Abstract
This research focuses on the discourses and strategies used by British political representatives in justifying continued ‘support’ for the Israeli occupation government in Palestine. As a member of the liberally identified ‘Western’ alliance, Britain, must justify its invested interests in the region, given Israel’s internationally criticized occupation practices. Between the months of May through July 2004 seven interviews were conducted with Members of British Parliament and the representative of a major London based pro-Israeli lobby organization concerning their rationales for the British government’s position towards the Israeli government’s occupation practices. A critical discursive analysis highlights key ideological and discursive themes forming the legitimizing rationales for the British position and involvements in the region. These rationales are seen as ideologically ‘necessary’ in negotiating the contradictory ‘gaps’ between neoliberalist identifications and practices. Given contemporary hegemonic contestations, the discussion highlights the necessity of an ideological and material analysis in studying Western discursive (re)productions of social domination.
Highlights
Contemporary international politics are full with rhetorical debates concerning the definitions and regulations of new constellations of geopolitical boundaries and relations1
Western political efforts to create ‘peace in the Middle East’ have been juxtaposed with their own economic strategies and battles to secure their interests in the area often converging in competing spatial ‘logics’ of ‘territorial’, and capitalistic agenda’s (Harvey, 2003)
The aim of this study was twofold; first to identify and outline discursive strategies utilized by British political representatives in explaining and legitimizing their government’s political and economic involvement in ‘supporting’ the Israeli government’s practices
Summary
Contemporary international politics are full with rhetorical debates concerning the definitions and regulations of new constellations of geopolitical boundaries and relations. Western governments maintain identifications with egalitarian and democratic ideals while at the same time faced with the systemic inequality “produced by the uneven ways in which wealth and power...become highly concentrated in certain places by virtue of asymmetrical exchange relations”(Harvey, 2003)2 These tensions become more ‘visible’ in extreme cases in which neoliberal Western agenda’s merge with geopolitical events in such a manner as to construct and maintain overt forms of social domination. Western political efforts to create ‘peace in the Middle East’ have been juxtaposed with their own economic strategies and battles to secure their interests in the area often converging in competing spatial ‘logics’ of ‘territorial’, and capitalistic agenda’s (Harvey, 2003) Such is the case in the U.S and British history of interventionism and continued ‘support’ for what critics often refer to as the Israeli ‘occupation’ government. As is well known there are wide divisions and resistances in Israel towards its own government policies as represented in various religious and political divisions
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
