In the 1970s, Israeli director Uri Zohar presented a short, satirical film portraying two Arabs standing on a beach in Palestine, hurling insults at a boat approaching with Jewish immigrants from Russia. The Russian immigrants then stood on the same shore, shouting insults at another incoming boat carrying Polish immigrants. This cycle continued with Polish immigrants insulting Germans, and subsequently, Germans insulting North Africans.
Ethnic Fragmentation
Perhaps unintentionally, Zohar’s depiction acknowledged the indigenous Arab presence in the land—a land Zohar later left cinema for, becoming an Orthodox rabbi. Intentionally, however, Zohar highlighted a universal trait of immigrant societies: perpetual internal conflict and intolerance towards newcomers. It mirrors the experiences of the U.S., Australia, and Canada—countries founded on attracting various ethnicities under the illusion of promised lands, constructed identities, and manufactured unity.
Yet, Israeli writer Uri Avnery described this occurrence within Israel as peculiar, given the nation’s ideological foundation as a homeland for Jewish people. How, he questioned, could Israel contradict its foundational logic by discriminating among its Jewish ethnic components?
Sociology and history show that extreme internal diversity isn’t always advantageous; highly fragmented societies struggle to maintain unity, as each subgroup asserts unique demands. Over time, overarching national identities weaken, causing sub-identities to dominate, increasing possibilities of fractures and rebellions that erode state cohesion and governance efficacy.
A clear demonstration of this fragmentation occurred during the Israeli cabinet meeting on March 23, 2025, where verbal and physical altercations broke out between Itamar Ben-Gvir, Minister of National Security, and Ronen Bar, former head of Israel’s Shin Bet security service, recently dismissed by Prime Minister Netanyahu over disagreements about investigations into the October 7, 2023 events.
This incident wasn’t merely personal but reflected deeper tensions between far-right factions and state security institutions attempting to preserve their autonomy. Reports suggest Ben-Gvir was being secretly investigated by Shin Bet under Bar’s leadership for alleged infiltration of extremist Jewish organizations into police ranks, particularly Kahanist radicals associated with Ben-Gvir.
An Arrow Poisoning the Wound
The events of October 7, 2023, amplified Israel’s internal divisions by highlighting its failure to provide safety and stability to its citizens. Zionist ideology had long promised security exclusively attainable within a Jewish state—a dream initially proposed by Theodor Herzl.
Israel’s military doctrine, primarily offensive in nature as established by Ben-Gurion, aimed to keep conflict away from Israeli soil. Yet, the October events shattered this principle, as hostilities penetrated deep into Israeli territory, prompting significant reverse migration. Reports from Israel’s Population and Immigration Authority indicated over half a million Israelis emigrated post-October 2023.
Moreover, the October events sent a clear message to Israeli society: military strength alone cannot guarantee security, hinting instead at the necessity of pursuing fair and sustainable peace. This message resonates particularly with moderates opposed to extremist factions, further intensifying internal divisions.
Threat to the Military Establishment
Similarly, the issue of Israeli hostages taken during “Operation Al-Aqsa Flood” and the government’s failure to recover them militarily sparked widespread internal protests against Netanyahu’s administration and security institutions. Blame-shifting among political and military leaders exposed deepening institutional fractures.
This division escalated dramatically in July when hundreds of extremist Israelis attacked the Sde Teman military base in the Negev desert, where Gaza prisoners were held. This unprecedented aggression against military infrastructure indicates growing extremist empowerment, positioning them above state law.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert expressed deep concerns, noting these extremist groups view moderate Israelis as “traitors,” legitimizing violence against them. The radical faction backing Ben-Gvir now includes police officers and reservists, signaling a dangerous trend where security forces might prioritize ideological alignment over legal duty.
Moreover, extremism has infiltrated military units like the controversial Kfir Brigade, notorious for rights abuses. Its recruits, including militant settlers and religious extremists, often prioritize religious edicts over military protocols, threatening the army’s cohesion.
Historical Roots of Internal Strife
Today’s unrest cannot be detached from Israel’s brief yet tumultuous history, deeply embedded with causes for internal strife.
Despite being marketed as a multicultural nation, power in Israel predominantly rests with the Ashkenazi elite, who constitute merely 30% of the population yet dominate politically and culturally. Disparities in education and employment opportunities between Ashkenazi and Mizrahi Jews further inflame tensions. This dynamic, described by historian Zeev Sternhell as deliberate marginalization, intensifies ethnic frustrations and identity politics.
Further complicating matters is the longstanding divide between religious and secular Israelis. Originating in 18th-century Europe, this divide shaped Israeli society through competing visions: secular Jews sought integration with Western capitalism, while religious groups emphasized insularity. These conflicting visions persist, despite attempts to achieve equilibrium through informal arrangements like the “status quo” agreements.
The Path Ahead
Despite escalating polarization, a full-scale civil war isn’t inevitable. Israel’s society remains relatively cohesive within state institutions, capable of managing ideological tensions without descending into chaos.
Nevertheless, realities on the ground suggest increasing volatility. With an armed and deeply divided populace, intensified extremism, and absent consensual leadership, the risk of civil unrest or intensified violence remains tangible. This ongoing tension underlines a precarious balance: Israel continues to grapple internally, navigating between the edge of division and the brink of open conflict.
