I agree that a question of Israels part of the European civilization is complicated considering the history of the Ashkenazi, and I think that one can rightly argue that it both is and isn't. But I don't think that is the discussion. Neither do I consider the issue of EU OCTs and OMRs an argument of side-stepping the membership criteria. French Guiana is until other is reported a part of France. I think that Cape Verde could only have been in the EU as an autonomous part of Portugal, and as such it's future is West African. Australia and New Zealand would make great members. That is not in their future, and I don't think it is in Israel's either.
In Brussels there are federalists, confederalists, maximalists, minimalists, localists, regionalists, anarkists, conservatists, socialists, nationalists, imperialists who agree and disagree in varying issues. I am sure that there is a decent amount of people representing every possible shape and form of a future European Union, including that of a global super power. But this is not what the European Idea is about, it's not the purpose and the vision of the Civilization state, and I think it will be hard to find broad consent to that in Europe on any level.
Thus, I think that the likelihood to form a future consensus in changing the content of enlargement policy - from that of the Copenhagen criteria - to include non-European democracies is slim. In addition to that, I believe we are beginning to discern the final shape of the EU concerning enlargement. I do not believe the EU will include anymore countries from around the Black Sea, including Belarus and Israel.
And I don't think that we should close our eyes to the development of the world around and pretend that the EU is alone. What we have been doing in Europe for half a century is echoing around the world on every continent and civilization, and our failures and successes building the European Confederacy is followed and setting precedent.
We can't and we won't continuously include every next fringe country that would like to be in the EU. Where does Europe end? I think we will have a decent picture of that in 2020.
Beyond that I don't see Israel any more eligible than Algeria - which can call on strong arguments as well - to join the EU, and I do not believe it is in it's best interest. I think that any mutual benefits for the EU and Israel can be found and met in bilateral agreements of trade and cooperation. There is no reason to include Israel in our political institutions and I certainly question the grounds on such a position. How would it benefit Israels geopolitical positions and relations within the region with at European Union membership? Would it not further set it apart and alienate it from it's neighbors? We can and we will support Israels continued existence even outside the EU.
The European Idea and the civilization state is easily translated into other parts of the world. I believe that Israels future lies in a Middle-Eastern regional cooperation, with mutual acceptance and friendship with it's neighbors, and assurances that threats, war and violence is multilaterally difficult to resort to. This would be possible with regional interdependence and integration. This can only start to become a reality when Palestine is declared a sovereign country, and the democratization of the Maghreb and the Mashriq will pave the way for such a reality.
In the mean time, I think we must support the safety of Israel as well as criticize it when it abuses the rights of it's neighbors. I believe that a friend supports, and that a good friend sometimes says no. I believe this includes membership into the European Union.