Exoteric Nationalism: Germany’s Stance on Gaza in Comparative Perspective
Tensions emanating from the Israel-Palestine conflict since the massacre carried out by Hamas on October 7th, 2023 and subsequent Israeli reprisals have reverberated around the globe. Within the EU and its member states, Germany has been distinguished for its uncompromising approach to limiting expressions of anti-Zionism and other criticisms of the Israeli state that might conceivably be interpreted as forms of antisemitism. Statements condemning the scale and severity of Israel’s operations in Gaza must be sufficiently qualified with adequate mention of the atrocities committed by Hamas. Governmental agencies, academic institutions and societies, cultural and artistic associations, and other influential public and private organizations have made a concerted effort to suppress protests, speakers, and productions viewed as calling into question Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state or as forms of subtle (or explicit) anti-Semitism, with the two often being conflated.
Given the powerful memory of the Holocaust in German society, it is unsurprising that responses to domestic speech and mobilization concerning the Israel-Palestine conflict have been different in form and degree than responses in other EU member states such as Spain, where support for Palestine and condemnation of Israel have become a rallying point, particularly among the progressive Left. Contemporary German national identity has been shaped immensely by this memory, the sense of responsibility for safeguarding the welfare of Jews it has engendered, and the general commitment to educating new generations about the dark period of National Socialism in German history. Support for Israel as a homeland for the Jews has become part and parcel of German nationalism and national values. In a 2013 interview, then Chancellor Angela Merkel thus stated, “Germany’s support for Israel’s security is part of our national ethos, our raison d’etre.”
The question we ask here is whether the singularity of the Holocaust makes Germany a complete exception regarding national identity and its relationship with the Israeli national project, or whether it represents a case of a broader phenomenon that we may also find elsewhere in different forms and degrees. We argue that Germany is not entirely exceptional and develop the concept of “exoteric nationalism” to describe national identifications and values in which loyalty to and public affirmation of a foreign national project functions as a domestic boundary marker of membership and values.
The form of nationalism we theorize here is exoteric in that it has an external national project as its referent. It is also exoteric in the primary sense of the term insofar as it is publicly accessible and outward-facing, rather than esoteric or obscure, allowing for the galvanization of emotional identification and attachment. This concept should not be confused with “diaspora nationalism,” “transnationalism,” or other forms of “long-distance nationalism,” as it does not refer to connections between immigrant or ethnic minorities and a territory they consider to be their “homeland.” Whilst it shares the quality of extra-territorial political commitment entailed by these concepts, exoteric nationalism establishes the boundaries of the nation through solidarity with and loyalty to a foreign national project. Support for a foreign national project becomes a symbolic expression of one’s own national identity. This intrinsic connection turns the foreign national project into a referent object that is understood to have a valid claim to existence and protection. Accordingly, those who express reservations about this external project or are openly critical of it are framed as outsiders and potential threats to the national community.
Christian Zionism among Evangelical Protestants, most notably in the US but also elsewhere, is another manifestation of exoteric nationalism, but one that emerges from a religious worldview rather than institutionalized collective memory of tragic persecution. Many Evangelical Christians understand the creation of the Israeli state as the fulfilment of a biblical prophecy establishing the Jews as the chosen inhabitants of the Holy Land. Christian Zionists’ commitment to supporting Israel as a Jewish state is linked to their beliefs about divine history and the path to human redemption. In the US, allying with Israel in the fight against Islam and extremism is viewed by many Evangelicals as essential for aligning America with God. Our argument is not that exoteric nationalism is central to American nationalism writ large, but rather that it is an important element of American nationalism for Christian Zionists, who comprise a sizable segment of the population. While American support for Israel has long been strong, there is evidence to suggest that it has taken on qualitatively new dimensions under the current Trump administration. Recent detentions and intimidation of pro-Palestinian activists, for instance, reflect the view that engaging in anti-Israel activism is perceived and treated as a threat to American identity and values.
Israel/Palestine is not only a focal point of exoteric nationalisms that are Zionist, but also of exoteric nationalisms that are anti-Zionist or pro-Palestinian, particularly in the Arab world. The sources of pro-Palestinian sentiment in Arab societies are diverse and have varied over time. Different degrees and combinations of pan-Arab identity, anti-colonial sentiment, and Islamic solidarity, among other factors, have contributed to strong support for the Palestinian cause in Arab countries across the Middle East. The term “Zionist” is used by actors in a variety of contexts in reference to enemies of the nation, regardless of whether they are actually pro-Israel. While a pro-Zionist stance is not explicitly criminalized in the Arab world, delivering a Zionist speech or producing a film critical of Palestinian self-determination would likely lead to personal security risks due to widespread identification with the Palestinian cause, attesting to the power of exoteric nationalism to influence international relations in Middle East.
Given the diversity of factors that produce exoteric nationalism, we might first ask why Israel/Palestine has become such an important referent for this form of nationalism. As with other forms of nationalism, exoteric nationalism takes time to develop and must be sustained. The fact that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is so longstanding has contributed to highly organized movements and entrenched discourses that provide a framework for mobilization and political expression around the issue. Moreover, the regular episodes of violence that punctuate the conflict constantly replenish existing movements and discourses. As described above, Israel’s creation was linked to a genocide of singular proportion that has been foundational to the reformulation of national identity in post-war Germany. Together with the sanctity that the territory holds for diverse world religions, and its historical involvement in various colonial projects, the land of Israel/Palestine is characterized by a “perfect storm” of factors that make it especially conducive to becoming a referent for different forms of exoteric nationalism.
But are there other referents for exoteric nationalism besides Israel/Palestine? While exoteric nationalism may not be a common phenomenon, we contend that it is not limited to Israel/Palestine. There is evidence to suggest, for instance, that Ukraine has become a referent for exoteric nationalism in post-Soviet republics in Eastern Europe. Not only has the Russian invasion catalyzed anti-Russian sentiment and the removal or destruction of monuments commemorating the former Soviet presence in several of these countries, but demonstrating support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty is treated by many as a litmus test for national loyalty or belonging. Citizens who voice support for Russia risk being deemed traitors and potential threats.
It is important to emphasize that exoteric nationalism should not be confused with solidarity. Solidarity is certainly an element of exoteric nationalism, but the two phenomena should not be conflated. There are many contexts where people feel solidarity with Ukraine. But it is only in countries that are geographically proximate to Ukraine and share a common history of foreign occupation that this solidarity plays a role in the demarcation of domestic boundaries of national belonging. The relationship with Ukraine among Baltic states like Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, for example, has been described as one of “vicarious identification” that is “linked to traumas of the past” and that “has major foreign policy implications.” The presence of a common enemy and shared memories of occupation are powerful mechanisms driving exoteric nationalism in the region. Whether this exoteric nationalism is sustained once the conflict ends and “politics as usual” sets in is an open question.
Political actors from countries that are referents for exoteric nationalism may strategically, or sometimes cynically, take advantage of the powerful loyalties and emotional attachments that it breeds. For instance, Jewish leaders visit Evangelical communities in North America and Europe to rally support for Israel, sometimes invoking biblical stories and imagery that underpin Christian Zionism. Given the importance of exoteric nationalism to foreign relations, it becomes part of political calculus, and leaders must also be careful not to alienate those for whom exoteric nationalism is meaningful.
Our argument that exoteric nationalism is not unique to Germany should not distract from its relative rarity. There are many factors that may prevent exoteric nationalism from materializing despite the presence of several of the conditions for its emergence described above. There are a number of post-colonial contexts whose populations suffered greatly at the hands of colonial powers. Nevertheless, the presence of competing ruling factions in many of these contexts contribute to political panoramas in which no clear national project emerges as a referent for exoteric nationalism. Racialization or ethnic prejudices may also impede exoteric nationalism from materializing in post-colonial contexts. Nation-building projects that might appear to be amenable to becoming referents for exoteric nationalism may fail to spark identification or support because their leaders and participants are perceived as too racially or ethnically distant.
Viewing Germany through the lens of exoteric nationalism displaces the notion of German exceptionalism—the idea that Germany’s position toward Israel is entirely unique due to the history of the Holocaust and its commemoration—and instead situates it within a broader comparative framework. As we have shown, exoteric nationalism manifests in different societies under varying conditions: in the United States among Christian Zionists, in parts of the Arab world through pro-Palestinian identification, and more recently in post-Soviet republics through support for Ukraine. What unites these cases is the use of a foreign national project as a symbolic anchor for domestic national identity, thereby shaping who belongs and who is excluded. In fact, exoteric nationalism can be weaponized to reinforce boundaries of national inclusion and exclude populations deemed insufficiently solidaristic with the foreign national project. Ultimately, the concept of exoteric nationalism challenges conventional understandings of nationalism as territorially or ethnically bounded and instead highlights how territorially external national projects can serve as referents for demarcating, expressing, and contesting national identity and belonging.
Prof. Matthias vom Hau is an associate professor at IBEI. He holds a PhD from Brown University and previously held a postdoctoral fellowship at the University of Manchester. He has been a visiting researcher at Princeton University and the Free University in Berlin. His research explores the intersections between identity politics, institutions, and development and has been published in leading journals such as Theory and Society, the American Journal of Sociology, Comparative Political Studies and Nations and Nationalism. In 2019, he received a European Research Council (ERC) Consolidator Grant and is the Principal Investigator of the ETHNICGOODS project which examines variations in nation-building from a global perspective, and their causes and consequences.
Prof. Avi Astor is an Associate Professor in the Department of Sociology at the Autonomous University of Barcelona and a member of ISOR-UAB. He received his PhD in Sociology from the University of Michigan in 2011 and previously held postdoctoral fellowships with GRITIM-UPF and the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Tel Aviv University. He has written on a variety of topics related to religion, culture, and identity. He is the author of Rebuilding Islam in Contemporary Spain, and his work has been published in leading journals such as Theory and Society, International Migration Review, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Qualitative Sociology, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, and the American Journal of Cultural Sociology.
The opinions expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of EU-VALUES Network.