\t\t\tIf Israel Funded a Parallel \u201cArab Palestinian\u201d Identity, It Funded Its Own Fracture<\/p>\n
A recent article titled \u201cExpos\u00e9: Israel Invested Millions in Boosting Palestinian Identity of Its Arab Citizens<\/a>\u201d alleges that state funds were used to strengthen a separate Palestinian national identity among Arab Israeli youth.\n<\/p>\n If this claim is false, it should be dismantled with documentation.\n<\/p>\n If it is true, it is not a minor bureaucratic mishap. It is a strategic self-inflicted wound.\n<\/p>\n Let us speak plainly.\n<\/p>\n Israel is not a federation of rival national projects. It is a sovereign state with a civic framework capable of including minorities without dissolving itself. Funding infrastructure in Arab communities is legitimate. Addressing crime, education, and employment gaps \u2014 all legitimate.\n<\/p>\n But funding the cultivation of a parallel national consciousness oriented against Israeli sovereignty? That is something else entirely.\n<\/p>\n That is not integration. And segmentation is the first move in the strategy I described in \u201cDivide and Demonize<\/a>.\u201d\n<\/p>\n In that article, I explained how Israel\u2019s enemies exploit its diversity \u2014 how they amplify internal differences, convert them into fractures, and then frame the Jewish state as inherently divided and unjust. Israel\u2019s openness becomes the lever used against it. Our internal debates are broadcast, magnified, and weaponized.\n<\/p>\n If the state itself were to underwrite a narrative that reinforces a separate national consciousness among one segment of its citizens in tension with Israeli sovereignty \u2014 while failing to strengthen a shared civic identity across all citizens \u2014 that would mirror precisely the logic of Divide and Demonize, only from within.\n<\/p>\n The state would be subsidizing the fracture others seek to impose.\n<\/p>\n Now let us be clear about something fundamental, which I wrote explicitly in \u201cWhy Arab Identity Laundering?<\/a>\u201d:\n<\/p>\n Arab Israelis have no problem identifying as Arabs\u2014before 1948, after, and today. They are happily part of Israeli society and face no identity crisis. They don\u2019t need to be called Canaanites, Philistines, Palestinians, Judeans, or anything else. They proudly identify as Arab Israelis, even as external forces constantly try to redefine them and impose foreign identities for use in geopolitical games against Israel. All such attempts fail.<\/p>\n That remains true.\n<\/p>\n Arab citizens of Israel are not confused about who they are. They are Arabs. They are Israelis. Many navigate layered identities as minorities in a Jewish-majority state. That is normal in democracies. In truth, layered identity is not unique to Arab citizens. Everyone in Israel \u2014 Jews included \u2014 navigates it: religious and secular, Mizrahi and Ashkenazi, traditional and modern. Layered identity is not an anomaly. It is the texture of Israeli society \u2014 complexity itself.\n<\/p>\n In fact, Israeli society already offers powerful examples of integrated civic identity. Consider Lt. Col. Ella Waweya \u2014 widely known as \u201cCaptain Ella,\u201d a senior Muslim officer tapped as the next IDF Arabic-language spokesperson<\/a> (as reported in The Times of Israel). She is not an exception manufactured for headlines. She is a product of Israeli civic life. She serves the state openly and confidently as both Arab and Israeli.\n<\/p>\n That is integration.\n<\/p>\n She is Israel.\n<\/p>\n It does not require erasing Arab identity. It does not require manufacturing a separate national consciousness. It requires strengthening Israeli civic belonging across all sectors of society.\n<\/p>\n What is not normal is the state appearing to elevate a specifically oppositional national framing \u2014 an \u201cArab Palestinian identity\u201d cultivated as distinct from Israeli sovereignty and rhetorically aligned with UNRWA clientele<\/a> outside Israel\u2019s sovereign framework.\n<\/p>\n This is not about language. It is about strategic direction.\n<\/p>\n In \u201cThe Palestinian Identity Manifesto<\/a>,\u201d I argued that \u201cPalestinian\u201d is not an oppositional grievance badge. It is not a weaponized brand to be deployed against Jewish sovereignty. Historically and civically, the term once operated as a geographic designation. Jews used it proudly. Arabs largely rejected it \u2014 until it became geopolitically useful.\n<\/p>\n Israel is the legal and historical successor of Palestine \u2014 ancient, Roman, Ottoman, and Mandatory alike. It declared independence on May 14, 1948, just before the British Mandate formally expired at midnight. On May 15, Arab armies invaded Palestine.\n<\/p>\n Those who stayed became Palestinians.\n<\/p>\n Those who left became UNRWA clientele.\n<\/p>\n
That is segmentation.\n<\/p>\n