Spatial Inequalities between the Core and the Periphery in Israel: a Geopolitical Challenge

The center-periphery phenomenon describes the principal spatial organization in many states, among them Israel. In terms of the nation, the center-periphery perception rests on the assumption that in every state two main domains can be identified, center and periphery, defined by a set of control-dependence relations. The center is the developed domain, which controls the entire national space, and in it are focused political power and control of resources. Most economic activity takes place there, and it concentrates a large and high-quality population; decisions are made in the center for the entire economy. The accumulated capital and the broad economic base of the center are a lodestone for population from all parts of the state, and this migration in turn enlarges the population and intensifies the economic activity. In many states the center area coincides with the main metropolitan area: such is the case in Israel. The metropolis is an extensive urban concentration, a focus for economic, social, and cultural activity, a hub of political and communication power, and a source of innovation and advancement (Gradus, 1996). The nature of the global economy requires an urban structure of metropolitan style, in which human and physical resources and infrastructures are concentrated, juxtaposed, and joined as a plexus of modern urban functions. This urban structure allows an adequate accumulation of capital, by means of which goods and services are made and traded in local and foreign markets (Castells, 1996). The yawning gap between the metropolitan core, or the center, and the periphery in economic activity, wellbeing, array of opportunities before the individual, and involvement in decision-making processes is a fundamental feature of center-periphery relations. Most states recognize this gap and adopt an active spatial policy to narrow it for fear of harm to their political stability and to their economic development (Gradus, 1996). The threat stems from the intensification of tensions, resulting from economic inequality and social and environmental injustice, between the center and the periphery. These tensions are several times worse when the peripheral population differs in ethnicity or religion from the population at the center. Governments fear that protest on the periphery over social and economic deprivation will spill over into acts of terror, guerrilla operations, and rebellion. Neglect of the periphery may also bring about loss of formal sovereignty on the periphery, and from there, in the case of a disaffected minority population, the road to separatism is short (through irredentism, i.e., attachment to a state across the border, or declaration of independence) (Soffer, 2005).