from citizenship to stateless citizenship171 resources and practices of its state and quasi-state institutions (Yiftachel 2011, 132). This Judaization project is, Yiftachel asserts, supported by the security establishment, capital accumulation and social development policies, the legal system, state symbols, urban planning, and settlement and demography plans (Yiftachel 2011, 132–134). And, taken together, these forces structurally marginalize Israel’s Palestinian citizenry. Having “framed the meaning of Israeli citizenship,” this Judaization project renders the status of Arab citizenship “precarious,” with a “‘separate and unequal’ citizenship structure” that leaves Arab citizens both “exclude[d] and marginalize[d]” (Yiftachel 2011, 130, 134, 135). In effect, argues Yiftachel, Israel’s stratified and ethnocratic incorporation regime has created a kind of “ghettoized citizenship” for the Arab community. He writes: Palestinian Arab citizenship in Israel can be characterized as existing in a ghetto. This ghetto is multifaceted–political, cultural, economic, and administrative. Consequently, it is also spatial. The Palestinian Arabs in Israel are officially part of [the] society, yet structurally they are isolated into enclaves and weakened by domination, exclusion, and disempowerment, the end of which does not appear to be in sight (Yiftachel 2011, 135). This point is reasserted by Amal Jamal, examining what he terms “the dialectics of state-minority relations in Israel” (Jamal 2007, 473). Jamal treats Israel as a “nationalizing state,” explaining that its mechanisms to structurally, politically, economically and culturally deepen and reinforce its ethno-national character have, over the decades, effectively “hollowed out” Arab citizenship. He writes: Nationalizing states … have special characteristics that make multidimensional analytical frameworks necessary in explaining state–minority relations. These states, conceived as complex institutional entities composed of legal, economic and cultural components, design and render the citizenship of indigenous national minorities into a ‘hollow citizenship’ that is devoid of substantive cultural, economic and political meaning, since these minorities, often by their mere existence, tend to challenge the basic vision of the state (Jamal 2007, 473, emphasis added). In other words, apart from any real claims for equality or genuine citizenship, it is mere Palestinian-Arab existence that constitutes the challenge to the state’s vision of Jewish exclusivity. And this exclusionary vision of Israel’s nationalizing project impedes genuine Arab participation and representation in state institutions and rids – or “hollows out” – their citizenship of any concrete meaning. Having examined three scholarly traditions that have studied state-minority relations in Israel, including the statecentric, the political economy and the ethno-nationalist readings, Jamal