Is the Israeli Discipline of “Middle East and Islam Studies” Decolonizing?

Eyal Clyne, Assaf David
{"title":"Is the Israeli Discipline of “Middle East and Islam Studies” Decolonizing?","authors":"Eyal Clyne, Assaf David","doi":"10.5325/pir.1.1.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n As critical attention to Western colonialism and imperialism has been growing in Middle East studies (MES) globally, the Israeli branch of the discipline often narrates itself as a critical ally, with some going as far as suggesting it is “decolonizing.” By acknowledging their predecessors’ historical contributions to orientalist practices, and mistaking improvement in inclusivity with radical change, Israeli MES scholars self-diagnose a radical transformation, which differentiates past from present and yields an evolved and legitimized version of Israeli MES. Against this view, we argue that the field’s actions testify to the contrary. Selective adherence to “political neutrality,” coupled with overwhelming underrepresentation of Palestinians, effectively safeguards the “unity” of the field’s various Zionist elements over the possibility of solidarity and action, which results in persistent avoidance of explicit, meaningful, and concrete anti-occupation and decolonization practices. The vigorous and nearly unanimous recent attack on the global discipline’s support for boycott, divestment, and sanctions is a recent example of complicity and faux-naïf evasion of the political reality. We conclude by pondering whether more than a lack of will prevents the field’s “decolonization,” calling attention to the structural, interested constraints of operating under legal and societal conditions, as well as under the orientalist presuppositions embedded in the independence of this pliable expertise.","PeriodicalId":516695,"journal":{"name":"Palestine/Israel Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palestine/Israel Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/pir.1.1.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As critical attention to Western colonialism and imperialism has been growing in Middle East studies (MES) globally, the Israeli branch of the discipline often narrates itself as a critical ally, with some going as far as suggesting it is “decolonizing.” By acknowledging their predecessors’ historical contributions to orientalist practices, and mistaking improvement in inclusivity with radical change, Israeli MES scholars self-diagnose a radical transformation, which differentiates past from present and yields an evolved and legitimized version of Israeli MES. Against this view, we argue that the field’s actions testify to the contrary. Selective adherence to “political neutrality,” coupled with overwhelming underrepresentation of Palestinians, effectively safeguards the “unity” of the field’s various Zionist elements over the possibility of solidarity and action, which results in persistent avoidance of explicit, meaningful, and concrete anti-occupation and decolonization practices. The vigorous and nearly unanimous recent attack on the global discipline’s support for boycott, divestment, and sanctions is a recent example of complicity and faux-naïf evasion of the political reality. We conclude by pondering whether more than a lack of will prevents the field’s “decolonization,” calling attention to the structural, interested constraints of operating under legal and societal conditions, as well as under the orientalist presuppositions embedded in the independence of this pliable expertise.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以色列的 "中东和伊斯兰研究 "学科是否在非殖民化?
随着全球中东研究(MES)领域对西方殖民主义和帝国主义的批判性关注与日俱增,该学科的以色列分支经常将自己说成是批判性的盟友,有些人甚至认为它正在 "去殖民化"。以色列中东欧研究学者承认其前辈对东方学实践的历史贡献,并将包容性的提高误认为是根本性的变革,他们自我诊断为一种根本性的转变,这种转变将过去与现在区分开来,并产生了一个进化的、合法化的以色列中东欧研究版本。与这种观点相反,我们认为该领域的行动证明了相反的观点。选择性地坚持 "政治中立",再加上巴勒斯坦人的代表性严重不足,有效地维护了该领域各种犹太复国主义分子的 "团结",而不是团结和行动的可能性,这导致了对明确、有意义和具体的反占领和非殖民化实践的持续回避。最近对全球学科支持抵制、撤资和制裁的强烈和几乎一致的抨击,就是共谋和虚假地回避政治现实的最新例证。最后,我们思考了阻碍该领域 "非殖民化 "的原因是否不仅仅是缺乏意愿,并呼吁关注在法律和社会条件下运作的结构性、利益性限制,以及在这一柔韧的专业知识的独立性中所蕴含的东方主义预设下运作的结构性、利益性限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Settler Mimicry: Colonization and Decolonization through Imitation Walking to Unsettle Jerusalem Old and New Strategies for Exploiting Structural Change in Palestine/Israel: A Review Essay Circumventing Israeli Control: Palestinian Furniture Exports via Israeli Settlements Is the Israeli Discipline of “Middle East and Islam Studies” Decolonizing?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1