Division and Reunification in Israel: Quod Erat, Erit?

The longstanding divisions within Israeli society raise profound questions about the potential for future reconciliation and unity. In two of my recent articles, I explored the enduring impact of historical and societal splits within Israel, tracing the consequences from ancient to modern times^[1]. This article reviews the historical and contemporary factors that have shaped these divides and raises the central question: Can Israel move toward unification, or will the divisions persist — Quod erat, erit?

Israel, founded in 1948, was built on the shared hope of Jewish people who faced centuries of exile and dispersion across Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa. However, the very diversity that contributed to its founding also laid the groundwork for the internal schisms that continue to affect Israeli society today. The religious-secular divide, tensions among Ashkenazi, Sephardic, and Mizrahi communities, and political polarization serve as persistent obstacles to national unity.

The origins of societal divisions within Israel can be traced back to biblical times, with the split between the ancient Kingdom of Israel and the Kingdom of Judah serving as an early example of intra-Jewish discord. Following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, the Jewish people were dispersed across various regions, leading to the development of distinct religious, cultural, and socio-political identities that continue to influence Israeli society today.

Ashkenazi Jews, particularly those in Eastern Europe, adhered to traditional religious customs, shaped by insular communities and often facing challenging conditions under Christian rule. In contrast, many Ashkenazi Jews in Western Europe, especially in Germany, encountered the Enlightenment and the Haskalah movement, which encouraged secular education and cultural integration. While not all German Jews adopted secularism, those influenced by these movements began to advocate for a more modern approach to Jewish life. The Reform movement, emerging in the 19th century, sought to adapt Jewish practices to contemporary society, promoting a liberal interpretation of Jewish law that emphasized ethical principles over strict ritual observance.

Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews, originating from regions such as Spain, North Africa, and the Middle East, had different historical and cultural contexts that shaped their religious customs. While Sephardic Jews maintained a strong adherence to Jewish law, their communities were often more flexible in religious observance, fostering philosophical inquiry and a pragmatic approach to religious practice. This openness, evident in figures such as Maimonides, was shaped by their interactions with Islamic and Christian societies, resulting in a different dynamic in religious life compared to many Ashkenazi communities.

These varying experiences contributed to differences in cultural inclusion and socio-economic status when these communities converged in Israel. Historically, Ashkenazi Jews held more dominant political and cultural roles, while Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews faced challenges in gaining equal recognition and socio-economic parity. In the early decades of the state, Ashkenazi Jews dominated politics and culture, often marginalizing Sephardic and Mizrahi communities, who faced systemic exclusion. Despite efforts to bridge these gaps, significant feelings of alienation persist among these groups.

Another central issue in Israel’s division is the conflict between religious and secular communities. Secularization, driven by modern Enlightenment ideals, has led to a growing secular culture that often clashes with religious traditions. Religious communities, particularly Haredi Jews, resist secular influences and call for policies aligned with Halakha (Jewish law), which they argue should serve as the nation’s guiding principle. This dynamic manifests in political debates over issues such as public transportation, military service exemptions, and public education.

The possibility of drafting a constitution has long been viewed as a potential solution to Israel’s internal conflicts. Many argue that such a document could balance the values of Judaism and democracy, providing a framework for unifying Israel’s diverse communities. However, religious parties, especially the Haredim, explicitly oppose the idea of a constitution based on secular legal frameworks, positioning Halakha as the only legitimate foundation. This uncompromising position presents a formidable barrier to the establishment of a broadly accepted constitution.

The journey toward establishing a constitution in Israel is burdened with historical and practical barriers. A lack of consensus among diverse Jewish communities regarding fundamental values has impeded the creation of a comprehensive constitutional framework. In lieu of a formal constitution, Israel has relied on a series of Basic Laws that serve as foundational legal principles. These laws have been instrumental in shaping the country’s legal and political landscape, providing a semblance of constitutional order despite their piecemeal nature. Nevertheless, reliance on Basic Laws highlights the urgent need for legislative reform to unify these laws into a coherent constitutional framework^[2].

Exploring practical solutions that involve public participation and address the diverse values within Israeli society can pave the way for a more robust constitutional process. By fostering inclusive dialogue and considering innovative legislative approaches, the prospects for establishing a comprehensive constitution may improve significantly.

Even if a constitution were established, the challenge of representing both religious and secular values equitably would remain. This would require an accord— a covenant that unites Israel’s communities under a shared vision. It remains uncertain whether such a covenant, if ever achieved, could effectively reduce disparities and promote long-term unity, particularly given that some groups fundamentally reject secular legal authority.

Political polarization in Israel exacerbates existing social and religious divides. The political landscape is highly fragmented, with numerous parties focusing on sectoral interests rather than pursuing national unity. Right-wing factions, for instance, advocate for settlement expansion and emphasize security issues, while left-wing groups promote a two-state solution and peace negotiations with the Palestinians, also highlighting security concerns. Additionally, religious parties are primarily focused on securing budgetary support for their communities and institutions. This fragmentation leads to unstable coalitions, frequent elections, and inconsistent policies, further hindering efforts for reconciliation and unity.

Reforming the electoral system is often proposed as a solution to the challenges facing Israeli governance. Advocates suggest implementing a district-based election system or other reforms aimed at ensuring more equitable and effective representation in the Knesset. This approach would reduce the dominance of numerous small parties in Israeli politics, promoting a more stable government capable of addressing the diverse needs of the population. By fostering a political environment that encourages larger, more cohesive parties, these reforms could enhance political accountability and improve the legislative process. By fostering a political environment that encourages larger, more cohesive parties, these reforms could enhance political accountability and facilitate a more effective governance and legislative process.

Despite ongoing efforts to bridge the divides in Israeli society, the reality is that unity remains elusive. The socio-economic, religious, and political divisions are deeply entrenched, and the obstacles to reconciliation are significant. Even with proposed reforms, such as electoral changes or the creation of a constitution based on the Declaration of Independence, the likelihood of unifying Israel’s diverse communities remains slim.

Given the current realities in 2024, it is unreasonable to expect significant unification at this stage. The divisions that have shaped Israel’s past will continue to influence its future – Quod erat, erit!

—

[1] (1) https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/from-solomons-kingdom-to-modern-israel-the-lasting-impact-of-division/

   (2) https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/division-consequences-parallels-between-first-century-judea-and-modern-israel/

[2] suggested for contemporaneous reading: The Constitutional Crisis in Israel Volume 56 – Special Issue 3 – November 2023. Israel Law Review: Volume 56 – The Constitutional Crisis in Israel | Cambridge Core