Israeli-Arabs Embrace Shared Fate with Jews While Backing Two-State Solution
A survey reveals shifts in self-identification among Arab citizens of Israel, with Israeli citizenship taking precedence for some, yet deep divisions, security concerns, and aspirations for a two-state solution persist
Veronica Neifakh / The Media Line
The ongoing war and mounting tensions have deeply affected Arab citizens in Israel, reshaping how they perceive security, identity, and political engagement. According to a recent survey, 33.9% of respondents now prioritize their Israeli citizenship identities, highlighting a shift toward civic belonging. At the same time, 57.8% believe the war has cultivated a sense of shared destiny between Arabs and Jews, underscoring both newfound solidarity and persistent divisions.
Despite challenging circumstances, the survey shows Arab citizens remain pragmatic about potential solutions. Nearly half back a two-state framework as the most viable path to peace, and 53.4% view normalization with Saudi Arabia as a positive step for the region. Beyond these statistics, 65.1% of respondents rate their economic situation as relatively good, indicating resilience in the face of uncertainty.
Yet, as experts and activists stress, these figures only capture part of the story. Long-standing social, political, and cultural factors and the current conflict shape an intricate landscape that cannot be fully understood by numbers alone.
Dr. Harel Chorev, Head of the Desk for Middle Eastern Network Analysis at the Dayan Center, Tel Aviv University, described the recent survey results as evidence of a notable shift in identity among Arab citizens of Israel. “There is a clear direction of what you may call Israelization—the Israelization of Israeli Arabs,” he explained to The Media Line. “You see a clear growth in identification with either the Israeli identity or citizenship or with non-Palestinian categories such as Israeli Arab or Arab.”
Turning to another expert’s viewpoint on interpreting the survey results, Dr. Arik Rudnitzky, the survey author and Project Manager of the Konrad Adenauer Program for Jewish-Arab Cooperation at the Dayan Center, told The Media Line that while the findings suggest that Israeli citizenship has become a significant identity marker, the data need to be interpreted very cautiously.
“I would be very cautious with the statement that many Arabs identify as Israeli as well,” he said. “With citizenship, I would say yes. But first, with all due respect, this is just a survey. There are some sample errors and other inaccuracies that we cannot control. All we can say is that the importance of being a citizen of Israel is significantly higher today than before the war.”
Rudnitzky went on to highlight the nuanced way Arab citizens define themselves, emphasizing that identity among Arab citizens remains deeply nuanced.
“This does not necessarily mean that many, or the majority, identify as Israeli. That’s not the case. About half—almost 40%—still highlight their national or cultural identity as Arabs or Palestinians. Others identify themselves as Muslim, Christian, or Jewish citizens in Israel.”
Beyond the experts, everyday experiences help illustrate the complexity of the issue. Fouad Abu Gosh, a 50-year-old activist with the Hand in Hand co-existence educational organization, shared a deeply personal perspective on his identity as an Israeli-Arab and the broader challenges facing his community. For him, self-identity has always required nuance and explanation.
“I’ve always given the immediate answer: Israeli-Arab,” he said to The Media Line. “But I always follow that answer with an explanation. We are originally Palestinians. After 1948, we were forced to become citizens. Before the establishment of the State of Israel, relations with our Jewish neighbors were really good. I’ve spoken to eyewitnesses who were young back then, and they had close relationships with Jewish neighbors from the nearby kibbutzim. We shared a lot in common, especially working in agriculture. My father was born as a Palestinian under the British Mandate, and my grandfather under the Ottoman Empire. Life here has always been shaped by change, and our identity reflects that.”
He further explained the layers behind self-identification and emphasized that his identity as an Israeli-Arab reflects both history and the realities of the present. “I want to be realistic. I’m an Israeli-Arab, but that identity comes with layers. Life in the Middle East keeps changing—nothing is stable. So, this answer always requires context,” Abu Gosh said.
Returning to the experts’ observations on the influence of recent events, Dr. Rudnitzky noted a growing detachment of Arabs from Hamas following the events of October 7th. “Many try to disengage themselves from what Hamas did. They do not perceive it as a Palestinian action. From this perspective, they feel they share the same fate or destiny as Jewish citizens. But shared destiny doesn’t necessarily mean shared values, future causes, or political worldviews. It just means that we live in the same state, in the same country.”
Dr. Chorev also makes connections between this shift and the impact of Hamas’s actions on October 7th. “Hamas showed its real face—it’s not just a liberation movement, but rather a jihadi, genocidal, deadly movement. Israeli-Arabs are afraid of it. They rejected it,” he said.
Speaking about the war and its impact on self-identity, AbuGosh reflected on the long-term shifts in Israeli society.
“The polarization we see today didn’t start on October 7th. It began after 2004 when the separation wall was built between Israelis and Palestinians,” he explained. “Before the wall, Israelis and Palestinians interacted regularly—in markets and daily life. Afterward, Israelis began seeing Palestinians only through a negative lens: as soldiers, military raids, and checkpoints. Palestinians started associating Israelis with soldiers, guns, and raids. That loss of direct contact bred radicalism on both sides.”
Abu Gosh also noted the immediate reactions following October 7th. He linked this polarization to the anger and fear that emerged from the Israeli side. “Society in Israel became more and more angry after the attack. Even though many Arabs were killed or kidnapped, we are still part of Israeli society,” he said. “Whenever there’s a threat—missiles, external attacks—we are exposed just like everyone else.”
Meanwhile, other voices disagree that a shared fate has emerged. Wajid Siddawi, a 68-year-old Arab Israeli human rights activist from Arara, shared his reflections on the survey with The Media Line. When asked whether the war has created a sense of shared fate between Jews and Arabs in Israel, Siddawi firmly disagreed.
“No,” he said. “The Palestinian minority in Israel was affected by the Knesset’s approval of two laws, the Nationality Law and the Kaminitz Law, which are racist and discriminate against the 20% Arab population in all areas. During the war, house demolitions of Arabs increased by about 400%. Arab students and lecturers were arrested or expelled from universities because of their statuses. The war exposed the lawlessness of the state towards Arab villages and towns, which were not granted better living conditions and faced the confiscation of budgets meant for Arab authorities.”
Siddawi also cited inflammatory rhetoric from government officials. “There were racist statements from ministers and high-ranking officials against Arabs living here. The political map in the Knesset is extremely right-wing, and Israeli society is moving further to the right. The war is still ongoing and will continue for many months. So, no, the war has not created a sense of shared fate between Jews and Arabs. I hope I’m wrong,” he said.
Dr. Rudnitzky then provided insight into the deeper nuances of belonging. He shared: “Some people tend to highlight one finding and ignore the others, but the picture is much more nuanced. We have to try to imagine what it’s like to be an Arab minority in Israel during wartime.”
Asked whether the ongoing war has created a sense of shared destiny between Jews and Arabs in Israel, Abu Gosh highlighted a complex and pragmatic perspective.
“We’ve always felt this way. I tell my kids: if you have the opportunity to study in Israeli schools, take it. This is our homeland. This is where we were born. We have to accept the reality on the ground,” he said. “But accepting this doesn’t mean we ignore the plight of Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Many families have been separated since 1948. I have family in Ramallah and Jordan who fled because they didn’t feel safe. My grandfather made the brave decision to stay, believing that after the British Mandate ended, we could find a way to live in peace with the Jewish population. That hope still lives in me.”
Siddawi, meanwhile, described his immediate reactions on October 7th.
“In the morning, when I heard about the attack by Hamas on the Gaza Envelope, at first, I thought it was another action by Hamas against Israel, like previous times, just like the Israeli army does in the refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza,” he said. “But with the flow of news from everywhere, I felt fear. I realized this was a big war, and everything happening on October 7th differed from any other time.”
Siddawi has been deeply involved in reconciliation efforts, even amid personal tragedy. “I contacted my Jewish friends in the Gaza Envelope, and I sympathized with them. To this day, we are in contact and have ongoing activities,” he said. “Most of us in a joint company continued social action on every issue. When I informed them about the killing of my niece in Jabaliya, they all hugged me and supported me. During this time, I was just thinking about everyone I know. We supported each other. I didn’t think about a country or two countries.”
Highlighting the survey’s most significant findings, Rudnitzky pointed to renewed support for the Palestinian cause, particularly the two-state solution. “Number one, Arabs in Israel support the Palestinian cause. Now, what is the Palestinian cause? It’s the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel—in other words, the two-state solution. This is the third survey we conducted during the war, and we’ve seen a significant shift. The war actually increased support for the two-state solution as the most realistic or desirable solution to the conflict.”
While the survey reflects a growing identification with Israeli citizenship, support for the two-state solution remains strong. “This isn’t a contradiction. In the past, when territorial annexation was suggested, many Israeli Arabs rejected the idea. They want to remain Israeli while still holding onto aspects of their Palestinian identity. It’s a complex but consistent sentiment,” Chorev explained.
Looking ahead, Siddawi expressed uncertainty about the future. “You don’t have to think about the day after the war so quickly. This day is probably too far away,” he said. “In my opinion, it is true that we have been at war for a year and two months, but the war will continue for many more months at different levels because there are several fronts, and Israel has an interest in being involved.” He highlighted Israel’s role beyond Hamas and Lebanon, adding, “Israel is very involved and active in what is happening in Syria. These are facts we all know.”
However, Siddawi remains optimistic that the war will eventually end in agreement. “After all, there are no wars that last forever. Wars end in agreements, and that’s what will happen,” he said. He believes that reconciliation across the region is essential for long-term peace. “In order for there to be a day after the war, the international community must work to reconcile all the people of the Middle East, to give freedom to all people, independence to all countries, and the establishment of two independent states—the State of Palestine and the State of Kurdistan—and social and national rights for all minorities in the entire Middle East.”
Underlining the two-state concept as a cornerstone of hope, Siddawi said, “I believe in a two-state solution. After that, I could see the establishment of a federation between two or more countries.”
On a personal and social level, Siddawi emphasized his ongoing efforts to bridge divides. “We have not stopped leading, initiating, and participating in political and social activities to stop the destruction and war, and also joint activities between the structures of Israeli society as a whole,” he said.
Despite the challenges, Abu Gosh also remains committed to the idea of a peaceful resolution. “A diplomatic solution is the only solution,” he said. “The Israelis must recognize the right of Palestinians to have independence. Together, we can build a new Middle East. With Israeli brains and Palestinian hands, we could create something incredible. We saw this model working in the mid-1990s before Rabin’s assassination. But it depends on leadership. To ensure peace for future generations, both sides need to invest in education and positive ideologies, not revenge and violence. That’s the only way to stop the bloodshed and build a better future.”
Chorev expressed cautious optimism about the findings while acknowledging their complexity. “Yes, the situation remains complicated, and fears and frustrations persist. But this shift in identity reflects a deeper appreciation for stability in Israel compared to the alternatives. It’s both an optimistic trend and a reflection of the lack of viable options elsewhere,” he said.
He concluded by emphasizing the importance of building on this trend. “I hope any government, not just the current one, will understand this shift and work even harder to integrate Israeli Arabs into society. It’s an opportunity to strengthen the relationship between communities and foster a more inclusive future.”
Brought to you by www.srnnews.com
