Shas Party Controls Religious Appointments, Not Religious Zionists, in Israeli Cities
Recent criticism targeting Bezalel Smotrich, chairman of the Religious Zionist Party, for failing to appoint Religious Zionist rabbis in Israeli cities overlooks the political realities dominated by the Shas party. Shas holds decisive control over the Ministries of Religious Services and Interior, which grant them significant influence over rabbinical appointments. After the elections, coalition negotiations shifted control of the Ministry of Religious Services to Shas, despite initial claims by Smotrich that it belonged to the Religious Zionist bloc. Shas quickly enacted legislation centralizing appointment powers, reducing local community influence and enabling the ministry to appoint nearly half of the members of the rabbinical selection committees. These appointees are loyal to Shas, creating a government bloc that effectively blocks candidates not aligned with the party.
Opposing this bloc are local city council members, many of whom are liberal and secular, but their decisions are influenced by the Ministry of Interior, also controlled by Shas, which holds regulatory and budgetary authority over municipalities. This dynamic pressures liberal mayors and council members to compromise and accept Shas-backed candidates to avoid delays in city development and funding. This results in a stark contradiction where secular local leaders who publicly advocate for equal military service end up supporting ultra-Orthodox rabbis who have not served in the army, sidelining Religious Zionist candidates who have served, including combat veterans.
Examples include Hod Hasharon, a predominantly secular city that appointed a Haredi rabbi over a former intelligence soldier and legal expert, and Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel’s liberal capital, which after years without a city rabbi, ultimately accepted a Shas candidate despite council members’ calls for rabbis serving in the reserves. Furthermore, internal divisions within the Religious Zionist community in some cities, such as Haifa and Givat Shmuel, have hindered consensus on candidates, allowing Shas to fill the void.
The article concludes that the failure to appoint Religious Zionist rabbis is not Smotrich’s fault but rather the result of Shas’s political dominance and the cynical compromises of liberal city officials. The Religious Zionist Party remains committed to appointing rabbis who can bridge religious and secular communities, but the political and institutional power lies firmly with Shas.
