Israel Doesn’t Need a Different Right. It Needs Better Leadership.

I have spent much of the last three years in uniform, fighting on multiple fronts, away from my family, my work, and my normal life. Like hundreds of thousands of other Israelis, I have had plenty of time to think about where our country is headed, what went wrong, and what needs to change.

I am a religious Jew, and my religious beliefs are fundamental to how I understand my responsibilities to my family, my people, and the State of Israel. I believe in the importance of Torah, Jewish identity, and the Jewish character of our state. I believe that our return to our historic homeland carries both tremendous opportunities and profound obligations. My religious convictions are not separate from my political worldview; they help shape it.

I consider myself firmly part of Israel’s national camp. I believe in a strong military, decisive victories over our enemies, Jewish settlement throughout our historic homeland, a free economy, personal responsibility, and a government that recognizes and rewards those who contribute to the country.

Those principles have not changed. If anything, the events of October 7 and the years that followed have strengthened them.

But my loyalty is to those principles, not to any particular politician or political party.

Supporting the national camp does not mean giving its current leadership a blank check. And being a religious, right-wing Israeli does not obligate me to defend every decision made by a government that calls itself religious or right-wing.

I believe the current coalition needs to change. Not because everything it has done is wrong, but because what it has failed to do is far more consequential than what it has accomplished.

And that is why I am voting for Ofer Winter.

Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due

Before explaining why I believe the current coalition needs to be replaced, I want to acknowledge what it has accomplished.

I have no interest in pretending that everything this government has done has been wrong simply because I believe it is time for new leadership.

The expansion of civilian firearm licensing is a significant achievement. The number of licensed firearm holders has more than doubled since 2022. I believe that allowing more responsible, trained citizens to defend themselves and their communities makes Israel safer.

In Judea and Samaria, the government has made meaningful progress in strengthening Jewish settlement. New farms, communities, housing, roads, and infrastructure are not simply construction projects. They are expressions of Jewish sovereignty and strategic investments in our future.

The government has also taken important steps to change the treatment of convicted terrorists, including tougher prison conditions and the removal of privileges that were difficult to justify to the Israeli public, particularly to the families of their victims.

I also welcome the reported reduction in vehicle theft, a crime that has imposed enormous costs on ordinary Israeli families. To the extent that improved enforcement is beginning to translate into lower insurance premiums, that is a tangible achievement worth recognizing.

These accomplishments matter. They reflect policies I believe in and policies that I want the next government to continue and expand.

My criticism of this government is not that it has accomplished nothing. It is that its achievements, however important, do not excuse its failures on the issues that matter most.

A government can deserve credit for improving personal security while still being held accountable for failing to achieve decisive victory.

It can deserve credit for strengthening settlement while being criticized for failing to change the social contract governing military service.

And it can deserve credit for helping reservists financially while still being criticized for passing the cost of that assistance on to future generations.

Political maturity requires the ability to recognize both success and failure.

I refuse to pretend that the government’s successes do not exist. But I equally refuse to allow those successes to become an excuse for avoiding accountability.

The National Camp Is Bigger Than Netanyahu

Benjamin Netanyahu is, for now, the undisputed political leader of Israel’s national camp.

He leads its largest party, has served as prime minister for much of the last two decades, and continues to command the loyalty of a substantial portion of right-wing voters.

That political reality cannot simply be ignored, nor should it be.

But there is an enormous difference between recognizing someone as the leader of your political camp and believing that loyalty to that leader is the defining test of belonging to the camp.

And this, I believe, is one of the greatest problems facing the Israeli right today.

Over the years, Netanyahu has succeeded in turning what should be an ideological movement into one increasingly defined by personal loyalty to him.

The question is no longer simply whether you support Jewish sovereignty, strong national security, settlement, economic freedom, or the preservation of Israel’s Jewish identity.

Too often, the question has become whether you support Bibi.

Are you willing to defend his decisions? Are you willing to justify his compromises? Are you willing to remain silent when his political interests conflict with the principles you claim to believe in?

If the answer is yes, you are welcomed as a loyal member of the national camp.

If the answer is no, you risk being labeled a traitor to the right, regardless of how strongly you believe in its principles.

That is a dangerous transformation.

There is a difference between being loyal to the leader of your camp and becoming his yes-man.

A political leader deserves support when he advances the principles on which he was elected. He deserves criticism when he abandons them. And when he repeatedly fails to implement them, his supporters have every right to seek new leadership.

This is not disloyalty. It is precisely what loyalty to a set of principles should look like.

I can support Netanyahu when he expands Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria and oppose him when he allows coalition considerations to prevent meaningful Haredi enlistment.

I can praise his government’s expansion of civilian firearm licensing while criticizing its failure to achieve decisive strategic victories.

I can recognize the importance of maintaining a stable right-wing government while rejecting the idea that coalition survival should take precedence over national priorities.

None of those positions makes me less right-wing.

They make me someone who believes that the principles of the national camp are more important than the political career of the person currently leading it.

And I believe the same standard should apply to Ofer Winter.

If Winter enters government and begins compromising his principles for political convenience, I will criticize him too. If he fails to deliver on his promises, he should be held accountable.

I am not looking for a new politician to follow blindly. I am looking for a leader who will advance the ideas I believe in.

The national camp existed before Netanyahu. It will exist after Netanyahu. Its principles must never be subordinated to the interests of any one politician, however accomplished or popular he may be.

Tactical Improvements Are Not Strategic Victory

October 7 was supposed to change everything.

We were told, and rightly so, that Israel could no longer tolerate the threats that had been allowed to develop on our borders. That containment had failed. That managing threats instead of eliminating them had come at an unbearable price.

Yet three years later, despite the extraordinary courage of our soldiers and the tremendous sacrifices of their families, I cannot point to a single front on which Israel has achieved the kind of decisive strategic victory we were promised.

We have inflicted enormous damage on our enemies. We have demonstrated remarkable military capabilities. We have eliminated commanders, destroyed infrastructure, and carried out operations that few armies in the world could accomplish.

But military achievements and strategic victory are not the same thing.

Victory means fundamentally changing the reality that produced the war in the first place. It means ensuring that the enemy can no longer threaten us in the same way, and establishing a political and security reality that will endure after our soldiers return home.

We have repeatedly demonstrated that the IDF knows how to fight.

What remains in question is whether our political leadership knows how to turn military success into lasting victory.

Gaza is perhaps the clearest example.

There was a period when the destruction and displacement caused by the war, combined with international discussions about Gaza’s future, created an opportunity to seriously advance voluntary emigration for Gazans who wanted to leave and countries willing to receive them.

Instead of treating this as a strategic priority, developing the diplomatic mechanisms, securing agreements with receiving countries, and building a practical framework, the government allowed that opportunity to slip away.

Whether one supports that policy or not, it was a stated objective of significant elements of the governing coalition. Once again, there was a gap between political declarations and the willingness or ability to implement them.

And that gap has become a defining feature of this government.

The Social Contract Has Not Changed

Perhaps nowhere is the failure of political leadership more frustrating than the issue of Haredi military service.

For years, Israel has avoided confronting a basic contradiction in our national life: a growing portion of the population is largely exempt from the obligations that fall on everyone else.

October 7 should have ended that arrangement.

Hundreds of thousands of reservists have spent months, and in many cases years, away from their families, careers, and businesses. Some have lost their lives. Others have returned with injuries, physical and psychological, that will remain with them forever.

At the same time, the political leadership has continued to treat meaningful Haredi enlistment primarily as a coalition-management problem rather than a national necessity.

I am not suggesting that every Haredi man must become a combat soldier. The IDF needs people in intelligence, logistics, technology, maintenance, medicine, and countless other roles.

Nor do I believe the solution is simply to declare war on the Haredi community.

But the principle must be clear: citizens who are capable of contributing to the defense of the country must be expected to do so.

There is room for genuine Torah scholars, for carefully designed exemptions, and for service frameworks that respect religious lifestyles.

What there cannot be is a permanent system in which one community is collectively excused from the obligations carried by another.

And as a religious Jew myself, I reject the notion that Torah study and meaningful national service must necessarily be mutually exclusive.

The current coalition had both the responsibility and the opportunity to begin changing that social contract.

It has failed to do so.

Stop Borrowing Money to Reward Those Who Serve

I welcome the increased financial support for reservists and their families.

I know firsthand what prolonged reserve service does to a household. The lost income, disrupted careers, exhausted spouses, and children growing up with a parent repeatedly absent are real costs that cannot simply be ignored.

But there is something fundamentally wrong with the government’s approach.

Instead of making difficult decisions about national priorities, reducing spending elsewhere, and shifting resources toward those who carry the burden, the government has too often relied on increased borrowing to finance its commitments.

In other words, it is giving me benefits today and leaving me, my children, and the next generation to pay for them tomorrow.

That is not the kind of economic responsibility I expect from a government that claims to believe in fiscal discipline.

Budgets are not just accounting exercises. They are statements of national priorities.

If the government genuinely believes that those who serve deserve more, it should have the courage to say where that money will come from and what other spending must be reduced.

Supporting reservists should mean changing national priorities, not simply sending the bill into the future.

And this goes beyond reserve benefits. The same principle applies to education, employment, infrastructure, and the economic burden placed on Israel’s productive population.

We cannot continue asking the same people to fight, work, pay taxes, and carry an ever-growing share of the national burden while avoiding the structural reforms necessary to make the system sustainable.

Why Ofer Winter?

I am not voting for Ofer Winter because I believe he has a magical solution to every problem facing Israel.

I am voting for him because I believe he possesses something that has become increasingly rare in Israeli politics: the combination of principles, courage, practical experience, and the willingness to act.

A Man of Principles, Not Just Positions

There is a difference between having political positions and being guided by principles.

Positions can be adjusted according to polls, coalition negotiations, and the latest political crisis. Principles determine how a person behaves when doing the right thing comes at a personal cost.

Winter has demonstrated throughout his military career that he is willing to stand by his convictions, even when doing so has created friction with those above him.

That does not mean I agree with every decision he has ever made. It means I believe his decisions are guided by a genuine understanding of what he stands for.

Israel needs leaders who know what they believe and are prepared to defend those beliefs.

A Man Who Gets Things Done

Winter’s record is not simply one of speeches or declarations.

He has demonstrated the ability to take difficult problems, challenge conventional thinking, and build solutions where others saw obstacles.

He has worked to bring Haredi soldiers into military service, demonstrating that meaningful integration is possible when leaders are willing to engage with the community and create appropriate frameworks.

His involvement in developing new military capabilities, including the innovative exercise in Cyprus, reflects the same approach: when existing systems are inadequate, don’t simply accept their limitations. Find a way to overcome them.

That is the mentality Israel needs in government.

Not another committee to explain why something cannot be done. Not another speech about the importance of reform.

Leadership that identifies an objective, brings the right people together, and makes it happen.

Independent Enough to Challenge His Own Camp

One of the things I find most encouraging about Winter’s political entrance is his refusal to be bullied into submission by the existing leadership of the right.

He is clearly part of the national camp. His worldview is not ambiguous.

But he does not appear willing to accept the idea that loyalty to the national camp requires unquestioning loyalty to the politicians currently leading it.

This distinction is critical.

For too long, Israeli politics has operated on the assumption that voters must choose between ideological camps and then accept whatever leadership those camps provide.

I reject that.

I can support the principles of the right while demanding accountability from its leaders.

And I want a leader who can do the same.

A Leader for the Entire National Camp

Winter’s appeal is not limited to one religious community, one political faction, or one narrow sector of Israeli society.

He has spent his professional life commanding Israelis from different backgrounds, working with people who did not necessarily share his religious beliefs or personal worldview, and building teams around a common mission.

That is the kind of leadership the national camp needs.

Someone who can unite religious and secular Israelis, immigrants and native-born Israelis, traditional voters and people who have become disillusioned with the current political system.

Someone who can lead the right as a whole, rather than simply represent one faction within it.

Israel does not need another sectoral politician fighting for a larger share of the coalition budget.

It needs national leadership.

A New List, Unburdened by the Failures of the Past

One of the strongest arguments for Winter’s party is that it offers an entirely new political list.

No recycled ministers. No politicians who have spent the last twenty years explaining why the failures of the system were always someone else’s responsibility.

The failures that led to October 7 did not begin on October 7.

They developed over decades, under multiple governments, through a security doctrine that gradually prioritized managing threats over defeating them.

Responsibility for those failures extends across Israel’s political and security establishments.

I do not believe everyone who participated in that system should be permanently excluded from public life. Experience matters, and institutions need continuity.

But there is tremendous value in bringing in a new generation of leaders who are not personally invested in defending the decisions that brought us here.

People who can ask difficult questions without first calculating how the answers might reflect on their own past.

A new list is not automatically a better list. But it creates an opportunity for genuine change that recycled political leadership simply cannot offer.

Humble Enough to Know What He Doesn’t Know

Perhaps the most important quality I see in Winter is one that receives far too little attention in politics: humility.

I do not expect a former general to arrive in the Knesset with all the answers to Israel’s economic, educational, diplomatic, and social challenges.

In fact, I would be deeply suspicious of anyone who claimed to possess them.

What I expect from a leader is the ability to recognize the limits of his own knowledge, surround himself with capable people, listen carefully, and then make decisions.

The most dangerous leaders are not those who admit they do not know something.

They are those who cannot admit it.

Winter’s willingness to seek expertise rather than pretend to possess it is, to me, a sign of strength rather than weakness.

The job of a national leader is not to be the smartest person in every room. It is to build the strongest possible team, establish clear objectives, and take responsibility for the results.

That is leadership.

My Loyalty Is to Something Greater

My religious beliefs teach me that leadership is a responsibility, not an entitlement.

My years of military service have reinforced that lesson in ways I could never have imagined.

In the army, we understand the importance of a chain of command. A commander must have the authority to make decisions, and those under him must be prepared to follow orders, including when they disagree.

But we also understand that the purpose of that authority is to accomplish the mission.

A commander is not the mission. And neither is a prime minister.

I have spent hundreds of days fighting alongside Israelis from across the political and religious spectrum. We did not put our lives on hold, leave our families, and risk everything for the political survival of Benjamin Netanyahu, Ofer Winter, or anyone else.

We did it for the State of Israel, for the Jewish people, for our families, and for the future we believe this country can have.

Those are the things that deserve our loyalty.

Netanyahu remains the leader of the national camp today. I recognize that reality, and I recognize the accomplishments of his government.

But recognizing his leadership does not obligate me to support every decision he makes, excuse every failure, or accept that he must remain our leader indefinitely.

Being part of the national camp means believing in its principles and working to advance them, including when doing so conflicts with the political interests of the person currently leading it.

I am loyal to the principles of the right, not to the politicians who claim to represent them.

I believe Ofer Winter offers the national camp an opportunity to renew itself. To bring forward leaders who are not burdened by the failures of the past, who are prepared to challenge conventional thinking, and who understand that leadership means taking responsibility for results.

I do not expect perfection from Winter. I do not expect him to have all the answers. And I certainly do not intend to give him the unconditional loyalty that I criticize others for giving Netanyahu.

I expect him to stand by his principles, surround himself with capable people, make difficult decisions, and deliver results.

If he does, he will have earned my continued support.

If he does not, he should be held to the same standard as anyone else.

After October 7, after three years of war, and after the sacrifices demanded of so many Israeli families, I believe we have earned the right to demand more from our political leadership.

The national camp does not need to abandon its principles. It needs leaders willing to put those principles ahead of their own political survival.

That is why I am voting for Ofer Winter.