mythical thought and the constitution of israeli foreign policy

Israel’s foreign policy at times diverges from prevailing realist expectations, specifically rational considerations and prudence. this article argues that this is the result of what ernst cassirer calls mythical thought or what can be called a myth-based discourse that constructs the mindset of policy makers and has made the emergence of non-realist elements in israel’s foreign policy possible. in this discourse, quantity, quality, similarity, space, and time acquire specific characteristics and, in the field of foreign policy, this primarily leads to maximalist aspirations, volunteerism, reactiveness, lack of proportionality between capabilities and actions, and at times refraining from diplomatic engagements. however, we encounter a state’s identity as a modern ruling state which, to gain international recognition and acceptability, must abide by the norms and laws that define statehood. on the other hand, we face an identity stemming from a mythical discourse, encompassing non-modern, irrational elements and self-definitions based on rules that often contradict legal discourse. relying on discourse analysis, the texts produced by israeli foreign policymakers are analyzed to show how this specific way of thinking has made non-realist elements in israeli foreign policy possible.