The mobility of Palestinian residents of Jerusalem is usually understood in terms of exclusion, reflecting their lack of access to urban services more broadly as well as the restrictive mobility regime at work across the Palestinian territories. Yet after fifty years of Israeli occupation, a more complex and contradictory situation has emerged in the city. This dissertation uses mobility as a vehicle to arrive at a more integrated understanding of the paradoxical manner in which Palestinian Jerusalemites are simultaneously excluded from and incorporated into the city and to analyse how they negotiate their interstitial and often contradictory position. The thesis approaches the question of Palestinian quotidian movement by engaging with theoretical work on mobility and embodied movement as well as from empirical study including eight months of on-site research. In its three core sections, the work examines in detail several manifestations of the restriction, facilitation, and contested nature of mobility. In the first section, a discussion of Palestinian exclaves and enclaves of the city shows the continuities of mobility’s exclusionary effects on both sides of the Separation Wall. This limitation of movement leads to a restriction of spatio-political possibilities – but at the same time, Palestinians expand the horizon of what is possible through everyday and leisure practices. The second section employs two case studies of recent public transport developments in East Jerusalem to examine how incorporation is operationalised through everyday movements across urban space. The third section analyses the paradoxical role of mobility as the result of a tension between the settler colonial and the neoliberal logics concurrently at work in the city. On the one hand, the restriction of movement gradually renders the Palestinians as external to their city. On the other, the facilitation and regulation of mobility in East Jerusalem also serves to normalise Israeli rule and constitute Palestinians as incorporated urban residents, thereby undermining long-term aspirations for autonomy in the east of the city. The examination of the manner in which mobilities are contested in Jerusalem shows that movement, although often associated with freedom and independence, is essential for negotiating the terms of interdependence in the city.

En sa qualité d’enfant, le mineur doit être protégé. Lorsqu’il se déplace par delà les frontières, ce dernier est exposé à des problématiques particulières induisant un élément d’extranéité. Le particularisme de ces situations impliquant plusieurs États entraine régulièrement l’application des mécanismes du droit international privé. Pour autant, peut-on demander à cette matière de contribuer à la protection de l’enfant mobile au travers des règles qu’elle fixe ? C’est ce que la présente étude s’est proposé de faire en s’employant à justifier la recherche d’un objectif matériel en ce contexte par la matière du droit international privé. En effet, l’évolution privatiste régulatrice du droit international privé semble légitimer cette ambition en octroyant à la matière la capacité de chercher à protéger un intérêt et, plus particulièrement nous concernant, celui de l’enfant déplacé.Au final, cette étude se propose d’avoir recours à une utilisation fonctionnelle du droit international privé dont le seul but est d’apporter à l’enfant qui se déplace par-delà les frontières des solutions propres à lui garantir une protection satisfaisante et ce, en dépit de la complexité de sa situation. / As a child, the minor must be protected. When moving across borders, minors are exposed to peculiar problems. These types of situations where several States are involved usually lead to the implementation of private international law. But can we apply the rules of private international law to the protection of the displaced child?This study proposes to clarify the use of this section of the law in achieving a tangible objective. Indeed, the private regulatory evolution of private international law seems to legitimize this aim in granting the subject matter the capacity to protect an interest and, more specifically that which concerns us, the interest of the displaced child.Specifically, this connection should be attributed to the competent authorities and to the law of the child's habitual residence in the event of continuous displacement. In order to understand the focus and integration centre of the displaced minor, the customary residence reflects the axiological system of the minor, that is to say, the focal point of his or her main ties. Of course, in the event of a change in the child's customary residence, the rules inherent to conflict of mobility should be able to justify their intervention in an effort to update the location of the focus and integration centre and, consequently, to the understanding. Thus, in the hypothetical case of temporary displacement, the closest chosen proximity should lead to the subsidiary, exceptional and temporary designation of the competent authorities and to the law of the State in whose territory the child is located.However, the flexibility of our proposals seemed to have lead to sometimes allowing deviations from the normal rules of jurisdiction. This would, however, only be achieved by the acceptance of the judges and the parties concerned.In conclusion, this study proposes to employ the functional use of private international law whereby the sole purpose is to provide children displaced across borders, with solutions that are ready to guarantee them adequate protection despite the complexity of the situation.