Seeking a Sustainable Solution to the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict from Judith Butler's Perspective

This paper aims to analyze the critical approach proposed by Judith Butler, a philosopher of post-structuralism, to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and investigate the alternative solutions that she offers based on ethical and political concepts. In a radical critique of the concepts of "nation-state" and "Zionism", Butler considers conventional solutions, e.g., "two states" or "one state", ineffective due to their perpetuation of historical injustice, exclusion of Palestinians, and reliance on an exclusivist logic. In contrast, she proposes the concepts of "diaspora" and "cohabitation" as an alternative framework. In Butler's view, diaspora is not merely a geographical situation but an ethical stance based on the shared experience of exile and displacement of Jews and Palestinians, emphasizing the importance of life in relation to the "other." Likewise, cohabitation extends beyond physical proximity to mean the development of a shared political space based on the absolute equality of rights, mutual respect for cultural plurality, and shared responsibility for the future. Inspired by Edward Said and Hannah Arendt, Butler emphasizes the necessity of cultural and ethical "translations" between conflicting narratives and moving beyond nation-state structures.

Introduction

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the most enduring and complex geopolitical issues of our time. The ongoing actions by Israel against Palestinians have raised global concern and created significant security risks. The disregard for international law has disrupted global order. Ilan Pappé describes Palestine as an "epicenter of global crises," where colonialism, imperialism, racism, and refugee crises converge. The devastation in Gaza, with widespread loss of life and infrastructure, underscores the urgency of finding a resolution.Traditional approaches, primarily the "two-state solution," face significant obstacles, including Israeli settlement expansion and the geographic fragmentation of Palestinian territories. Alternative proposals like the "one-state solution" raise concerns about continued domination. These solutions often fail to address historical injustice and the necessity of a shared future, highlighting their limitations. This persistent failure necessitates alternative perspectives that transcend traditional "state-centric" thinking and address the conflict's underlying ethical and political dimensions. Judith Butler's intellectual contributions offer a unique and potentially transformative lens for understanding and confronting the conflict.

Theoretical Framework

Butler's critical approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is rooted in her radical critique of the "nation-state" and "Zionism." She argues that conventional solutions are ineffective because they perpetuate historical injustice and rely on an exclusivist logic. Instead, Butler proposes "diaspora" and "cohabitation" as alternative frameworks. For Butler, the "nation-state" model, especially one privileging one group over others, inherently leads to injustice and violence. Drawing on Hannah Arendt, Butler argues that the nation-state's emphasis on national homogeneity often causes the emergence of "stateless" individuals. The Israeli nation-state law of 2018, which declares Jewish settlement a national value and confines self-determination exclusively to the Jewish people, exemplifies this exclusionary logic, undermining Palestinian self-determination. Butler views Zionism as a form of nationalism aimed at creating a homogenous and exclusivist nation-state, rendering its foundation problematic due to its basis on exclusion. She challenges the equation of Jewishness with Zionism, seeing it as a dangerous political movement that ignores the diversity of the Jewish experience. In contrast, "diaspora," from Butler's perspective, is not merely a geographical condition, but an ethical stance. Grounded in the shared experience of exile and displacement for both Jews and Palestinians, this stance emphasizes living in relation to the "other." She redefines Jewishness as a diasporic identity, linked not to a specific territory but to a shared history of displacement and an ethical commitment to engagement with others, challenging the Zionist idea of a return to a single homeland. "Cohabitation" extends beyond physical proximity, meaning the development of a shared political space based on absolute equality of rights, mutual respect for cultural plurality, and shared responsibility for the future. This necessitates moving beyond the exclusivist logic of the nation-state towards a model of political belonging that embraces plurality. This cohabitation must be founded on recognizing the equal value of grievance for all lives, challenging discourses that devalue Palestinian mourning. Inspired by Edward Said's "contrapuntal reading," Butler emphasizes the need for cultural and ethical "translations" between conflicting narratives. Translation, for Butler, is not about finding direct equivalences but about having a profound, empathetic recognition of differences and engaging with them constructively to foster mutual understanding and respect. This process acknowledges the fundamental "relationality" of Jews and Palestinians, where identity is formed through its relationship with the "other."

Methodology

This paper employs a descriptive-analytical method to investigate Judith Butler's ideas for the development of a just and sustainable solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The paper aims to delineate a transformative vision that seeks to redefine political identities based on relationality, acceptance of plurality, and shared responsibility for a common future by relying on Butler's critique of Zionism and the nation-state.

Results & Discussion

The dominant paradigms for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, namely the two-state and one-state solutions, have faced an impasse. The two-state solution, though internationally supported, is fraught with challenges, including the continuous expansion of Israeli settlements (e.g., doubling the settler population between 1993 and 2009), the fragmentation of Palestinian land, and the failure to address underlying causes stemming from what some see as an aggressive, expansionist Zionist project. Critics argue it fails to guarantee full Palestinian rights, including the right of return for refugees. The one-state solution, promoting a single political structure for both Israelis and Palestinians through a rights-based approach, is presented as better able to secure the rights of Palestinian refugees and ensure full equality for Palestinian citizens of Israel. However, it faces significant opposition from both Israeli and Palestinian societies, with many Israelis fearing a loss of Jewish national identity. Butler's critique targets the foundational concepts of the "nation-state" and "Zionism." She argues that the nation-state's inherent drive for homogeneity leads to exclusion and violence. For Butler, the Israeli state, in its aspiration to be a Jewish nation-state, exemplifies this by dispossessing and marginalizing Palestinians. Her ethical framework calls for transcending these exclusionary structures. Her alternative centers on "diaspora" and "cohabitation." To Butler, diaspora is an ethical and political resource, a shared Jewish and Palestinian experience of displacement that fosters an understanding of interconnectedness and responsibility towards the "other." Cohabitation, however, is the development of a shared, inclusive political space built on absolute equality, mutual respect, and joint responsibility, transcending the nation-state's exclusionary logic. This involves recognizing the equal grievability of all lives lost. This vision of cohabitation may emerge as a binational state, but one that radically challenges the traditional nation-state by dispersing sovereignty.

Conclusion and Suggestions

Judith Butler offers a profound ethical and political critique of conventional approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, challenging the foundational concepts of the nation-state and Zionism. She posits that solutions like "two states" or "one state" are inadequate because they perpetuate historical injustice. Instead, Butler champions "diaspora," "cohabitation," and "relationality," which stem from shared experiences of exile and offer a path to redefine political relationships. By emphasizing the diasporic nature of Jewish identity, she contests the territorial exclusivity of Zionism and redefines Jewishness as a global experience rooted in interaction with the "other," thereby developing space for the recognition of the Palestinian experience. Butler’s "cohabitation" envisages a shared political structure with absolute equality, respect for cultural diversity, and active shared responsibility. This concept addresses historical injustices and insists on the equal grievability of all lives. Drawing from Arendt, she views the concept of the nation-state as inherently exclusionary, proposing a move towards new forms of political organization like a transformative binational state or transnational models based on ethical interaction. Critics have highlighted the abstract nature of her concepts in the face of harsh realities, questioning their immediate applicability and potential to overlook the agency of those on the ground. However, Butler's framework can be seen as a long-term vision aimed at fundamentally altering the terms of the conflict rather than a short-term fix. Her ethical framework serves as a pivotal foundation for any pragmatic political strategy, ensuring that solutions are built on equality and justice. Although the practical implementation of a binational state as envisioned by Butler still remains ambiguous and faces significant hurdles, her work compellingly challenges the status quo and the assumption that the current nation-state model is the only viable paradigm for the future. Her ideas provide a crucial framework for decolonization and termination of settler colonialism. Despite its limitations, Butler's perspective represents a vital step beyond classical state-centric discourses. By linking ethics and politics, she demonstrates that resolving the conflict would necessitate redefining the notions of identity, belonging, and justice. Her emphasis on "translation" as a process for mutual understanding can facilitate constructive dialogue. However, realizing these ideals would require commitment from international bodies, civil society, and political leaders willing to move beyond the logic of domination. Butler's call to "dwell with the impossible" acknowledges the complexity of the conflict, suggesting that only a sustained commitment to justice and equality can offer hope for a shared future. Her philosophical insights provide a guiding light for those who seek to transcend violence and establish a more just order.