Defining the City: Contested Borders, Fences, and Walls in Urban Centers

Abstract

Border walls have long been viewed as a legitimate and rational security strategy for cities, nation states, and private landowners alike. They are employed to safeguard those on the inside, to deter any would-be invaders, and to regulate crossings from one side to the other. The increasingly normalized trend of building walls through the middle of a single urban center raises questions of utility, intent, and legality in the modern day. Examining a range of evidence, from transcripts of official correspondence and conversations to public declarations and international court decisions, this thesis seeks to compare and contrast the urban walls within Belfast, Berlin, and Jerusalem in an attempt to understand why walls built within cities continue to be a legal or effective form of managing intra-urban disagreement and violence.