If Israel is no nation-state, it might be more useful to think of it as a node-state - that is, as the sovereign element chosen by narrative and collective will at the center of a global network. Whereas the entire network is interdependent its center is currently restricted by our theory to operate as a nation-state. That is to say, the State of Israel might benefit from the global network, but in its functioning, most of its focus has been on basic domestic operations only, which affect only a small set of nodes on this network, and it permits only a minority of its network members to elect representatives whose decisions will affect the network as a whole. For example, even though Israel's financial health depends just as much on foreign investment as it does on domestic production, it is the residents that determine the economic policy that affects the return on those investments - and thereby the network's overall health. As populations shift, this same network effect facing Israel will face other nations as well.
I would suggest that a "node-state" is a strong answer to my riddle. The main problem right now with workforce development policy is how we conceptionalize Heimat.