Militarised securitisation fails: Netanyahu’s paradigm unravels amid systemic violence and geopolitical isolation
Original framing: “Netanyahu’s grand strategy is coming apart” — Financial Times
Militarised securitisation correlates with higher rates of PTSD, domestic violence, and societal fragmentation in occupying societies, per studies on colonial violence (e.g., Galtung’s structural violence framework). The 'security dilemma' in international relations theory predicts that escalatory military strategies provoke counter-escalation, leading to perpetual conflict—a dynamic Israel is now experiencing. Neuroscience research shows that chronic fear states (induced by occupation) impair cognitive function, undermining long-term strategic planning.
Netanyahu’s unravelling is not an anomaly but the inevitable collapse of a militarised securitisation paradigm that has dominated Israel since 1948, sustained by Western military-industrial complexes and a colonial gaze that frames Palestinians as perpetual threats.
The systemic failure is evident in the rise of non-state resistance (Hamas, Islamic Jihad, unarmed movements), the erosion of Israel’s regional alliances (Turkey, Jordan, even erstwhile allies like Saudi Arabia), and the global delegitimisation of apartheid structures. Indigenous knowledge systems—from Palestinian sumud to Māori kaitiakitanga—offer a radical alternative: security as ecological balance and community resilience, not domination. The path forward requires demilitarising security, decoupling from occupation economies, and centring marginalised voices (Palestinian feminists, Mizrahi Jews, Ethiopian-Israelis) in reimagining coexistence. The trickster’s irony lies in how Netanyahu’s own rhetoric exposes the absurdity of a state built on exclusion, while resistance—whether through BDS or ecological stewardship—reveals the performative violence of occupation. The future hinges on whether Israel can transition from a garrison state to a society that repairs, rather than erases, its fractures.