Israel After 78 Years: Transformations of Identity and Destiny

Seventy-eight years after its establishment, Israel, in the eyes of Palestinians, appears as an entity that has not yet settled on a definitive self-definition. It is not merely a state that has succeeded in establishing its existence, but a project that still fluctuates between contradictory forms, transforming from one stage to another without reaching a moment of balance. Therefore, looking at it today is inseparable from reading this profound transformation in its intellectual, political, and social structure.It can be said that Israel has transitioned, over these decades, from a socialist Zionism with a collective character to a biblical religious Zionism tending towards extremism and insularity. That initial Zionism, despite its hostility, cloaked itself in a modernist discourse and presented its project as part of the Western world and its values. Today, however, we are faced with a different discourse, more inward-looking, and more based on religious texts and historical interpretations that give the conflict an absolute character that does not accept compromises.This transformation was not merely superficial. Israel moved from a relatively open stance to a state of increasing insularity, and from accepting the idea of compromise – even if tactically – to adopting policies based on expansion and rejection. Compromise is no longer a central option; instead, it has been replaced by a vision based on imposing facts by force, and on redefining the conflict as an existential rather than merely political struggle.In the same context, Israel's image as the "exceptional victim" that cannot be touched has receded, gradually entering the sphere of criticism and accountability, and even prosecution in some international circles. The moral aura that surrounded it in its early days is no longer able to fully protect it, especially with the escalation of violence and expansion, and with the exposure of the contradiction between its discourse and its practices.As for the Jewish personality within this entity, there has been a remarkable transition from the inward-looking "Talmudic Jew," content with managing his private affairs, to the "Biblical Jew" who sees himself as an actor in history, tasked with control, expansion, and fighting. This shift reflects a transition from a state of defense to a state of offense, and from retreat to initiative, but at the same time, it opens the door to further clashes.Politically, Israel is no longer what it once was. Instead of institutions that set the general rhythm, we are now witnessing the rise of the individual and the leader, and a gradual decline in the weight of institutions. The democracy that has long been presented as a key feature is undergoing severe tests, with the growth of authoritarian tendencies and the rise of populist forces that tend towards decisive action rather than consensus.In terms of performance, sweeping military victories are no longer the dominant characteristic. Israel now engages in complex rounds, often ending in compromises or attempts to market a "victory narrative," rather than decisive victories on the battlefield. Moreover, the concept of absolute security control has eroded, replaced by a reality of multiple fronts and intertwined threats, making military superiority less capable of resolving the conflict.Socially, Israel has transitioned from a society aspiring to homogeneity to a multi-ethnic and multi-identity society suffering from increasing internal divisions. From the collectivism that characterized its beginnings to the individualism that dominates today, and from a solid national immunity to a state of internal fragmentation, reflecting the failure of the complete integration project.Most significantly, groups that were considered marginal or extremist are now at the heart of the scene; indeed, they are shaping policies and determining directions. This transformation is reshaping Israel from within, pushing it towards greater rigidity, and making "Third Israel" in the occupied West Bank an expression of this new path, where settlement is not just a policy, but an ideology.Despite all the successes Israel has achieved in economy, technology, and military power, it still suffers from a deep identity crisis. It has not yet been able to resolve the question: What does it want to be? A normal state in the region, or an exceptional project above it? This confusion is reflected in its policies, in its relationship with its neighbors, and in its dealings with Palestinians.At its core, it seems that its failure to reach a settlement with the Palestinians is not just a detail, but the knot that hinders its stability. Instead of leading to a review, this failure pushes it towards further extremism and violence, as if it is trying to escape forward.Thus, Israel today stands at a real crossroads. Its continuation on this path may lead to uncomfortable results, not only for Palestinians, but for itself as well. For states, no matter how powerful, cannot live long in a state of open conflict, nor can they establish their stability on the denial of the other.Therefore, the question is no longer just: How do Palestinians see it? But: Where is Israel itself heading, as it changes so rapidly, without finding a definitive point of reference?* Director of the Mediterranean Center for Regional Studies