This paper explores the spatial perceptions and practices of Druze citizens of Israel vis-à-vis their Lebanese and Syrian co-religionists before, during and after the Israeli occupation of South Lebanon (1982-2000). During these eighteen long years, Israel controlled parts of Lebanon and enabled the re-emergence of a reality in which on a daily basis thousands of South Lebanese crossed the border to Israel and Israelis crossed the border to Lebanon, although on a much smaller scale. Israeli Druze were one of the communities that benefited the most from the opening of the border. For the first time since the 1948 war they had access to their religious leaders and centers in Lebanon as well as to their extended families. From 1982 to 2000 thousands of Israeli Druze visited Lebanon, reestablishing communal ties with their Lebanese brothers (as well as with Syrian Druze) and in fact transforming their collective identity inside Israel. Cross-border marriages, licit and illicit trade, and religious studies, to mention a few examples, reconnected Israeli Druze with their religious community in Lebanon (and Syria to a lesser extent). Additionally, during these years, hundreds of Lebanese Druze worked inside Druze villages in Israel strengthening cross-border ties with their coreligionists. With the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000, Druze citizens of Israel launched a public campaign urging the state to allow them continued access to Lebanon and Syria. Many of them disobeyed state prohibition and crossed the border to Syria and Lebanon via Jordan. It was only the civil war in Syria that put a temporary halt to their campaign to open the border for them and allow them to visit their religious centers and families in these countries. By using this case study, the paper draws attention to space and scale in scholarly studies of the Middle East, critiquing the tendency to focus on the bounded state as the primary spatial unit of analysis. This case demonstrates that supra state identities and spatial perceptions and practices are crucial for the understanding of the contemporary Middle East. As coined by the political geographer John Agnew, it is essential that we don’t fall into “the territorial trap of the state.” Rather, we should incorporate into our spatial analysis historical (the element of change) and regional (the element of space that exceeds state boundaries) dimensions.