Critical geopolitical analysis of Israeli and Syrian discourses on the Golan Heights

This thesis focuses on the Golan Heights problem, which has been an unresolved issue between Israel and Syria since 1967, by employing critical geopolitics as a theoretical framework. It analyzes discourses developed by Israeli and Syrian decision-makers since 1967 with the critical geopolitical presumption that all geopolitical knowledge is indeed a discourse. The thesis has three main arguments. First of all, a geographical space is not only defined by the physical infrastructure, but also by the discursive superstructure attributed to it. In other words, Golan Heights is not only a geographical space of conflict between two states, but also a discursive construct affecting domestic and foreign policies of these states through meanings attributed by the decision-makers of Syria and Israel. Secondly, the geopolitical discourse developed for Golan Heights differs both temporally and spatially; it not only evolves over time, but it has also been handled by the actors of the crisis sometimes similarly and other times differently. Finally, Israeli and Syrian perception of the Golan Heights has been transformed by domestic, regional and global developments. In other words, Golan Heights, which has traditionally been defined as a border problem between two states, is indeed continuously deterritorialized and reterritorialized by Israel and Syria through these developments. Therefore, this thesis attempts to examine the evolution of the discourses developed for Golan Heights via analyzing the discourses of Israeli and Syrian decision-makers.