Oded Haklai

Religious—Nationalist Mobilization and State Penetration Lessons From Jewish Settlers' Activism in Israel and the West Bank

When will public agencies act in violation of the rules set by the state in a strong state? This article demonstrates that when an organized religious— nationalist force manages to penetrate the state apparatus, it can cause the state to lose some enforcement capacity vis-à-vis the penetrating force. The activists, in turn, can use the infiltrated arms of the state to realize their preferences, even if the pursuant practices contradict state laws. These conclusions are based on research conducted on Jewish settlements constructed unlawfully in the West Bank. The establishment of these settlements necessitated some collaboration from state agencies. Settler activism that included penetration into important arms of the bureaucracy is identified as an important facilitator of unauthorized settlements. The lessons drawn from the case are generalizable and can apply to other types of societal mobilization.

State mutability and ethnic civil society: the Palestinian Arab minority in Israel

Abstract This article identifies the phenomenon of ethnic civil society activism as mobilization that seeks to empower an ethnic community and challenges the institutional order. The case of the Palestinian Arab minority in Israel is discussed and is used to reveal the conditions under which disaffected minorities pursue the path of ethnic civil society. The study finds that an analytical framework that stresses the mutability of state structures and changes in broader state-society relations provides a better explanation than existing theories of ethnic conflict. State-society characteristics conducive to this type of mobilization are a well-institutionalized state that can prevent deviation from the states foundational rules and a counterbalanced dispersion of authority that limits regime capacity to control society.

Linking Ideas and Opportunities in Contentious Politics: The Israeli Nonparliamentary Opposition to the Peace Process

Abstract. Theorists of contentious politics have been divided over the influence onagency behaviour of ideational or cultural factors on the one hand, and rational strategic cal-culations of opportunities on the other. Based on an Israeli nonparliamentary oppositionmovement to the peace process, this study presents an integrative approach in whichideational variables are elevated to the level of independent motivating forces in which theobjectives of the movement are embedded. Argumentation at the strategic level provides themovement with opportunities for increasing its support basis beyond the natural con-stituency with which it shares ideology and, ultimately, for mobilizing protest. The caseillustrates how a political context that limits activity actually mobilizes contention, while acontext of more open opportunity can demobilize protest activity. Resume. Les the oriciens inte resse s a la politique contestataire sont divise s quant a l’ in-fluence exerce e sur le comportement des acteurs par les ide es et les facteurs culturels d’ unepart, et les calculs strate giques par rapport aux diffe rentes opportunite s d’ autre part. Utili-sant le cas d’ un mouvement d’ opposition non-parlementaire israe lien face au processus depaix, cet article propose une approche inte grative dans laquelle les variables ide ologiquessont conside re es en tant qu’ e le ments explicatifs inde pendants. Ces objectifs ide ologiquessont parfois enchâ sse s dans une argumentation strate gique, permettant ainsi au mouvementd’ opposition d’ e tendre ses appuis au-dela de ses e le ments constitutifs partageant la me meide ologie, et donc de mobiliser les masses a des fins protestataires. Ce cas illustre qu’ uncontexte limitant l’ activisme politique peut en fait servir a mobiliser la contestation, alorsqu’ un contexte politique plus ouvert peut engendrer une de mobilisation face a cette me mecontestation.

A minority rule over a hostile majority: The case of Syria

This article attempts to devise a conceptual framework for the analysis of continuous ethnic minority rule over hostile majorities. A synthesis of the cultural, modernist and psychological approaches to the study of ethnic conflict provides the grounds for the explanation of the ways in which the identities of the minority and majority were shaped throughout their history and why they became politically salient. On this basis, it is possible to understand why the minorities seek political power. As the case of Syria suggests, the ability to attain power is primarily dependent on dominating the army, usually through colonial legacy. Maintaining rule relies on an authoritarian and oppressive government structure, and the ability of the regime to legitimize itself, primarily by decreasing the saliency of the distinct identities, and ultimately the hostility, and creating a unified identity.