Finding Common Ground

In recent years, and most pointedly since October 7th, the debate over ultra-Orthodox Jews serving in the Israeli army has intensified, bringing to light the disparities between different segments of Israeli society. On one hand, many Israelis view military service as a sacred duty and essential to national security. On the other, ultra-Orthodox Jews (Charedim) hold deep beliefs about their role in preserving Jewish identity and spiritual fulfillment, primarily through learning and prayer. A tongue-in-cheek approach was published a month ago that suggested that Yeshiva be required for all Israelis with Army service being an exemption. However, I would like to offer a different approach that has the potential path toward compromise that could honor both perspectives and foster unity within the country.

For many in the Charedi community, the commitment to studying Torah and engaging in prayer is not just a personal preference; it is viewed as the most significant contribution they can make to Am Yisroel, the Jewish people. This spiritual devotion translates into a sense of pride and purpose and forms the core of their identity. Acknowledging this commitment is crucial for any discussion about service and societal contribution.

Certainly, the Charedi community should be encouraged to enroll in Army service, but one also must incorporate the concerns of the community. It goes without saying that direct military service through an expansion of the current Netzach Yehuda Charedi Brigade structure will remain a primary means of fulfilling national service. At a minimum, the Charedi community must stop the ostracization of young Charedi men who choose to serve. Other opportunities to serve the Nation should be opened up.

One practical solution could involve redefining traditional notions of service to encompass alternative forms of contribution that respect and include the Charedi perspective. For instance, recognizing Yeshiva study as a form of “שרות לעומית” (national service) could provide a framework for ultra-Orthodox individuals to participate meaningfully while adhering to their religious convictions. This program could be limited to a set number of positions, creating healthy competition and incentivizing dedication to learning. So, for example, if there are currently 100,000 Charedi men learning full-time, the State could recognize the importance of their contribution to the society but limit this form of National Service to 25,000-50,000 spots. This would lead sincere Torah Scholars and community heads to choose only the most qualified learners who have the greatest potential for contributing to the society longer-term through their scholarship. Those that do not qualify for this select group would find other avenues to fulfill their three-year national service. There could also be a requirement for those exempted to be required to fulfill some form of National Service after their Yeshiva training, for example as educators.
In tandem with this, the State could explore the introduction of additional services conducive to Charedi participation in national service duties. Options such as involvement with Zaka (the emergency response organization), Hatzoloh (emergency medical service), MDA (the ambulance service), Chevra Kadisha (those responsible for preparing fallen for burial) and perhaps even military food service, could provide versatile avenues for contribution that honor the lifestyles of Charedi participants.

Moreover, leveraging the goodwill and community spirit of the Charedi population, the State can consider an auxiliary police service. By allowing Charedim to patrol their neighborhoods for a period of three years, they could contribute to local safety and security while freeing up professional police officers for other duties. This role would allow for direct community engagement and invest Charedim in the safety of their environment.

Implementing these measures could help bridge the perceived divide between those who serve in the military and those who do not. Many current servicemen and women feel frustrated by the notion of “freeloaders”—those who opt out of military service. By expanding the definitions of national service and acknowledging the different ways individuals can contribute to society, these feelings can be alleviated.

Moreover, incorporating a diverse range of contributions into national service could promote understanding and tolerance among differing communities. It asserts that serving the nation isn’t solely defined by arms and combat but also by community service, sacrifice, and dedication to public welfare.

This model can also be applied to other segments of society that are currently exempt or opt out of military service.

In a society as multifaceted as Israel, the challenge of integrating the ultra-Orthodox community into national service is undoubtedly complex. However, by adopting a more flexible approach that honors the religious beliefs of the Charedim while providing equitable avenues for service, we can foster solidarity and responsibility across all segments of Israeli society. This compromise could not only mitigate tensions but also lay the groundwork for a more unified national identity, enriching the tapestry of Israeli life for all its citizens.