Palestine and Ukraine: A Postcolonial Critique of the Neo-Realist Strategy of Offshore Balancing

This article employs Edward Said’s contrapuntal reading to challenge the account offered by proponents of offshore balancing of the conflicts in Palestine and Ukraine. This reading, the article argues, presents two challenges to the strategy of offshore balancing. First, it shows that the strategy’s treatment of Israel and Russia as states like any others morally equalises the dispossessors and the dispossessed, and leads to unviable policy conclusions – namely, the two-state solution (Palestine) and territorial concessions (Ukraine). Second, it shows that the strategy’s assessment of these conflicts solely based on capabilities harms US national security and threatens the survival of the United States as a liberal democracy. The article advances postcolonial critiques of neo-realism towards its contemporary application via offshore balancing in Palestine and Ukraine. Furthermore, by extending Said’s contrapuntal reading to Ukraine, it contributes to a closer engagement between postcolonial scholarship on the ‘Global East’ and the ‘Global South’.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Millennium Journal of International Studies
Published
2026-01-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298251402984
Primary Topic
Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Palestine and Ukraine: A Postcolonial Critique of the Neo-Realist Strategy of Offshore Balancing

Haro L Karkour
Millennium Journal of International Studies
Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies
article

Palestine and Ukraine: A Postcolonial Critique of the Neo-Realist Strategy of Offshore Balancing

Haro L Karkour
article en

Abstract

This article employs Edward Said’s contrapuntal reading to challenge the account offered by proponents of offshore balancing of the conflicts in Palestine and Ukraine. This reading, the article argues, presents two challenges to the strategy of offshore balancing. First, it shows that the strategy’s treatment of Israel and Russia as states like any others morally equalises the dispossessors and the dispossessed, and leads to unviable policy conclusions – namely, the two-state solution (Palestine) and territorial concessions (Ukraine). Second, it shows that the strategy’s assessment of these conflicts solely based on capabilities harms US national security and threatens the survival of the United States as a liberal democracy. The article advances postcolonial critiques of neo-realism towards its contemporary application via offshore balancing in Palestine and Ukraine. Furthermore, by extending Said’s contrapuntal reading to Ukraine, it contributes to a closer engagement between postcolonial scholarship on the ‘Global East’ and the ‘Global South’.

Millennium Journal of International Studies
Cardiff University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Jewish and Middle Eastern Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.