Illustration by Denis Shifrin

Although culture clashes are common in all intermarriages, Claire Rabin writes about the special issues that characterize the American-Israeli match. But in the end result, claims Rabin, the more fundamental issues of the relationship need to be faced rather than American vs. Israeli.
As a former American married to an Israeli, I face culture clashes that are common in all intermarriages. Yet I will propose that there is something special about the American-Israeli match.  Israel is truly a melting pot, and almost every family includes people who have mixed marriages: Ashkenazi married to Sephardi; Russian married to Israeli born; religious married to non-religious - the number and type of combinations are staggering and incalculable. Every marriage is a mixed marriage of some sort. Is a person whose parents went through the Holocaust married to a second generation sabra in an intermarriage? Since women are from Venus and men from Mars, maybe marriage between men and women is a form of intermarriage? So I chose here to focus on my own match because I believe that it can teach us a lot about marriage in general.

When making generalizations about people (race, class or ethnic background) we run the risk of promoting stereotyping. Maybe an American-born person whose parents were born in Germany has more in common with an Israel-born person whose parents were born in Germany - more than two Israeli-born partners whose parents come from different worlds (like Morocco and England). So I run the risk here of coming to conclusions which are by no means true for all Americans married to Israelis. Having said this, here goes:
All marriages have to deal with issues of status, power and entitlement. Few marriages start out with total equality. One partner might come from a rich family, the other from a poor one, or one with an academic education married to someone who did not finish high school, or one partner having a dominant charismatic personality while the other is shy. American and Israeli-born marriages have certain "fault lines" of cultural stress which often revolve around status, power and entitlement. For a start, the native English-
language speaker has greater access to the language that is becoming the international language of the internet, library references and conferences. In other words, the native English speaker has a high status language as his/her default language. This often puts the partner at a disadvantage. I am always curious with intermarriage couples to see which language they have chosen to speak to each other and to their children. It is my experience that in most intermarriage homes there is a real attempt to use Hebrew within the marriage and between parents and children - all except the English speakers. Most often the English speakers speak English at home (and in therapy), which disadvantages the native Israeli parent. There is no way this parent can feel the same talking to his/her children who themselves are experts in both English and Hebrew.
Another issue is returning to the United States. I know of no other intermarriages where the threat of one of the partners wanting to 'go home' is so great. Unlike immigrants from the former Soviet Union, North Africa or even Europe, Americans always have one foot in their US identity and one in their Israeli identity. Indeed, when listening to the histories of intermarriage couples, there is almost always a major theme of longing to return to the good life in the United States. Many of these couples have indeed tried to move back (either for a year's sabbatical or a more serious attempt of decades) and then face the unhappiness of the Israeli partner who is homesick for his/her family, and dreams of returning to the homeland. In effect, the intermarriage of many of these couples never really gets resolved. The American partner is always ambivalent about Israel while the Israeli partner is ambivalent about America. Their children show the ambivalence that was such a part of their childhood. One will settle in the USA, the other in Israel, creating distances inside of families for generations to come.
The high status of American culture goes way beyond language. Israel sometimes feels like a poor copy of the USA, dependent on US aid and support politically and copying trends a bit late but faster and faster. Why would this matter to the couples who have intermarried? The partner who is American is of higher status than the Israeli. This causes a typical dynamic that will be described by a hypothetical couple:
Roger and Revital.

Roger was born in NYC and went to the highest status and best schools America has to offer. He has a PhD in his field.  When he came to volunteer on a kibbutz he met Revital, who had a high school diploma, but who had just finished the army and had no idea what she wanted to study. Because of their marriage and the pull of the USA, they returned to Roger's hometown and Revital got a degree in art therapy from an American college. The struggle around the return to Israel began then. Revital was sure that it had been
clear to Roger that they were going to eventually settle in Israel. She has a large family and could not imagine bringing up her children without her family. But Roger was offered a great job and it seemed crazy to turn it down. Ten years later they were still fighting about Israel and America. Roger was getting bored with his comfortable life in the USA and was willing to try out a year in Israel.
The fighting about where to live never stopped. Roger enjoyed the year and was happy to make it two. But he never lost the sense that he was out of his element. Revital had friends going back to her kindergarten while Roger always felt like an outsider. Their children had reached the age of study and some went back to the USA while others stayed in Israel. The family became the highest frequent flier they knew, going back and forth from the USA to Israel for mutual visits, Revital became more and more adamant
that they should stay in Israel and stop long visits which tired her out. Roger became more and more stubborn about moving back.
Many of these couples cannot seem to find a place that feels right to both of them. Ironically, the years of fighting about where to live do not usually lead to divorce. They lead to a bunkering down into polar positions. The conversations are often about which country is better, even when they seem to be discussing something unrelated. For example, if they talk about issues like the high number of car accidents or increasing violence among the youth, the subtext (not spoken aloud but there all the time) is "which
country is more successful" and "who is at fault". Revital firmly believed that all the negative things happening to Israeli society were imports from the American culture, and she made Roger feel defensive about his homeland. Roger firmly believed that the United States was a more cultured and peaceful place than the 'balagan' in the Middle East. When they discussed a topic such as the rise in crime in Israel he pointed out that crime was going down in NYC. These conversations had an undertone of aggression and anger and were also rather boring. It was as if they had nothing to talk about except America versus Israel. Every topic led to this one metatopic that was at the core of their conflict.
The solution? Maybe Americans should not marry Israelis! But since they will continue to fall in love despite (or because of?) their differences, there has to be a solution, a way out of the intense underlying clash that continues for generations. It would seem that it is by accident that people intermarry. They fall in love and they happen to come from different cultures. But maybe it isn't so accidental. Israelis are captivated and fascinated by America. They love to go there, copy the American culture and finally come to the conclusion that Israel is just as good if not better. American Jews are born into ambivalence about the Holy Land. While only 20% of American Jews have even visited Israel, Israel is the voice of their people. They give generously to Jewish charities, send their kids to summer camps or trips to Israel, and face a sense of guilt that they have not made aliyah. Thus, one important thing that couples can do is make a prenuptial contract about where they will live. They need to come out of the cloud of the honeymoon stage and face the issue. It will not just work itself out, but can ruin their relationship, introducing disharmony and rage for decades. A contract made together with a therapist at a very early stage is counterproductive.
Couples at the early stage want to believe everything will work out fine. But it doesn't happen that way. By facing the Israel-American issues head on together with a therapist and perhaps a lawyer, they can outline their mutual goals and see where they are hiding some unspoken expectations. I have worked with couples at early stages who have decided to split up when they realized that they were building a marriage on a very shaky basis. Each might assume that the other will eventually give in, an assumption that is
better faced earlier rather than later.
Another way to handle the conflict is to normalize it and come together with other couples who are similar. Creating a group comprised of couples to discuss these issues is a positive way of handling and normalizing the conflicts. When couples see that the conflicts are universal, they have an easier time not taking it all so personally.
Couples need to beware of making promises that they are not really sure they can keep. When they meet, their love seems more important than cultural differences. What is the importance of where we live when we love each other so much? Ten years down the line, the love might still be there but "where we live" seems just as important, if not more so. Therefore, couples should be careful not to promise something in the highs of the first stage of love that will be hard to keep later on.
Finally, couples can realize that even if the issue seems to be America versus Israel, their fighting is just another form of a conflict and power struggle that all couples face. The fact that the issue of where to live never goes away makes it just that much harder to solve the stage of conflict and move on in a more normal way. If they go to a therapist they have to make sure that they are ready to face all issues between them without putting everything on the cultural clash, but even from the start of therapy the cultural issue rears its head in the form of which language the therapy will be in! Instead of getting pulled down into the cultural clash and overriding issue of the two countries, it pays to move those issues aside and face the core of the relationship itself. Is there good communication? Is there respect? How are their intimacy and sexuality? Do they show their love? All these are more fundamental issues and need to be addressed without making everything about America versus Israel.

Claire Rabin is the director of the Claire Rabin Institute for Couples Therapy which has twelve clinics in Israel. She is a professor of family therapy and for ten years started and directed the Tel Aviv University School of Social Work's Continuing Education Department.