Nissim makes an intriguing suggestion: to replace solidary with identification as a mode of relating across group boundaries in the context of the devastation in Israel–Palestine. I respond to Nissim by wondering about the identities of the groups themselves. Who are the “we” extending or receiving identification when, beyond the most general historical narratives, collective belonging is contested, disturbed, and at the same time ossified by decades of violence, oppression, and now genocide? Stressed identities are perhaps the most defensive, because they are the most fragile. They resist change, but they might also give way more easily than others, which is why Nissim’s suggestion is hopeful. Collective boundaries in Israel–Palestine could be redrawn. I agree with Nissim, and add that for this to be possible, identification demands a will for truth and a willingness to balance privilege and power.