This article argues that extending Agamben’s theorization of inclusive inclusion, to include discursive strategies of ontological desecuritization allows us a better understanding of how sovereignty is constituted as a sphere of legitimate power in colonial contexts. Agamben viewed inclusive inclusion as a manifestation of “the paradigm of security as the normal technique of government”. Notwithstanding, he has not paid sufficient attention to the unique discursive power of colonial narratives in justifying the transformation of ontological securitization into a continuous state of exception. The article utilizes the Israeli population and territorial policies as an exceptional form of ontological security, aiming to ban the Palestinian inhabitants of the land from sovereignty. Therefore, exploring the reasoning and ethical foundations of the Israeli inclusive exclusion techniques of government help us reveal the continuous racial constitution of the Israeli sovereign, while differentially subordinating Palestinians and ontologically and existentially securitizing their presence in their homeland. Israeli inclusive exclusion policies do not only silence the Palestinians and prevent them from contributing to the debate over how the land and its inhabitants should be ruled and developed, but also define the conditions under which their presence and behavior are securitized. This theorization is achieved by addressing the following interrelated dimensions of the Israeli inclusive exclusion of Palestinians: 1) The potential inclusion of all Jews over the world in the national political community, while differentially excluding Palestinian inhabitants of the land; 2) The inclusion of the entire territory between the river and the sea, while justifying the securitization of Palestinians through exclusive Jewish decision-making; 3) Justifying Israeli law-making through majoritarian democratic procedures, while promoting exclusive Jewish securitization policies inside and beyond the Green Line; 4) Guaranteeing Jewish hegemony based on a unique combination of the internationally recognized right for self-determination, the exclusive Zionist narrative of the land, and past traumas that justify extensive security measures; 5) Silencing Palestinians from bearing witness to their exclusion and oppression by depicting their efforts to protect their rights as illegitimate -anti- Semitic. Notwithstanding, these patterns of inclusive exclusion render the separation between Jews and Palestinians untenable. Therefore, any reconciliatory measures to meet the expectations of both peoples must be based on the categorical imperative of shared sovereignty in the entire territory, which is considered by both parties to be their respective homelands.