The Dialectics of Security Discourses: Policing, Gentrification, and the Contestation of Self-Determination in Ethno-nationally Contested Cities
Citizenship
Conflict
Democracy
Ethnic Conflict
Local Government
National Identity
Security
Political Regime
To access full paper downloads, participants are encouraged to install the official Event App, available on the App Store.
Abstract
Policing constitutes a critical mechanism in urban politics through which the state and local authorities exert social control, particularly in segregated, racialized communities undergoing urban redevelopment and gentrification. An expanding body of scholarship, primarily focused on the Global North, details how class, cultural, and racial differences between gentrifiers and local residents shape the discourse of (in)security and fuel demands for—or resistance to—policing. This study extends this debate into an under-researched urban context—ethno-nationally contested cities—and focuses specifically on Jaffa, Israel. The research connects the local politics of policing and gentrification to the broader struggles over self-determination and minority protection under conditions of majority nationalism.
Based on in-depth interviews with liberal gentrifiers, ethno-gentrifiers, and Arab residents, alongside document analysis, the research illuminates two key aspects of the gentrification-policing intersection: First, I argue that in a nationally polarized urban space, experiences of security and insecurity are not merely driven by class or cultural differences but are fundamentally intertwined with a broader security discourse of sovereignty, national identity, and majority-minority conflict. In this context, the demand for policing—or its strategic withdrawal—is weaponized by both the state and ethno-gentrifiers to intensify national control and assert territorial dominance, directly impacting the Arab minority’s ability to exercise local self-determination. Second, Paradoxically, a dialectic of security discourse emerges where the reality of fear is often masked by public declarations of "safety." These declarations reflect ideological values used to justify the groups' presence: for ethno-gentrifiers, the discourse asserts sovereignty and serves as deterrence; for liberal gentrifiers, it supports a fragile narrative of coexistence and justifies their presence; and for Arab residents and activists, the security discourse is reclaimed as a tool to justify national struggle and stand firm in their urban presence. The findings highlight the urgent need to integrate the study of self-determination, democratic backsliding, and minority protection into urban studies. This critical analysis of contradictory discourses demonstrates how policing and perceptions of security are mobilized to affirm and challenge claims to belonging, legitimacy, and political participation within contested urban territory.