The Haredim in the IDF



"Soldiers of  Nahal Haredi in action."



In the Israeli Defense Force there is a unit designed to accommodate Ultra-Orthodox Jews, this unit did not exist ten years ago. In fact, it would have been called and “oxymoron” to have any relationship at all between any of the Ultra-Orthodox groups and the IDF.  The Haredim: (a word meaning to adhere strictly to traditional form of Jewish law) often stresses that all connections with the IDF should be limited or avoided all together. These extremely religious Jews follow the “Torah” much more strictly then Modern Orthodox or secular Jews. Because of these strict religious views and pressure on the government from haredi leaders who have the “political power [to] make or break government coalitions” (Rosenthal, 186) haredi scholars were freed from their obligation to serve in the Israeli army. (Rosenthal, 186) However, the number of draft-exempt religious scholars began to grow and Israeli leaders “did not foresee the astounding explosion” in the number of men that would be granted deferments. In 2008 there were over fifty thousand military exemptions granted to yeshiva student that were of draft-age. (Rosenthal, 168)  Nevertheless, a group of haredi educators realized that not every yeshiva student was destined to become a rabbi or educator. They decided to approach Yehudah Duvedani (an retired IDF officer) “with the idea to create the Nahal Haredi.”  Duvdevani embraced this idea and agreed that “the haredim would serve in a combat unit”.  Compromises between the IDF and the haredi leaders began: a base with out female soldiers, special haredi supervision, orthodox officers, and daily lectures from haredi organizers were all requested. The army agreed to pay for most of the requests but not for all. They required the haredi organizers to pay for the daily shiurim, recruitment, and personal needs of the haredi solider. Funding was not the only set back…” some of the haredi soldiers were no longer welcomed home by their families who couldn’t accept that their sons were serving in the IDF.”   Many felt like these boys betrayed all that they were taught. Arguments that the haredim “lifestyle is different and is incommensurate with the IDF atmosphere, slang, and conduct” only reinforced the stresses of the families. Many of the families feel that these young men are “not fit for military service.”  Nevertheless, the Nahal Haredi has now been a three year IDF program and has a combat ready battalion of 600 soldiers, 275 trainees and 125 participants in the third year educational vocational program. And future plans to increase the recruitment numbers are underway.

"The haredi soldiers participating in a religious ceremony"

            When reading my two online I found it interesting how one was very positive and supportive of the Nahal Haredi and the other was very critical and diminishing. The mission statement of the webpage supporting Nahal Haredi was to “provide for the unique spiritual needs of the Haredi youth, while also enabling them to participate in the defense of Israel.” It also listed that it hopes to “bridge the gap between the secular and religious populations in Israel.” However, on the other web page it was clear to see that it was reinforcing negative emotions about the IDF and any participation of the Haredi’s in the military. It even put blame on the IDF by saying that “it has been clear to us, the haredim, that we are not really wanted in the army.”  The two articles were interesting to compare because one stressed that the IDF was supportive and enthusiastic about the Nahal Haredi and the other page gave the reader a negative perspective on the IDF and their efforts to integrate the haredim into the army. When placing them together it is clear that the website in support of Nahal Haredi provided more factual and reliable information then the web page against it. The source that was unsupportive of haredim participation in the military was based more on opinion then legitimate facts.



"A solider studying  the "Torah""

 

Ethiopian Jews

 On May 23, 1991 an aircraft supplied by the IAF was sent to rescue Ethiopian Jews who in a few hours were to be surrounded and massacred by rebel groups. (Rosenthal, 158)  No one was allowed to bring any belongings because “every bundle meant another Jew couldn’t fit onto the plane. (Rosenthal, 158)”  Planes were so crowded with people that some had to have seats removed and others had to carry 1000 passengers even though the capacity of the plane was only 500.  During this rescue Israel managed to “smuggle 14,324 Ethiopian Jews” into Israel within thirty six hours. Many Israelis welcomed the refugees with opened arms by showering them with gifts, food, and tutoring them. For many this rescue was one of Israel’s “finest” moments. The Ethiopian Jews were overwhelmed with all that industrial Israel had to offer. Many had never seen everyday luxuries such as electricity and running water.  

There are now about 100,000 Ethiopian Jews in Israel. The majority of the Ethiopian families are among the poorest economic groups in Israel. 72% live below the poverty line and 70% are illiterate in both their native language and in Hebrew. Both of these factors cause a high rate of unemployment of Ethiopian men and women in Israel. Another, notable fact is that more then half of these 100,000 immigrants have been living in Israel for less then ten years. The majority of Ethiopian Jews living in Israel are under the age of 18! In fact 60% if the population falls into this age range.

Another factor that contributes to the continuing poverty faced by the Ethiopian Jews is the high rate of high school dropouts. Drop out rates for Ethiopian students double that of Israeli Jews and the general population in Israel!  These high drop out rates cause most of the Ethiopian families to remain in the same economic position. Because, “more then 75 percent of the Ethiopian Israelis came from rural, agrarian environments and have few skills marketable in a modern economy…resulting in severe inequalities between Ethiopian citizens and other citizens of Israel.”  By not finishing school and learning the skills needed to become successful in modern Israel-many high school drop outs continue the cycle of poverty for themselves and their families.

 This high rate of high school drop outs in the Ethiopian community does not mean that they are less intelligent or able to be educated then other Israeli children. In fact, “Ethiopian students often exhibit better memory skills, concentration, and patience then other students (Rosenthal, 170).”  Some argue that the reason for the high drop out rate is because many of the children do not receive individualized tutoring and opportunities to attend afterschool programs that allow them to excel in computers, Hebrew, and English. All of these factors together cause Ethiopian Jew to be stuck in a persistent cycle of poverty, lack of education, and diminished opportunity. Nevertheless, more and more Ethiopian Jews are breaking free of this cycle and leading the way to ending this underprivileged life style. For instance, “in 1993, there were only 143 Ethiopian college students… By 2008, more then 3000 Ethiopian Israelis were [enrolled]! (Rosenthal, 172)  These young Ethiopians are good examples for younger generations to see that anything can be accomplished. Many haven’t had good examples because, “most of their mothers and fathers have never been in a classroom. But once these kids get a taste of this, they want it. (Rosenthal, 173)” Hopefully, there will be an even greater increase in Ethiopian Jews enrolled in college in the future. And hopefully we will see a decline in drop out rates among high school students. These types of changes will allow Ethiopian Jews to integrate more into Israeli society and feel less like outsiders.            

            The information that I found through out Rosenthal’s book The Israelis was often identical to the information and statistics found on the websites. This led me to asses that most of the information that I found on Ethiopian Jews was reliable and consistent. However, I felt like Rosenthal had a more understanding and compassionate view of the situation regarding the Ethiopian Jews in Israel. Her writing had much more personal relevance then the website articles. By including personal stories from Ethiopian Jews it made the reader feel more compassion for their situation then the website articles which were just cold hard facts-making the Ethiopians seem uneducated and lazy.  Rosenthal took a much more humanitarian approach when talking about the hardships faced by the Ethiopian Jews by talking about why they haven’t been able to improve their situation. The websites did not give much background on why there were so many drop outs, or why there was so many people living in poverty. Overall, I felt like the information was very reliable and that I learned a great deal about the Ethiopian Jews that immigrated to Israel-and challenges they are facing.

"Ethiopian boy with his Israeli classmates."

"Ethiopian woman serving her two years in the Israeli army."

"A group of Ethiopian Jewish men getting ready for a religous service."

Loyalty or Discrimination?

Jonathan Lis and Barak Ravid are the authors of an article about the controversial proposal to change the law of citizenship in Israel. The article entitled, “Cabinet Expected to back Proposed Loyalty Oath Law”, reflects on the proposal of Justice Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is suggesting a change in the the requirements for a non-Jew to become a citizen of Israel. If the change to the Law of Citizenship is passed it will require any non-Jew wishing to become a citizen to vow loyalty to Israel as a “Jewish and democratic state.” The proposal has a lot of support and is expected to pass in the cabinet. However, the bill is considered discriminatory by the Labor Party which “supports the policy of social pluralism and equality.”  Many labor ministers are announcing that they will oppose the bill because  it will affect the “fate of all” of the Jewish citizens of Israel because now they will “be living in a new, officially approved ethnocratic, theocratic, nationalistic and racist country”. Israel’s Declaration of Independence includes, “the principle of equality, which prohibits discrimination and calls for full integration of the state’s Arab citizens.”  However, the original Law of Return which was passed in 1950 only gave Jews, those of Jewish ancestry and their spouses the right to migrate, settle and gain citizenship in Israel. This law combined religion, history, nationalism and democracy. The Law of return did not require for the immigrant to pledge loyalty and allowed any Jew regardless of affiliation, but restricted immigration to Jews only. This law was also challenged by Palestinian refugees who also claim a right of return to Israel. It often was challenged and labeled as offensive and ethnically discriminatory. In 1970 The Law of Return was amended and allowed even non Jews to immigrate to Israel also. This included converted Jews, children born to Jewish fathers, spouses of Jewish citizens and those who were born Jewish but converted to another religon. This allowed more immigrants to come but was still considered very discriminatory.   Because of this the Labor Party wants to make sure that Israel's future cannot be label as discriminatory towards anyone else. They believe that this new proposed change will only add to the discrimination that many non-Jewish immigrants already feel or have previously felt. The leaders of the opposition are Issac Herzog, Avishay Braverman and Benjamin Ben-Eliezer (who will not be attending the meeting, where the decision whether or not to pass the law will be made.) Some of the Likud ministers such as Dan Meridor and Benny Begin are also expected to vote in opposition to the change, but many of their final votes still “remain unclear.”  Others such as Defense Minister Ehud Barak support the amendment but have concerns and reservations. Ehud Barak has not yet revealed if he will vote for or against the change. Those close to Barak say that he does not oppose the amendment and does not consider it problematic. However, Barak issued a statement saying that, “this is a matter of conscience and as such I will allow the Labor ministers to vote in line with their conscience.” Barak’s main issue with the law is that he thinks it should reference Israel’s Declaration of Independence. Braverman and Dan Meridor have both lashed out against Barak’s unknown position on the law. Braverman accused Barak of “abandoning the values of Labor” and called the proposal “a stain on the government of Israel.”  Meridor is also siding with Braverman by arguing that “such an amendment to law could severely damage relations with the Arab population in Israel.” Meridor is expected to try to persuade the Likud ministers to delay the vote. Another opponent to the amendment is Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin, who argues that there is no need for this law, because Israel is already respected as a Jewish and democratic state. And that by adding any additions to any of the Laws “can only be harmful.”  Arguments that ever since Beitenu came into government there have been more “loyalty laws” passed, which might be considered “to be discriminatory against Israel’s Arab citizens.”  Rivlin also points out that, “This law…could arm our enemies and opponents in the world in an effort to emphasize the trend for separatism or even racism within Israel.”

          Lis and Ravid did a good job finding direct quotes from the ministers that were in opposition to the proposed change to the Citizenship Law. They had a lot of quotes that showed the negative aspects of passing this law. However, if they had provided more sources for those in support of the Law they might have done a better job at informing the reader of both sides of the story. Because of their focus on those that are expected to vote against the law, it can be implied that they also do not agree with the change to the Law. Even though Lis and Ravid did not give their specific opinion on the issue, the fact that they did not get quotes from those in support of the Law shows that they were trying to make the reader feel in opposition to it also. Nevertheless, they provided many direct quotes from many different sources. They also provided links that gave me more information on the Law and the reasons why the Labor Party does not support it.  This made me feel as if they had done a lot of research when writing this article. The article also did a good job in staying on topic and providing the reader with greater understanding about how the change would make Israel seem more discriminatory and racist then if we just left the law as is.

Jewish Activists and the Gaza Blockade.

 In the article called “Jewish Gaza-Bound Activists: IDF used excessive force in naval raid”, the journalist Yanir Yagna  reports that the Israel Defense Force is responsible for using excessive force to take over the ship.  The boat was carrying nine Jewish activists, and had set sail from Famagusta harbor located in Cyprus. The activists were hoping to breach the blockade that Israel had set up outside of Gaza, on September twenty sixth two thousand ten. The Israel Defense Force issued a statement that they had “peacefully boarded” the Jewish aid boat and that “it is currently being led to the Ashdod seaport along with its passengers.”  However, the nine passengers did not agree with the Israel Defense Force’s report of how the ship was seized. Yonatan Shapira one of the passengers of the ship and a former Israel Air Force pilot stated that “no words to describe what we went through during the take over.”   Yonatan also claimed that the activists were met with extreme violence from the Israel Defense Forces, even though the activists were displaying no violence themselves.  He claims that he was beat and hit with a taser gun by one of the soldiers. Yonatan’s description varies a lot from what the Israel Defense Forces spokesman is saying happened.  Nevertheless he and the other eight activists stand proud of their efforts to breach the blockade. He issued a statement saying that Israel’s siege on Gaza is an immoral, un-Jewish, crime that must me spoken out about.

            Yonatan’s claims against the Israel Defense Forces are being conformed by other sources as well. Eli Usharov, a reporter for Israel’s channel 10 also conformed that the take over was very brutal, even though the violence was unnecessary.  However, Usharov also said that “the activists managed to have a serious heart-to-heart with the troops once they were all placed on board the military vessel, and that “overall the atmosphere was good””.  Another source named Reuben Moscowitz, who was also one of the activists aboard the boat, was shocked that the soldier’s could be so violent to their fellow Jews. Moscowitz is a Holocaust survivor, and compares the blockade of Gaza to his experience in the concentration camps. Moscowitz states that he “cannot live with the fact that the State of Israel is imprisoning an entire people behind fences.” 

            The reliability of this article seems to come from very direct sources. The journalist seemed to have a lot of information and personal recollections of events that took place. He took the time to get direct quotes from the activists that were involved, and provided their names as well as other information about them. He also gave a quote that showed the Israel Defense Forces side of the story.  Overall the reliability of the article seemed strong.  He also did a good job at providing more then one source of information. When he was describing how the activists were unfairly treated, the fact he had three sources saying that the soldiers acted in a violent manner gave the activists more validity then the Israel Defense Forces. Though the author does not say that he is taking a particular side of the issue, and writes very objectively, you can infer from his sources that he is defending the activist more then he is the Israel Defense Forces. He uses the quotes and the backgrounds of the activists to draw the reader into the story and cause the reader to relate more with Yonatan, Eli, and Reuben then with the nameless and faceless Israel Defense Force.

Missing... But Not Forgotten.

The article that I choose to read had a huge affect on me as I was reading it. The article was about a young Israeli solider named Gilad Schalit. Gilad has recently been named Jerusalem Post’s person of the year and stands as symbol of sacrifice for many Israelis. His story however, does not have a happy ending thus far. About four years ago on June 25, 2006 Gilad was taken hostage by Hamas during a cross boarder raid. His parents pleaded for his safe return the very next day June 26, their desperation was felt across all of Israel. Hama’s however made it very clear that Gilad would not be released unless Israel’s government agreed to release every underage female Palestinian prisoner, as well as, one thousand other prisoners; many of whom where being held in Israeli prisons on terror charges. Since that horrifying day four years ago Gilad’s parents Noam and Aviva Schalit have bargained and begged the Israeli government to take action in their son’s safe return. Though no action to have Gilad returned has yet been taken, Noam and Aviva have never spoken an unpatriotic word about Israel, and even encouraged their younger daughter to enroll in the army also. Their undying patriotism and strength gives many Israelis hope and encouragement. Many look up to Gilad as a symbol of strength and patriotism, and think about him as they send their own children off to join the army after high school. Gilad’s whereabouts are currently unknown, and he has had no medical care since he has been taken hostage in 2006. And the terms of his release divide many Israelis, faced with the option of freeing thousands of potentially deadly prisoners… for the return of one of their own sons, a young solider who was standing up to defend the country HIS country, THEIR country.


Gilad’s story affected me on many personal levels. It is hard for me being an American, growing up in a safe and sheltered environment, to put a face on war. Reading about Gilad made me realize how real war really is. It made me realize that he was not that much different then myself. And that he too did not imagine this to be his faith. I felt the frustration in the words that the Daniel Gordis the author of this article wrote. His undying passion and anger about how long Gilad has been prisoner is clearly felt. It was almost as if Gilad was apart of Gordis’s own family. In fact more then once he mentioned “Gilad has become OUR son.” A son of Israel, someone whose name is mentioned in thousands of synagogues around the world, a son who has become a house hold name and hero to millions of Jewish people around the world. As I read the article I could feel the emotion that was put into each line of this memorable story. I began to want to know more about Gilad and how he ended up with this unimaginable faith. As I looked on the internet I found pictures and even a video of Gilad. As I watched this video I felt like each of us should take the time to watch it, and put a face to war. To see that Gilad Schalit is not that different from each of us, he is young, smart, and has his whole life in front of him. But he has not been free for the past four year. He cannot go out and live his life, and purse his dreams, fall in love, or even see his family. He is trapped-waiting for an ending to this nightmare, which has not come for four years.