The existing situation, where, de facto, the vast majority of the ultra-Orthodox community does not enlist in the military, is undoubtedly illegal and severely undermines the right to equality. The Israeli Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, currently discussing how to draft ultra-Orthodox men, focuses heavily on questions of quotas and goals. The idea behind goals is to set measurable targets for ultra-Orthodox enlistment, demanding a visible rising trend in their integration into the army. Failure to meet these conscription goals would result in the imposition of sanctions on the haredi community institutions and on individuals required to enlist. The concept of quotas is the mirror image of the goals system, intended to set a numerical determination of which members of the ultra-Orthodox community will be exempt from conscription. Under either system or a hybrid of both, the state will not impose a general individual draft obligation on all haredi men but only on part of the community.
However, imposing a collective service obligation on the ultra-Orthodox community – whereby the community itself must supply conscripts or face consequences – is highly problematic. This would amount to a form of communal tax – reminiscent of the Russian Cantonists or of more recent harrowing times’ internal selection processes – where the ultra-Orthodox community determines who remains in yeshivas and who goes to the army, contrary to the right to equality. Moreover, a collective obligation privatizes the state’s coercive power, transferring it to yeshiva heads or sector leaders. Just as the privatization of prisons was prohibited by the Israeli Supreme Court, so too should the privatization of the state’s coercive power in the context of enlistment be forbidden.
From a strategic perspective, a collective model is also flawed. Even within the ultra-Orthodox community, those willing to cooperate with state service obligations will likely refuse if they witness preferential treatment, where those closer to decision-makers obtain exemptions for their students.
Why a universal draft won’t work – yet
So, what does equality require in this context? One could argue that the Knesset should refrain from action. Under current law, all ultra-Orthodox men must draft under the Defense Service Law after tailored statutes were invalidated by the court as unconstitutional. However, equality requires treating equals equally; and treating different people differently, according to the degree of their difference. Thus, for example, it would be grossly discriminatory to require new immigrants to be tested under the same conditions as natives if they do not master the language of the country.
The Supreme Court addressed this issue in the Movement for Quality Government in Israel decision in 2006. It held that there is no relevant difference between the ultra-Orthodox and general populations for conscription purposes. Supreme Court president Aharon Barak reasoned: “There is nothing in a person’s religiosity that prevents military service. Many of the IDF soldiers are religious.” This ruling is the binding precedent, and any tailored arrangement legislated by the Knesset will immediately be subjected to proportionality requirements, with the presumption being that it violates equality.
I seek to challenge this presumption. There are highly significant relevant differences between the ultra-Orthodox community and the general population regarding military enlistment. One type of relevant difference is the cultural worldview of the ultra-Orthodox community, which emphasizes separation from general society. The haredi community largely exists in a parallel universe to the general population: They are born in different hospitals, educated in separate institutions, shop at distinct stores, read different newspapers, marry differently, and are buried in separate cemeteries. When an ultra-Orthodox young man enters the army, he experiences severe cultural shock, transitioning from a religious and communal hierarchy to a military hierarchy under the Military Jurisdiction Law. He has no communal ethos to prepare him for the experience nor any role models to lean on for support. A liberal society, even when imposing general norms such as conscription, must make reasonable adjustments to preserve the core values of the minority. This means that even when drafting ultra-Orthodox individuals, the military must offer them a tailored framework – and these relevant differences will be part of Israeli society for many years to come.
The key to integration
There is another relevant distinction. It has been created and cultivated by the general society itself: the issue of core curriculum studies in school. In 2008, the Knesset passed a law allowing the funding of ultra-Orthodox high schools without requiring core curriculum studies. This law was challenged in the Supreme Court, but in 2014 the court approved this funding, finding no violation of the right to equality. What are core curriculum studies? According to the state, it is the minimum set of tools required for integration into the military, the economy, and society more generally. In high school, based on the 2008 Unique Cultural Educational Institutions Law, the state takes away the ultra-Orthodox students’ ability to blend into society by funding their deficient education. However, when these students complete their high school education, the state seeks to treat them like everyone else and draft them – without recognizing the relevant differences between them and the general population. This is impossible.
What, then, is the tailored framework required in the name of equality? The first thing any draft arrangement must do is to address core curriculum studies. The Supreme Court has already linked educational funding to military service in recent rulings but did so at the post-high school level. In 2024, the court revoked funding for post-high school ultra-Orthodox educational institutions when students’ draft was not deferred, and yet they failed to enlist. I argue that this connection must be established earlier in the educational timeline. The state should withhold funding from high schools that do not teach core curriculum studies. This is essential for enabling enlistment, as core studies provide the minimum set of tools needed for military integration. The state has a duty to reduce the relevant differences between the ultra-Orthodox and the general populations so that, over time, haredi individuals can integrate into the broader society.
In addition, an immediate imposition of a tailored personal service obligation on all ultra-Orthodox individuals is required. This could include offering options not available to the general population, such as choosing between National Service and military service. National Service may be less threatening to ultra-Orthodox men than the army because the men may return home on a daily basis, have a choice regarding the institutions in which they serve, and are not subject to the rigidity of the military hierarchy. Various other tailored frameworks could be considered. Concurrently, incentives should be created to encourage ultra-Orthodox youth to choose military service over civilian service, such as longer service periods for National Service or financial incentives for military service.
A decade to change
The proposed framework disrupts the status quo, integrates the haredi community into general society through core curriculum studies, and recognizes the general obligation to serve. It also promotes equality, strengthens the army, and prepares the ultra-Orthodox community to integrate into the general economy while preserving their way of life. Under this framework, a set of outstanding talented students may be recognized – similar to exceptional athletes – and allowed to focus on their studies after their initial training. The tailored framework should be time-limited, with periodic reviews to assess which adjustments should remain and which can be abolished. Perhaps a decade from now, after the ultra-Orthodox population has become accustomed to core studies and state service, a universal military draft can be imposed. Tailored military frameworks will still be necessary, but the draft obligation would apply to all.■
Rivka Weill is a professor at the Harry Radzyner Law School, Reichman University. This article is based on her statements to the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on February 4, 2025. It is derived from a broader article forthcoming in the Hebrew University Law Journal, Mishpatim, titled “Fearing for the State’s Security: Reexamining the Right to Equality and the Need for Accommodation in Drafting the Ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel.” The research is supported by the Israel Science Foundation.