The fact that societies mobilize around the protection of a specific territory is not the same as asserting that a society is defined by its shared territory. A territory and a society are entirely different entities, but they have a close relationship.
A territory is the natural result of the process of forming a society, but it is not an integral part of the society.
If a society is de-terrorialized, is robbed of its land and forced to move, does that society become extinct? The answer is evidently no. That society may become nomadic, take another territory, or become a diaspora elsewhere, but it survives in its existing form. This would suggest that while societies have a close relationship to their territory, they are not reducible to the possession of that territory.