its demographic burden and to secure Jewish hegemony
over these territories. This process has undergone two key phases. In its first phase,
Zionist colonisation established itself through the violent depopulation of hundreds of
Palestinian towns and villages in 1948, transforming the remaining Palestinian people
into an involuntary minority subjugated to Israel’s discriminatory legal regime. The sec-
ond phase was marked by the colonisation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and East
Jerusalem after the Arab–Israeli War in 1967. In addition to international opposition to the
occupation, Israel’s hasty takeover of these territories was not part of a pre-orchestrated
plan to replicate the 1948 elimination scenario (Dana and Jarbawi, 2017). As a result,
Israel encountered a Palestinian population density that rendered its settler-colonial pro-
ject incomplete and trouble-ridden.
To counter this dilemma, Israeli strategists embarked on a variety of complex methods
to create a legal and physical distinction between the land and the Palestinians living on
it; that is to include the land and exclude the population (Zureik, 2016). Chief among
these methods was the notion of ‘Palestinian autonomy’ which developed over time and
became a keyword in Israel’s perception of ‘peace’ to settle the Palestinian question
(Dana, 2021).
Far predating the Oslo process and the establishment of the Palestinian Authority (PA)
in 1994, the vision of Palestinian autonomy has predominated Israeli political thought,
since the aftermath of the 1967 occupation, enjoying quasi-consensus across its political
spectrum, albeit with competing views regarding secondary details. Common to all the
different perspectives on Palestinian autonomy are a number of conditions: it should be
spatially limited, demographically dense, institutionally fragile, and able to administer
the life conditions imposed by Israel.
However, this autonomy vision does not resemble any other existing models of auton-
omy implemented around the world today. Although a small number of studies have cast
doubt on the relevancy of autonomy in the Palestinian context, most studies have taken
the notion of autonomy for granted. As such, the notion remains understudied, and lacks
a proper comparative explanation despite its centrality to Israel’s settler-colonial plan-
ning. The dearth of research in this area could be attributed to the political and legal ‘grey
To continue reading
Request your trial