Israel has spent much of the<\/span>\u00a0past three years demonstrating extraordinary military capability, degrading much of Hamas\u2019 infrastructure, severely weakening Hezbollah, and projecting power deep into Iran.<\/span><\/p>\n Yet those battlefield gains have not translated into greater international influence. As Israel\u2019s military reach expanded, its diplomatic room for maneuver narrowed. Academic and cultural boycotts spread. Scientific partnerships became more fragile. Public debate across Europe and North America grew more polarized. Israel demonstrated military superiority while steadily losing ground in the struggle for international legitimacy.<\/span><\/p>\n This erosion is no longer merely a matter of perception. Recent polling points to declining support for Israel in countries where public opinion had already turned negative, including the United States and Germany. For the first time in decades, Americans express no greater sympathy for Israelis than for Palestinians. The Anholt\u2013Ipsos Nation Brands Index has placed Israel at or near the bottom of the countries it assesses for two consecutive years. At the same time, the International Criminal Court\u2019s arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant have reinforced the country\u2019s growing diplomatic isolation.<\/span><\/p>\n This paradox captures one of the defining realities of the 21st century: military strength remains indispensable, but it is no longer sufficient.<\/p>\n For most of modern history, states measured power by armies, territory, industrial production and economic output. Those assets remain essential in an increasingly unstable world, as Russia\u2019s war in Ukraine and Iran\u2019s regional ambitions continue to demonstrate.<\/span><\/p>\n But strategic competition now extends well beyond the battlefield.<\/p>\n The concept of soft power has shaped international relations for more than 30 years. Yet in Israel, it is still too often reduced to public diplomacy \u2013 a question of messaging rather than national strategy. In reality, countries compete not only for territory but also for talent, investment, trust and enduring partnerships.<\/p>\n Universities, hospitals, cultural and sporting institutions, technology companies and philanthropic foundations increasingly shape a country\u2019s international influence. Governments cannot simply command that influence. It grows when talented people choose to study, collaborate, invest and create within a country\u2019s institutions.<\/span><\/p>\n Here, Israel possesses one of its greatest strategic assets. The country is widely known as the \u201cStartup Nation,\u201d but innovation is only part of a much larger story. Institutions such as the Technion and the Weizmann Institute rank among the world\u2019s leading research centers. Hospitals such as Sheba and Ichilov are internationally recognized for medical innovation and humanitarian expertise. Israeli scientists, entrepreneurs, artists, filmmakers and athletes reach audiences far beyond the country\u2019s borders.<\/span><\/p>\n Together, these institutions form an ecosystem that gives Israel a global reach far greater than its size would suggest. It is precisely this ecosystem that today\u2019s boycotts, diplomatic isolation, and declining public support threaten.<\/p>\n Yet the picture is not entirely bleak. Columbia University recently announced the opening of its Tel Aviv Global Center to deepen collaboration in science, technology, entrepreneurship, and medicine, despite having become a symbol of anti-Israel campus protests. Nor is Columbia alone. MIT has expanded its Kalaniyot program, more than doubling the number of Israeli scholars on campus. Together, these developments suggest that even amid political polarization, Israeli institutions remain highly valued research partners.<\/span><\/p>\n Israel also possesses a less recognized advantage: its institutions are connected to one of history\u2019s oldest and most globally dispersed communities. For centuries, Jewish communities built schools, universities, hospitals, charitable organizations, and philanthropic networks across the world. After the establishment of the State of Israel, many of these institutions became intertwined with Israeli ones, creating a far-reaching network of scientific, educational, cultural, medical and civic cooperation.<\/p>\n Few countries benefit from a worldwide network that predates the state and continues to reinforce it. Such networks rarely collapse overnight. They erode gradually as partnerships weaken, exchanges diminish and trust declines.<\/p>\n Unlike countries whose soft power rests primarily on culture, technology or higher education, Israel\u2019s influence emerges from the interaction between a sovereign state and Jewish communities worldwide. This is not merely soft power. It is institutional and network power \u2013 the capacity to build relationships and generate forms of cooperation that others value and need.<\/p>\n This is why Israel must rethink its understanding of power.<\/p>\n For years, discussions about Israel\u2019s international position have focused on public diplomacy. Every setback abroad prompts renewed calls for better messaging. Communication matters. But communication cannot substitute for strategy.<\/p>\n Countries admired for scientific excellence first build outstanding universities. Countries respected for innovation first cultivate entrepreneurs and researchers. Countries trusted during humanitarian crises first establish world-class hospitals.<\/p>\n Reputation follows performance. Institutions earn credibility long before governments communicate it.<\/p>\n That lesson has become especially important since Oct. 7, 2023. Israel\u2019s understandable focus on immediate security has reinforced its traditional emphasis on military strength, and rightly so. But the past three years have also shown that military success alone cannot secure the country\u2019s long-term international position. In some cases, military action may deepen the diplomatic isolation it is intended to prevent.<\/p>\n Scientific cooperation, educational exchange, technological leadership, cultural creativity, humanitarian engagement and strong ties with Jewish communities abroad are not luxuries reserved for peaceful times. They strengthen the economy, reinforce diplomacy, attract talent and create partnerships that become especially valuable during periods of crisis.<\/p>\n They are part of national security.<\/p>\n Israel therefore needs a broader understanding of grand strategy. The country built one of the world\u2019s most sophisticated military establishments because successive governments understood that security required sustained investment, institutional capacity, and long-term planning.<\/p>\n The same strategic mindset must now guide investment in universities, research, culture, humanitarian institutions and the organizations connecting Israel with Jewish communities around the world. That means more than increasing budgets. It means protecting research partnerships from short-term political pressures, expanding scientific and cultural exchange, investing consistently in humanitarian cooperation and creating durable mechanisms through which Israeli and diaspora institutions can plan and act together.<\/p>\n These areas should not be treated as separate policy portfolios. They form a single strategic ecosystem. Strong universities generate discoveries. Discoveries attract investment. Investment fuels innovation and strengthens resilience. Culture broadens international familiarity. Philanthropy sustains education and research. Together, they create influence greater than the sum of their individual parts.<\/p>\n This perspective should also change how Israel views its relationship with world Jewry. Too often, that relationship is framed primarily in terms of political advocacy or philanthropy. In reality, Israel and Jewish communities together constitute a uniquely extensive network of knowledge, education, entrepreneurship, medicine and civic leadership. Preserving and strengthening those ties is not simply a communal responsibility. It is a strategic imperative.<\/p>\n The international system has already been transformed. Strategic competition now encompasses AI, biotechnology, cybersecurity and technological leadership alongside conventional military power. The countries that shape this new era will combine the ability to defend themselves with the ability to attract exceptional talent, investment and enduring partnerships.<\/p>\n Israel already possesses many of these advantages. The challenge is to protect them, strengthen them, and treat them as strategic assets rather than as byproducts of national success.<\/p>\n For 78 years, Israel has treated deterrence as a national imperative. The decades ahead will require it to pursue attraction with comparable determination. Military superiority will remain essential for survival. But lasting influence will depend on whether Israel remains an indispensable partner in science, innovation, education, culture, medicine and humanitarian engagement.<\/span><\/p>\n In the 21st century, the strongest countries will not simply be those that defeat their enemies. They will be those that others cannot afford to do without.<\/p>\n