Israel's Youth Has Paid Its Dues, Now the State Must Deliver

The younger generation in Israel has proven its willingness to sacrifice for the nation, but after years of reserve duty and war, they are demanding to know the purpose behind their efforts. The author argues that it is time to stop managing the enemy and instead decisively defeat them, while simultaneously freeing citizens from bureaucratic burdens, excessive taxation, and government overreach. The state, she contends, should serve its citizens, not the other way around.

Since October 7th, a significant gap has emerged between how the younger generation was perceived and how they acted during the crisis. Previously labeled as spoiled and individualistic, hundreds of thousands of Israelis left their families, jobs, and studies to report for reserve duty, often repeatedly and for extended periods. This placed immense strain on their partners, employers, businesses, and children, yet Israeli society bore this burden admirably.

The current weariness among reservists and the public is not due to an unwillingness to exert effort, but rather a questioning of the ultimate goal of these sacrifices. The author suggests that Israel is still operating under the same worldview that led to the October 7th disaster, capable of immense force but struggling to define a desired future political and security reality.

For those serving multiple tours, the distinction between a war aimed at decisive victory and one focused on managing the threat is practical. Repeatedly conquering, evacuating, and then returning to areas where the enemy has recovered raises questions about the strategy itself. The article criticizes the long-standing policy of "managing the conflict," which allowed adversaries to grow stronger while fostering a false sense of control, a notion shattered on October 7th.

Beyond security, the state's approach to its citizens in civilian life is also questioned. While young Israelis can bear immense responsibility in uniform from age 18, they face a heavily regulated housing market where the state controls most land reserves. Similarly, the tax system and various economic mechanisms are seen as overly controlling, dictating economic activity rather than fostering freedom. The author concludes that if the state trusts its citizens with national security during crises, it should also trust them to build their lives, advocating for a shift in power from the bureaucracy to the individual.