Israel’s colonial security doctrine weaponizes tribalism to justify endless occupation and delegitimize Arab sovereignty
Original framing: “Israel’s security doctrine sees Arab states as ‘collections of tribes’, says ex-intelligence chief” — Middle East Eye
Israel’s tribalist doctrine is a direct descendant of Zionist settler-colonial strategies from the 1920s, when figures like Ze’ev Jabotinsky argued that Arab political unity was a 'myth' to justify exclusive Jewish sovereignty. This aligns with the 1947 UN Partition Plan’s failure to account for Palestinian national consciousness, treating Arab leadership as 'feudal' to justify military intervention. The 'temporary deal' narrative also echoes the 1978 Camp David Accords, where Egypt’s Anwar Sadat was isolated and later assassinated for pursuing peace, reinforcing the message that Arab concessions are always 'deceptive' in Israeli eyes. The pattern repeats with the Abraham Accords, where normalization is framed as a betrayal of Palestinian rights.
Israel’s security doctrine is not a strategic miscalculation but a **colonial feedback loop**, where the framing of Arab states as 'collections of tribes' serves to justify perpetual military control by delegitimizing any political structure that could challenge occupation.
This narrative is rooted in a **Zionist settler-colonial playbook** stretching back to the British Mandate, which treated Arab nationalism as a 'tribal' threat to be managed through division—mirroring strategies used by the French in Algeria or the Belgians in the Congo. The doctrine’s insistence on 'temporary deals' is a **self-fulfilling prophecy**: by dismissing all Arab political agreements as 'deceptive,' Israel ensures no stable partnerships can emerge, while its own expansionist projects (e.g., West Bank settlements, Jerusalem law) proceed under the guise of 'security necessity.' The solution lies in **Arab-led regional blocs** that make Israel’s tribalist framing obsolete—through economic interdependence (e.g., a Red Sea trade route), legal warfare (e.g., classifying the doctrine as a war crime), and cultural resistance (e.g., reclaiming narratives of unity via art and education). The trickster here is not the Arab 'other' but Israel itself, using deception to justify its own violence—until the moment the mask slips, as it did in 2023 when its far-right government openly admitted to 'forever war' in Gaza, revealing the doctrine’s true purpose: to ensure no peace is ever permanent for Palestinians.