Sharkansky focuses on the relationship between religion and politics. His point of departure is comparative. Judaism is not unique, and politics in Israel is not exceptional. There are, according to his thesis, rules that govern the relationship between the two domains. His major argument is that religion and politics interpenetrate and actually resemble each other, having much in common. Neither can claim to have a monopoly of virtue or to be free of evil. Both religion and politics attract majorities, most of whose members remain loyal across time; both have their mainstream and their extreme elements. Leaders in both spheres tend to mix the promotion of spiritual and symbolic goals along with material payoffs for the faithful. Both are creative, inventing new doctrines and rituals, despite claims about absolute values; both attempt to distinguish themselves from their previous allies and current antagonists. In both religion and politics ambiguity is part of success and failure. The essence of the similarities lies in the policy arena: Religious issues are often the subject of political dispute. Religious demands, however, are not fully met because they come up against one another and because they encounter secular or antireligious opposition. The result is generally a stand-off in which neither religious nor antireligious activists can overcome the other.

This thesis is widely demonstrated by Israel, with its long history of a “thick” mixture of politics and religion. In a breathtaking journey through Jewish history and contemporary politics, Sharkansky demonstrates his thesis and shows that dispute over religious issues is a chronic phenomenon. At stake are problems of conversion, of personal matters, of observing Sabbath and holidays, and of the composition of religious institutions. Religious parties, described in detail in the book, exert demands that, if yielded to, may turn Israel into a halachic state, governed by religious law. This, however, has not been the case. Although religious issues are often on the political agenda, neither religious nor secular groups can overcome the other. The agenda of both proponents and opponents of religion is not translated into public policy.

According to Sharkansky, the reasons for this failure are grounded both in the universal attributes of the commonalties between politics and religion, on the one hand, and in the particular characteristics of the Israeli scene, on the other. The following reasons are prominent. First, although religious groups unite in seeking to advance their interests, they also compete with one another. Second, Israel as a state is so imbued with religious values that it is difficult to define the labels “religious” and “secular.'' Not only does a substantial share of the population consider itself “traditional,” but also daily practices of individual secular Israelis are embedded in religious symbols, constituting part and parcel of the national culture. Third, the fact that no party has ever won a majority in the Knesset elections has served to mitigate the conflict between the secular and the religious. Fourth, surrounded by hostility, Israel is forced to maintain a degree of unity in order to survive. Politicians' pursuit of consensus and conflict minimization also contributes to easing the tensions. The result is that neither religion nor politics has gained total victory or encountered total failure.

Sharkansky's book makes an important contribution to understanding both the religion-politics nexus and the problems of religion in Israeli politics. The richness of data and the abundance of issues covered are overwhelming. In a brilliant exploration across time the author does not skirt any religious issue raised on the public agenda in Israel, be it trivial or major. The fit between the theory, captivating in its originality, and the case study is impressive. This is a thorough, innovative, and important work.

Cohen and Susser tackle the problem of religion in Israel from a different angle, focusing on the relationships between the two camps, the secular and the religious. Their major thesis contradicts that of Sharkansky. The picture they paint is not at all optimistic. In fact, they lament the decline of consociationalism in Israeli politics, implying that the secular-religious cleavage is in a new and unprecedented perilous phase. Not only are past animosities part of present realities, but also important changes have taken place in the character, context, and personal aspects of the religious-secular confrontation. In the authors' view, something qualitatively different has ocourred in recent years, and there is a mounting potential for destructive crises along the religious-secular divide. “The language of consociational reciprocity, compromise, and mutual adjustment is quickly giving way to strident talk of total victory” (p. 139).

After elaborating the principles of consociationalism and the conditions that favor its emergence, Cohen and Susser adapt their conceptual framework to the Israeli scene by emphasizing the moderating and compromising effect of these arrangements, particularly in a society riven by deep cleavages. They then delve into Israel history, demonstrating the efficiency of consociational arrangements in the first generation, from the state's independence to the change of power in 1977. Admittedly, even in that peaceful period there were thorny and highly disputed problems. The authors give a detailed account of these, including the drafting of the constitution, military service of religious students and women, observance of Sabbath and holidays, religious education, and the formidable problem of who is a Jew. These problems were dealt with in the past in line with the consociational spirit, namely, by mutual adjustments and accommodation.

From this point onward Cohen and Susser differ with Sharkansky. They maintain that the second generation witnessed an enhanced power of radicals, ideological transformations both in the secular and the religious camps, and most important, a growing correspondence between Jewish identity and the territorial issue; all of these have eroded consociationalism in Israel. The causes of breakdown are grounded in the political, ideological, and social domains. Succinctly put, the transition from a dominant-party system to a balanced two-bloc system with the growing empowerment of the religious, especially the Haredi parties, is the first reason. These parties are no longer minor groups with limited assets but pivotal parties able to determine the composition of the ruling coalition. Changes have occurred also within the religious camp, and there is growing dominance of the Haredi over the national religious party. The dramatic convergence of religiosity with militant views regarding the future borders of Israel has produced overlapping cleavages in Israel's public life. Ideology, according to these authors, has become more prominent.

Contrary to Sharkansky, Cohen and Susser believe that “religious values are understood to be absolute, and the tendency to present them in ultimative fashion is, therefore, only to be anticipated” (p. 41). Radicalization of demands, backed by deepening social rifts and by effective use of the political constellation, is the main reason for the crumbling of the consociational arrangements that have kept the religious-secular rift at bay. The broadening of judicial intervention in politics and the constitutional revolution have added fuel to the flames, making the two camps drift apart. In addition, demographic, cultural, and religious transformations have put consociationalism under pressure. Among the most noticeable are the growing influence of the media, the growing insistence on “good government,” and the immigration of many non-Jews. Cohen and Susser have written an excellent book, well organized and highly systematic. They present their argument clearly and concisely and provide ample evidence to prove their point.

The two books have some omissions. Sharkansky overlooks the radicalization tendencies in the religious-secular rift. Assuming that religion and politics are alike does not mean that they cannot clash. Although, as he suggests, both invoke compromise, the process has its drawbacks and shortcomings. By presenting the grand design of the religious-politics nexus, he pays too little attention to undercurrents.

Cohen and Susser do the opposite: They rely on contemporary events to explain processes of a much broader scope. A good example is their reference to the peace process (p. 72), which has been nipped in the bud. Both books disregard civil society, whose activity has both invigorated the consensual spirit and fueled the flame of extremism. Cohen and Susser refer in passing to “grassroots initiatives that mobilize support across communal lines, [and] detour the normal political leadership” (p. 87), but activity appears to be flourishing. A plethora of movements and associations are active on the scene, which is no longer monopolized by political parties and elites.

Despite these slight oversights the two books are mandatory reading for anyone interested in Israeli society, which excellently exemplifies the relationship between the two leading forces in human history, politics and religion.