In contemporary studies of international relations, the cultural background of foreign policy has become a central analytical tool for understanding how nations and non-state actors behave on the global stage. Scholars such as Alexander Wendt, Peter Katzenstein, and Benedict Anderson have demonstrated that states do not act solely according to material interests; rather, their foreign policies are deeply shaped by collective identities, historical narratives, and culturally embedded understandings of the self. It is within this broader theoretical framework that we advocate the idea that “Israel must be more than just the nation-state of the Jewish people.”
Seen through the lens of identity politics, this assertion gains deeper meaning. It parallels the observation sometimes made about China: that it is “a civilization pretending to be a country.” This comparison aligns with Samuel Huntington’s insight that many modern states are not merely political entities, but expressions of civilizational lineages that long predate the nation-state model. Identity politics highlights precisely this point: states often act not only as sovereign units but as embodiments of older cultural and civilizational identities.
In this light — and drawing on the work of the prominent sociologist S. N. Eisenstadt — Israel can be understood not only as a sovereign state created to ensure the physical security of the Jewish people but also as a potential anchor for the renewal and evolution of Jewish civilization in the contemporary era. This civilizational framing situates Israel as the institutional expression of a transnational Jewish identity that spans geography, history, and culture.
Such a vision may also provide a new basis for rebuilding mutual confidence between Diaspora Jews and the Jewish state — a relationship that has been eroding for a long time. Identity politics helps explain this erosion: differing political cultures, competing identity narratives, and divergent communal priorities have strained the relationship. A civilizational understanding of Israel offers a shared identity framework that transcends these differences. This follows the vision of a World Jewish Community as articulated by the eminent political scientist Daniel J. Elazar. Furthermore, Elazar saw the Jewish people as united in covenant among themselves and along with all peoples of decency and goodwill. With the alienation of so much of the populations of the Western world such larger framing can help to influence positively international perceptions of Israel.
Finally, this Jewish civilizational conception is highly relevant to Israel’s position and perception in the Middle East. Too often, Israel has been assigned the role of an alien European entity. Identity politics exposes how such narratives function: they delegitimize Israel by framing it as externally imposed rather than indigenous. Recasting Israel as the political expression of an ancient Near Eastern civilization challenges this narrative and situates Israel within the region’s own civilizational identity map.
Jewish Civilization in a Zionist Context
Viewed from a historical outlook, this broader civilizational perspective echoes the foundational debates within the Zionist movement founded by Theodor Herzl. From its inception, Zionism grappled with the question of what kind of collective identity the Jewish people sought to restore — a political identity, a cultural-civilizational identity, or a synthesis of both.
One camp’ led by Herzl, emphasized the urgent need for a haven — a political refuge capable of protecting Jews from persecution. This was a state-centered identity, focused on sovereignty, security, and the basic functions of national self-determination. Leaders such as David Ben-Gurion and Ze’ev Jabotinsky articulated this approach, grounding Jewish identity in the modern nation-state model and its capacity to ensure physical survival.
Another camp envisioned Zionism as a spiritual project: the rebirth of Jewish culture, creativity, and prophetic ethical purpose in a modern setting. For these thinkers, the establishment of a state was not an end but a means to enable the flourishing of Jewish civilization — a civilization fundamentally rooted in the Bible and animated by ideals such as the aspiration to be “a light unto nations.” Ahad Ha’am and Martin Buber were central representatives of this outlook, emphasizing cultural renaissance, ethical mission, and spiritual renewal as the core of Jewish collective identity. Ultimately, Ben-Gurion, as a nation builder, comprehended the importance of the spiritual mission and adopted some features of the cultural school.
Indeed, the two visions were not mutually exclusive, but they created a productive tension that continues to shape Israeli and Jewish discourse today. While, theoretically, the debate reflects two competing models of Jewish collective self-understanding: Israel as a nation-state versus Israel as the civilizational center of a global people. An ongoing interplay between these models remains one of the defining characters of Jewish political identity in the modern era.
Current Challenges: Security and Transcendence
Given Israel’s challenging geopolitical environment, it is understandable that public attention centers heavily on immediate security concerns. The responsibilities of governance, defense, and national resilience are unavoidable realities of statehood. At the same time, focusing exclusively on these urgent needs risks narrowing the horizon of what Israel is meant to represent within the broader Jewish civilizational narrative.
A civilizational perspective invites a more expansive understanding of Israel’s role. It suggests that beyond ensuring physical safety, the state can serve as a platform for moral and cultural renewal, ethical exploration, intellectual creativity, and global engagement. In identity-politics terms, this means that Israel is not only a security actor but also a symbolic and cultural center through which Jewish collective identity is continually reinterpreted and expressed.
Such a role positions Israel as a place where ancient spiritual traditions interact with modern challenges, generating new expressions of Jewish thought, art, science, and social vision for the benefit of humanity. This civilizational mission also extends inward: Israel must meet the challenge of ensuring diversity within unity within its own body politic, cultivating a shared civic identity that embraces both Jews and non-Jews. Doing so strengthens Israel’s legitimacy not only as a nation-state but as the living core of a global civilization.
A Civilizational Perspective and the Jewish State
Viewing Israel through a civilizational lens should not diminish its identity as a nation-state nor the role of the Jewish diaspora; rather, it situates that identity within a deeper historical continuum. A civilizational framing highlights the possibility that Israel can function simultaneously as a sovereign state and as a central pillar of a global Jewish civilization — one that includes both Israelis and Diaspora Jews, each contributing in distinct yet complementary ways. Most importantly, a civilizational vision that includes both Israel and the Jewish Diaspora may help reduce tensions between the American Jewish pluralistic community and the Jewish state, tensions that have grown as their political cultures and identity narratives have diverged.
This perspective also encourages a more expansive understanding of Israel’s purpose. It suggests that the state’s significance lies not only in its capacity to protect but also in its ability to inspire, to cultivate cultural vitality, and to serve as a meeting point between tradition and modernity. In identity-politics terms, Israel becomes not only a geopolitical actor but a symbolic and cultural engine — a place where ancient Jewish texts, values, and memories interact with contemporary challenges to generate new expressions of Jewish thought, art, science, and social vision.
Finally, conceiving Israel as the basis of a renewed Jewish civilization opens the door to a deeper dialogue between the Jewish and Arab-Islamic civilizations rooted in the Middle East. Samuel Huntington himself advocated such encounters as a means of moderating the “clash of civilizations.” Much pioneering work has already been done, grounded in the strong structural and ethical parallels between Judaism and Islam — parallels that can foster mutual respect, self-respect, and enrichment through sustained dialogue. Expanding these efforts could form the basis for an eventual reconciliation between Islam and Judaism, a vision that Prime Minister Netanyahu has articulated at the United Nations in the spirit of the Abraham Accords. Indeed, the cultural spirit animating these Accords may represent the first building block of a major inter-civilizational encounter in the Middle East.
This article is based upon a op-ed which appeared previously in the Jerusalem Post.
