The relation between nationality and state must be examined in light of several existing models of nationalism. The common categorization of nationality differentiates between two major types: civilian nationality, which is voluntary; and ethnic nationality, which is organic. In between the two, there is a third option –cultural nationality. 

• Voluntary Nationalism unites all those who wish to partake. One can join voluntarily, as long as he or she accepts the rules and norms that are demanded of them by the group they are joining – a political contract between all members of the group.
  
  
• Organic Nationalism – members do not have a choice whether they wish to join, on the contrary – they are born into the group. This type of nationalism is permanent, and cannot be modified even in the case of immigration. Nationality in this case includes a common set of values, a historical tradition and cultural similarities which are shared by all group members.
  
  
• Cultural Nationalism – those who join are expected to go through a process of absorption, and to adopt the language and culture of the host society.

The reality of nationalism is not as simple as the above theoretical models, and Smith (2003: 35 – 43) claims that no pure form of civilian or ethnic nationalism actually exists. Nations that are usually described as civilian are never free of cultural and primordial considerations, and rational considerations can always be found in behavioral patterns, even in societies characterized as ethnic nationalities. Ethnic considerations usually reinforce the rationale for civil responsibilities and civil rights, and often justify political and social arrangements.

The State of Israel was founded on the basis of Jewish nationality, as is expressed in Israel's definition as “Jewish and Democratic”. This complex definition was first incorporated in legislation in 1985, as an addition to Basic Law: The Knesset, and later, in 1992, as part of Basic Law: Human Liberty and Dignity and Basic Law: Freedom of Occupation.

Despite the theoretical dispute regarding the correct interpretation of the above definition, the Jewish nature of Israel has obvious tangible implications. Israel's national symbols are based on Jewish tradition, as are the national holidays and memorial days, which both coincide with the Jewish calendar. The Hebrew language enjoys a degree of pre-eminence over other languages – laws and court rulings are both inscribed in Hebrew. The government maintains Israel's Jewish character through legislation – the jurisdiction of Jewish law and religious courts over weddings and divorces (among Jews) , and the prohibition to publicly sell Chametz on Pesach and to desecrate the Shabbat (while not always enforced) are all indicators of Israel's commitment to Jewish tradition.

One of the focal points of this issue is the Law of Return, which every once and a while leads to the claim that Israel is an ethnic democracy because it does not offer equal opportunity to all of the national groups which it comprises, and shows favoritism towards the Jewish population, and because it grants citizenship on the basis of congenital criteria – Judaism (Samucha, 2000). Others claim that European law acknowledges the connection between ethnic groups and their homelands, regardless of where they reside. Moreover, the Venice Conference  ruled that this kind of connection between certain ethnic groups and homelands is legitimate, and that an ethnic majority has the right to maintain its advantage by encouraging immigration through legislation. (Rubenstein, 2004: 53 – 54; 2005: 326)

Jewish characteristics are indeed dominant in Israel, and what is more, Jewish nationality has more of an effect on the State than the other way around. In light of this, it is interesting to look at the way Israeli citizens define themselves – do they feel more attached to their ethnic identity or their civic one? As opposed to Judaism, being Israeli is associated with a civic connection to the borders of the State of Israel, and is an acquired identity. Despite the difficulties of obtaining Israeli citizenship, at the end of the day, being Israeli is one and the same as having an Israeli passport, regardless of one's ethnic or religious background.

It is, therefore, interesting that among the Jewish population in Israel, self-definitions (as Israelis or as Jewish) are equally divided. Fourty-seven percent see themselves first and foremost as Jews, and 42% say that “Israeli” is the best way to define their identity. As a secondary identity, 40% defined themselves as Israeli and 33% as Jewish. For 19% of those polled, religion is the second-most important self-definition. The fact that almost half of Jewish Israelis define themselves first of all as Jews shows that ethnic nationalism plays a major role in the Jewish-Israeli society. Even so, the fact that almost as many people see themselves as Israelis first, does not necessarily prove that they have civilian-national tendencies, since many of them may have interpreted the term “Israeli” as similar to the term “Jewish”.

Figure 2: Self-Identification
(Jews only; by percentages)

There is an obvious connection between self-definition and levels of religiousness. Seventy-eight percentof the Ultra-Orthodox define themselves as Jews first, and none of them define themselves as Israeli. Amongst religious respondents, 73% define themselves as Jews first and only 16% as Israelis. Fifty-five percent of traditional respondents prefer to be defined as Jews, and 35% as Israelis, and only 34% of secular participants chose “Jewish“ as their first definition, as opposed to 49%, who preferred the term “Israeli“.

Figure 3:Self-Identification according to Religious Affiliation
(Jews only; by percentages)

Respondents’ views are also directly related to their age – the older they are, the more likely they are to define themselves as “Israeli“. Between the ages 18 – 30, 41% defined themselves as “Israeli“, whereas that number grows to 52% among people ages 51+. Fourty-six percent of respondents between the ages 18 – 30 saw themselves as “Jewish“, as opposed to only 32% over the age of 51.

Figure 4: Self-Identification according to age
(Jews only; by percentages)

Among Arabs the picture is very different. Forty-nine percent see themselves first and foremost as “Arabs,” 25% as “Palestinians,” and only 18% as “Israelis”. The conclusion is that although “being Israeli” is meant to include all Israeli citizens, actually only a small minority of the Arab population sees itself as such. One can assume that the different attitudes of Arabs and Jews toward the term “Israeli”, stems from the fact that for most Israeli Arabs “being Israeli” is identified most of all with the Jewish population, although officially it is based only on citizenship. This identification of “Jewish” with “Israeli” is most probably related to the definition of Israel as “Jewish and Democratic”, a term which emphasizes Jewish symbols and characteristics. The Arab population's difficulty to relate to the majority's culture and symbols is further complicated by the long-standing tensions between Jews and Arabs and between Israelis and Palestinians.

Figure 5: Self-Identification, Israeli Arabs
(Israeli Arabs only; by percentages) 

Israeli society is full of identities – national (Jewish, Arab, Israeli), religious, and ethnic. Each one encompasses a large number of Israeli citizens, and amongst Jews and Arabs alike, the most significant of them all is national identity. Each group’s identity has its own language, symbols, traditions, and collective memory. These group identities – and the many tensions between them – are always of interest to the Israeli public.

These identities – national, religious, and ethnic, exist within each individual; for example: Jewish, traditional, and Ashkenazi. These definitions and layers remain relatively important even 60 years after the establishment of the state of Israel, and as opposed to them, the common denominator – civic nationality or “being Israeli” – has yet to serve as a wide identifier that includes different groups. Compared with religion or ethnicity, civic identity is still young, and moreover, the definition of Israel as both Jewish and Democratic emphasizes ethnicity as well as nationality. One can assume that strengthening the civilian aspect in the future will not replace the other aspects of identity in Israel. But when the day comes, and all Israeli citizens see their “Israeliness” as an identifying factor, maybe some of the tensions that exist today can be resolved.

*Click here to view bibliography and sources (Hebrew)