Right-Wing Voters Grapple With Coalition's Ultra-Orthodox Draft Stance
Translated & summarized from Arutz Sheva by baba
Right-wing Israelis are increasingly frustrated with the coalition government, particularly over the issue of ultra-Orthodox conscription, leading some to reconsider their votes. While acknowledging the pain of reserve duty burdens, the author argues that politics requires choosing the lesser evil and defends the government's actions. He warns that alternative governments would pose greater security and identity risks, citing past failures and specific policy proposals from opposition figures. The debate highlights a deep division over national priorities and the practicalities of coalition politics.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Right-wing Israelis are frustrated with the coalition over ultra-Orthodox draft laws and reserve duty burdens.
- Voters question their support for right-wing parties due to coalition's perceived failures and concessions.
- The author argues that choosing the 'lesser evil' is necessary in politics, defending the current government.
- Concerns are raised that alternative governments would endanger national security and Jewish identity.
- Figures like Yair Golan and Yoram Cohen are cited for controversial stances on settlements and conscription.
A growing number of right-wing, religious, and value-driven Israelis, many of whom have served extensive reserve duty, are expressing deep frustration with the current coalition government, particularly over the issue of ultra-Orthodox conscription. This discontent is leading some to question their traditional voting patterns and search for political alternatives.
One such individual, a friend of the article's author, articulated his struggle in a candid exchange. He cited the government's handling of the October 7th failures, its "shameful cooperation" with the ultra-Orthodox leadership on draft laws, the narrow focus on settlement issues, and the extreme rhetoric of some Knesset members as reasons for his disillusionment. He lamented the collapse of attempts to form more moderate right-wing parties and expressed uncertainty about where to cast his vote.
The author, while acknowledging the validity of the pain, particularly regarding reserve duty burdens, argued that politics requires choosing the "lesser evil" rather than seeking an ideal match. He defended the government's representatives, stating they have achieved significant goals in areas like economic stability during wartime, education funding, the Gaza conflict, preventing Palestinian statehood in Judea and Samaria, and strengthening Jewish identity, despite imperfections.
However, the friend countered that it is illogical for the public to bear the burden of reserve duty while the ultra-Orthodox partners in the coalition benefit from power without contributing to security. He expressed a desire for a broad Zionist government that includes all who serve.
The author pushed back, suggesting that a left-wing or centrist government, despite its appealing slogans of unity and statehood, would pose greater risks. He pointed to past experiences with the "change government," which he claims made no progress on ultra-Orthodox conscription. Furthermore, he argued that such a government would likely make dangerous security concessions, promote the establishment of a Palestinian state, and undermine the country's Jewish identity, potentially leading to more soldier deaths and increased reserve duty in the long run.
He specifically referenced statements from figures like Yair Golan, who has advocated for evacuating settlements and potentially cooperating with the ultra-Orthodox on their terms, and Yoram Cohen, who suggested significant compromises on ultra-Orthodox conscription. The author concluded that the current coalition, despite its flaws and the painful costs associated with the ultra-Orthodox draft issue, represents the more pragmatic choice to prevent greater harm to Israel's security, identity, and future.
Mentioned
