Professor Questions Israelis Abroad Voting Without Sharing Burden

Professor Yuval Albashan has criticized Israelis living abroad who return to vote in elections, drawing a parallel to Haredim who do not enlist in the military. In an opinion piece published in the Israel Hayom newspaper, Albashan affirmed the legal right to vote but questioned its moral significance without participation in the burdens of war and life in Israel.

Albashan argued that while Israelis flying in from London, Berlin, or New York to vote are often praised for their civic engagement, the focus should also be on Israelis who remained in the country during three years of war, served in reserves, and bore the heavy cost of living in Israel. He highlighted the disparity between those who fly in solely to vote and those who live in Israel and carry the security burden, noting that some voters would return to their lives abroad while others would continue to face the ongoing security and social realities.

To illustrate his point, Albashan recalled his personal experience during protests against Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin before his assassination. He admitted to knowing about the demonstrations but chose not to attend, only visiting the site after Rabin's murder. He recounted an encounter with Leah Rabin, who expressed sorrow over the delayed involvement, a moment that underscored for him the cost of avoiding real-time engagement.

Albashan's most pointed comparison was to Haredim who do not enlist. He suggested that those who criticize their refusal to share the security burden should apply the same standard to Israelis living abroad who vote on the future of a country where they do not reside. He observed an inconsistency in public reactions, noting that similar efforts to bring Haredi voters from abroad have drawn criticism, while comparable actions by other political groups sometimes receive favorable responses.

Furthermore, Albashan raised concerns about the use of conferences organized near elections to subsidize the travel of voters from abroad, drawing a parallel to similar initiatives attributed to Haredi communities. He stressed that his critique is moral, not legal, and he does not advocate for restricting the voting rights of citizens living abroad. Instead, he called for a public discourse that emphasizes ongoing commitment to the country beyond just election participation.

Concluding his piece, Albashan directly addressed Israelis who returned to vote, urging them to consider staying in Israel after the elections to participate in the nation's life and challenges between election cycles, rather than solely influencing its political decisions.