IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rjbsxx/v31y2016i3p287-304.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chameleon Wall. Inside Two Competing Coalitions of Pro-“Fence” Actors in Israel

Author

Listed:
  • Damien Simonneau

Abstract

Fourteen years after the start of the construction of the “security fence,” the idea of the West Bank Wall as a concrete separation from the Palestinians is a norm for the majority of the Israelis. The “security fence” represents a consensual security solution among the Israeli public opinion that is assumed to have stopped Palestinian attacks in Jewish-Israeli populated areas during the Second Intifada. This article explores the various meanings ascribed to the Wall by certain segments of Israeli society, specifically by pro-fence actors pressuring the Government between 2001 and 2005. Based on the identification of beliefs associated with the fence by such actors, the Wall appears to act as a Chameleon “solving” issues concerning security, identity, territory and separation. Beyond military and control purposes, the Wall also acts as a tool of reassurance on these issues to the Israeli public. The demonstration distinguishes between divergent and convergent meanings ascribed by pro-fence actors to the “security fence.” Nowadays, separation is favored over negotiations and territorial or political compromises. The Wall is thus a consensual public policy for most Israelis. It normalizes their daily life and perceptions of safety, and it moves them away from the Oslo period.

Suggested Citation

  • Damien Simonneau, 2016. "Chameleon Wall. Inside Two Competing Coalitions of Pro-“Fence” Actors in Israel," Journal of Borderlands Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 287-304, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rjbsxx:v:31:y:2016:i:3:p:287-304
    DOI: 10.1080/08865655.2016.1174598
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/08865655.2016.1174598
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/08865655.2016.1174598?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rjbsxx:v:31:y:2016:i:3:p:287-304. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rjbs20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.