Editor-in-Chief Atul Singh and Josef Olmert, a former Israeli government official and Middle East scholar, examine growing divisions within Israeli politics and society. A dispute between Defense Minister Israel Katz and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) over the future of a senior West Bank commander highlights tensions between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government and the military. Singh and Olmert also discuss divisions over West Bank settlements, religion and military service, rising emigration and whether Israel’s traditional sense of national solidarity is weakening.

Netanyahu’s right clashes with the IDF

Singh begins with Katz’s announcement that he would replace Major General Avi Bluth, the IDF’s senior commander in the West Bank. The military publicly disputed Katz’s authority to make the change. Olmert argues that this confrontation reflects a deeper transformation within the Israeli right.

Historically, he says, Menachem Begin’s Likud regarded the IDF as central to Jewish national revival. Military service symbolized the ability of Jews to defend themselves after centuries of persecution culminating in the Holocaust. Although tensions between political and military leaders occurred, notably during the 1982 Lebanon War, respect for the institution remained deeply rooted.

Olmert says that Netanyahu’s dependence on religious right-wing parties and the settler movement has changed this relationship. Begin promoted West Bank settlements after becoming prime minister in 1977, but his government also evacuated settlements in Sinai to secure peace with Egypt. Former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon similarly removed Israeli settlements from Gaza in 2005.

Netanyahu, Olmert states, has instead become politically dependent on parties that place West Bank settlements at the center of their agenda. He believes this has encouraged attacks on institutions such as the IDF when military priorities conflict with settler interests.

Olmert calls this an “ideological reversal” for the Israeli right. Confronting an institution still admired by much of Israeli society could hurt Netanyahu’s coalition in the next election, he mentions.

Religion, settlements and military service divide Israel

Singh and Olmert turn to divisions within Israel’s religious communities. Olmert emphasizes that West Bank settlers are not politically or religiously uniform. Some of the largest settlements are ultra-Orthodox, while national-religious Israelis serve extensively in the IDF and have suffered significant casualties during recent fighting.

At the more radical end, the so-called hilltop youth have established unauthorized outposts outside established settlements. Olmert argues that some increasingly reject the authority of the state itself in favor of a society governed according to their interpretation of Jewish religious law.

This raises a larger question about what it means for Israel to be simultaneously Jewish and democratic. The country’s founders and much of its population are not simply secular. Religious traditions remain embedded in everyday Israeli life, from Jewish marriage ceremonies and the Sabbath to observance of Yom Kippur.

The more consequential dividing line, he says, concerns the relationship between religious authority and individual choice. Disputes over ultra-Orthodox exemptions from military service have brought that conflict into sharper focus.

Olmert believes the next government will have to confront both the military draft and lawlessness among radical settlers. He reiterates his earlier prediction that Israel is approaching a “third Israeli republic,” in which the political arrangements governing religion, the military and the state could see substantial reworking.

Are Israelis voting with their feet?

Israel’s internal political struggle coincides with reports of unusually high emigration. Singh asks whether three consecutive years of elevated departures indicate a deeper crisis.

Olmert accepts that emigration has risen but cautions that estimates depend on how departures are measured. Israel has experienced similar anxieties before, particularly during the severe recession of 1966. Today, many of those leaving are highly mobile professionals, including technology workers and doctors.

That composition makes the trend potentially important. Yet Israel continues to receive new immigrants and returning Israelis, including significant numbers of Jewish doctors. Its population also continues to grow faster than those of many other developed countries.

Political dissatisfaction may nevertheless contribute to departures. Olmert points particularly to opposition among some Israelis to the growing influence of ultra-Orthodox parties. He expects many Israelis living overseas to return temporarily to vote in the coming election, potentially making emigration itself part of Israel’s political reckoning.

Prosperity cannot resolve Israel’s divisions

Singh contrasts these tensions with Israel’s economic resilience. The economy grew by about 3% last year, unemployment remains around 3%–3.5% and Israel maintains substantial foreign currency reserves. Singh and Olmert discuss strong investment in Israel’s technology sector despite the pressures of war.

Olmert describes Israel’s economic performance as remarkable but contends that prosperity does not necessarily translate into social satisfaction. Many emigrants are precisely the professionals who have benefited from the country’s technology-driven economy.

Israel, he suggests, increasingly resembles other advanced societies in which people judge their circumstances not simply by employment or income but by political stability, personal freedom and overall quality of life.

Is Israel’s siege mentality weakening?

The larger question is whether decades of conflict still bind Israelis together as strongly as they once did. Singh characterizes Israel as a modern Spartan society because military service and mobilization remain unusually widespread compared with other developed countries.

Olmert agrees that Israel remains distinctive. Military participation and volunteerism are still high, even if they have declined from earlier periods. Yet he sees signs that the traditional “siege society” mentality is losing some of its power.

Historically, external threats acted as a cementing force across Israeli society. Today, prolonged conflict exists alongside political polarization, disputes over religion and military service, as well as changing expectations among younger and professional Israelis.

Olmert cautions against interpreting current emigration or political divisions as evidence of imminent national decline. Israel has endured previous periods of economic hardship and outward migration before recovering. The coming election, however, could determine whether current divisions represent another difficult political cycle or the beginning of a more fundamental transformation of the Israeli state.

[Lee Thompson-Kolar edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article/video are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.