Citation

Grinberg LL. Curr. Sociol. 2013; 61(2): 206-225.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2013, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0011392112456506

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article analyzes violence within the framework of power relations and social conflict, aiming to comprehend the different dynamics that lead to escalation of violence or its containment by opening political space for representation. It distinguishes between the violence of dominant and non-dominant groups and explores the conditions of effective resistance that facilitate recognition and negotiation. The Israeli-Palestinian case provides an opportunity to explore the dynamics of resistance and violence and their relation to politics. The goal is to explain the contradictory reactions to the First and Second Intifada in order to analyze options for the future. The article argues that the First Intifada opened up political space for recognition and negotiations but since the Second Intifada there has been only violence, no politics. The First Intifada demarcated the borders of the Israeli state and the imagined Palestinian state, while the second blurred them. Palestinian resistance is in a catch: when it uses violence it is oppressed, and when it uses diplomatic negotiations it is ignored. Given the absence of recognized borders and the imbalance of power between Israelis and Palestinians, international intervention is required both in the form of pressure on Israel and in the form of peace troops.

Language: en