Whenever the country enters a stage of political or reform debate, the question of national identity returns to the forefront, as if the state is still in the process of being formed, or as if society has not yet decided. The same debate is repeated, and the faces change, but the content of the debate remains the same: Who is more deserving? Who represents the state? Who owns the definition of national identity?

Practical experience says just the opposite; Society has long since overcome the theoretical division that is re-invoked every few years. The cities are mixed, the state institutions are unified, the economy is one, and the fate is shared. Citizens work in the same place, their children study in the same schools and universities, and face the same living challenges. That is, social reality far preceded political discourse.

The problem, then, is not identity, but rather its use. When political space narrows or economic crises escalate, the identity file becomes an easy tool to raise fears or mobilize supporters. Instead of the discussion revolving around job opportunities, improving administration, fighting corruption, and developing the economy, it deviates to the question of belonging, as if the origin of the crisis is society, not politics.

National identity is not built on comparisons between citizens, nor on re-sorting society whenever a crisis arises, but rather on a simple principle: equal citizenship in rights and duties, and the rule of law over everyone without exception.

Experiences around us prove that the countries that succeed are not those with similar origins, but rather those that succeed in transforming their diversity into strength, and preventing it from turning into conflict.

In conclusion, we must say it clearly: identity is not a problem that needs a solution, but rather turning it into a problem is the same mistake. Countries fall when their people disagree about who owns the homeland, and they become stronger when everyone realizes that the homeland has room for everyone, and that the future is built by work and reform, not by reopening the battles of the past.

National identity is not a slogan raised when needed, but rather a social contract that protects everyone… or is lost to everyone if it is misused.