Israel Embodies Global Struggle Between Nationalism and Globalization

Dr. Adi Schwartz, a Senior Fellow at the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy, posits that Israel has become a central symbol in the global conflict between globalization and nationalism. In an interview with Arutz 7, following an article he published on the subject, Schwartz explained that Israel evokes strong emotions worldwide because it represents opposing ideals in this struggle.

For proponents of nation-states, border protection, and preserving local identity, Israel can serve as an admirable model. Conversely, those who favor a global order based on international institutions and a diminished role for nation-states may view Israel's insistence on its unique identity as a source of opposition. Schwartz stated, "We represent something that on the one hand perhaps attracts admiration and attraction, but also arouses a lot of anger."

Schwartz noted that Israel often occupies a disproportionately large space in public discourse in many countries, especially when governments change. He observed that shifts in political power, such as from right to left or vice versa, can lead to immediate changes in a country's stance toward Israel. This phenomenon is particularly evident in Latin American countries, where political transitions can impact relations with Israel and its capital, Jerusalem.

He attributes this heightened focus to a global shift over the past two decades. After years of promoting free trade, open borders, and the influence of international bodies, a counter-movement emphasizing the resurgence of the nation-state has emerged. Schwartz cited the rise of parties in Europe seeking to limit immigration and preserve national identity, and the "America First" movement in the United States, as examples of this trend.

Schwartz further explained that this ideological clash extends to the authority of international institutions like the UN and the EU. He described the sentiment of those opposing supranational authority as questioning the legitimacy of external bodies dictating national decisions. In this context, Israel's emphasis on being the nation-state of the Jewish people, its unique identity, and its determination to make its own security and future decisions make it a prominent example for those holding nationalist views.

However, Schwartz argued that this same characteristic fuels opposition from those who advocate for greater international frameworks and a global perspective, finding Israel's insistence on sovereignty and distinct national identity challenging. He drew parallels to historical instances where Jewish people became symbols in broader ideological struggles, suggesting that current attitudes toward Israel reflect a larger debate about nationalism, borders, and the world order.

Schwartz identified positive expressions of this trend in parts of American society, including support from Donald Trump, and in European countries like Slovenia, where political changes can alter relations with Israel. He anticipates that potential political shifts in the UK, Italy, Spain, and France could strengthen factions inclined to embrace Israel, driven by a desire to focus on domestic affairs and reduce reliance on international bodies. He also sees potential for identification with Israel in Central and Eastern Europe, and the Balkans, where political forces aim to preserve local languages, cultures, and customs. Furthermore, he noted appreciation for Israel in countries like India, Japan, and South Korea, partly due to its reluctance to fully submit to externally dictated international orders. Schwartz linked this approach to the Jewish people's historical experience, which has taught them the limitations of relying on external factors.