Introduction
The debate over compulsory service in Israel—particularly the conscription of the ultra-Orthodox (Haredim) and Arabs into the army—has been one of the most contentious issues in Israeli society since the state’s establishment. It is not merely a question of national security; it also touches on fundamental principles of equality, social justice, national identity, and social solidarity. It reflects the diversity of Israeli society, a fabric of different cultural, religious, and national communities, each with its own needs, values, and way of life, and each with its own unique approach to its relationship with Zionism and its legacy—the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state.
Numerous attempts have been made over the years to regulate mandatory service, but political, social, and cultural disagreements have made it difficult to reach a consensus acceptable to the public as a whole. The tension between the need to maintain a strong army and the need to respect the lifestyle of communities such as the Haredim has created a persistent dilemma, one that continues to spark heated debate and affect Israeli society as a whole. In practice, a broad service framework is needed for all populations—one that requires every citizen to contribute.
The discussion over mandatory service touches on a range of questions: How can equality in sharing the burden be ensured without undermining the unique identity of conscripts? How can participation from all sectors of society be encouraged while addressing all national, security, and other needs equally? And what is the right way to honor those who serve without creating social divides?
This paper provides a brief historical overview, outlines the main challenges, and makes the case for a comprehensive solution based on mandatory military, national, or civilian service for all Israelis. It offers a practical framework aimed at ensuring equality in shouldering the burden and the right to contribute to the nation’s security, honoring those who serve, and integrating as many citizens as possible into the workforce and society—while taking into account the cultural and religious needs of different communities and strengthening social solidarity and national security.
Historical Background
The debate over mandatory service in Israel began with the establishment of the state. During the 1948 War of Independence, part of the public, including Haredim, enlisted in the security forces and took part in the war effort. However, Prime Minister and Minister of Defense David Ben-Gurion made a historic decision to exempt 400 yeshiva students from compulsory military service, on the condition that they engage in full-time Torah study.[1] This decision, based on Article 12 of the Security Service Law, laid the foundations for the Torato Omanuto (“Torah is his occupation”) arrangement, which exempted yeshiva students from military service as long as they continued their studies. The decision stemmed from a desire to preserve the centrality of Torah study within the Haredi community, which at the time was small in the aftermath of the Holocaust. Yet even then, it sparked controversy over the principle of equality. Ben-Gurion viewed Torah study as a national and spiritual value, but the decision set a precedent that would shape the debate for decades.
After the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel’s security needs grew, and the army faced declining enlistment rates alongside greater operational demands. A committee headed by Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan reexamined the issue and decided to increase the exemption quota to 800 students per year, thereby entrenching the Torato Omanuto arrangement. The committee’s report also recommended creating dedicated military service frameworks for Haredim that would allow them to maintain their religious lifestyle. Among its recommendations were the establishment of separate Haredi units in the IDF, adjusting schedules and service requirements to Haredi life, and enabling Torah study during military service.
When the Likud government came to power in 1977, it abolished the cap on the number of exemptions, leading to a significant rise in the number of young Haredim receiving exemptions from service. This was made possible in part by substantial growth in the Haredi population and the number of yeshiva students. Attempts to regulate the issue continued through various committees, such as the Cohen Committee in 1986, which set a quota of up to 3 percent of the annual draft cohort, and the Haim Israeli Committee in 1992, in which the army stated that drafting Haredim involved cultural and logistical complexities, such as the need for religious accommodations including strict kashrut and gender separation.
It is worth noting here the development of the hesder yeshivot, which combine Torah study with military service. The first hesder yeshiva was established in the mid-1950s (Kerem B’Yavneh), in response to the need for a model that blended religious commitment with national values. Over the years, the model expanded, with the program including three years of Torah study in a yeshiva and two years of military service. The hesder yeshivot became an influential force within the religious Zionist community and made a significant contribution to the IDF.
In 1998, the High Court of Justice changed its approach, ruling that the existing exemption, based on temporary provisions, was unlawful without primary legislation, as it violated the principle of equality.[2] In the wake of this ruling, the Tal Committee, chaired by retired Supreme Court Justice Tzvi Tal was established and drafted the 2002 Tal Law. This law, enacted as a five-year temporary measure, set out pathways for integrating Haredim into military or civilian service, including the option to defer service until age 22 and then choose between shortened military service or civilian service.[3] The Tal Law was extended several times, with adjustments made to the enlistment targets set by the law. In 2012, the High Court struck down the law, ruling that it contradicted Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty due to the unequal distribution of the burden of service.
After the Tal Law was struck down, further attempts were made to amend the legislation through committees such as the Plesner Committee (2012), the Perry Committee (2013), and the Shaked Committee (2014), but none succeeded in reaching broad agreement among the Haredi community, the general public, and the government. In 2014, the Knesset passed an amendment to the law that included gradual enlistment targets and sanctions for draft evasion, but the High Court struck it down in 2017 on the same grounds of violation of the principle of equality. In 2018, Minister of Defense Avigdor Liberman appointed another committee to propose an amendment to the law, but there was no majority to pass the law in the Knesset, partly due to opposition from Haredi parties and lack of support from opposition parties. The draft law crisis was among the main reasons Prime Minister Netanyahu decided to dissolve the Knesset and call elections in 2019.
The succession of elections between 2019 and 2022 made it difficult to reach agreements, and the Bennett-Lapid government, formed in 2021, also failed to pass an amended law despite a draft prepared by then–Minister of Defense Benny Gantz. This draft included a proposal to integrate Haredim into military and civilian service while offering economic incentives, but it did not receive broad support. In March 2024, against the backdrop of the Swords of Iron war that began in October 2023 and the IDF’s urgent need for manpower, the Knesset applied the “continuity law” to Gantz’s draft from his tenure in the Bennett-Lapid government. This law, intended to regulate Haredi enlistment by setting binding targets and imposing sanctions, is still under deliberation in the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee and has not yet reached a second and third reading. The war, which heightened the need for combat soldiers and logistical manpower, underscored the urgency of finding a solution that would enable broader enlistment while taking into account the diversity of the country’s population.
For its part, the IDF has taken an ambivalent approach toward drafting Haredim over the years. A major concern has been the cost and adaptations required to integrate them into various units—gender separation, kashrut, and conditions enabling observance of all religious commandments. In 1999, the Nahal Haredi Battalion—Netzah Yehuda—was established to provide a dedicated combat framework for drafting Haredim. Later, smaller frameworks were created within the Paratroopers Brigade (Hetz Company) and the Givati Brigade (Tomer Company). In 2007, Maj. Gen. Eliezer Shkedi, then commander of the Air Force, launched a program to recruit Haredim into combat support roles, such as ground mechanics in the Air Force—Project Shahar Kachol (Blue Dawn)—which allowed Haredim to serve in a tailored framework. Following its success, the program was expanded to other branches, including Intelligence and Communications. In 2024, the Hashmonaim Brigade was established to allow Haredim to serve as combat soldiers in a dedicated framework, as part of the IDF’s effort to increase enlistment in this sector given the needs of war. The first company was established in 2025, and recently (August 2025) new recruits completed their beret march at the Western Wall. These frameworks initially enjoyed significant enthusiasm within the Haredi public, but as the draft law debate intensified and the discourse became confrontational, motivation declined and enlistment numbers fell.
The Main Challenges
The issue of mandatory service in Israel is complex because of key challenges that reflect the country’s social and religious diversity. The main challenges are as follows:
Equality in Sharing the Burden – Even during the 1948 War of Independence, while most of the population enlisted or volunteered, there were those who avoided service under various pretexts. In recent years, the army has faced a phenomenon known as “gray evasion,” in which individuals either avoid service by gaining exemptions on medical or psychological grounds—sometimes by abusing the system— or fulfill their obligations in rear-echelon roles that are not always essential. This phenomenon deepens the sense of injustice among conscripts, especially those serving in demanding roles such as combat soldiers, who devote years of their lives under difficult conditions.
Population groups that do not enlist – The Arab population in Israel, which makes up about 20 percent of the total population, is not subject to mandatory military service, with certain exceptions such as the Bedouin Reconnaissance Battalion, trackers, or individual volunteers. The absence of a service obligation for this population raises questions about equality and participation in the duty of defending the state, especially given the ongoing security challenges. Among the Haredi population, enlistment rates are also very low, and the Torato Omanuto arrangement continues to stir controversy, as it grants a sweeping exemption to Haredim—particularly yeshiva students—whose numbers have grown substantially over the years. Added to this is the broad exemption for religious girls and the blanket exemption for Druze and Circassian women.
Security needs – The war that began in October 2023 and continues to shape the security reality in 2025 underscores the army’s urgent need for additional manpower. The demand for combat soldiers, and for logistical support and reserve units has grown, posing a major challenge to both the military and Israeli society. This situation has sharpened the call for all sectors of the population to share the burden of service.
Maintaining the Haredi way of life in the army – Many in the Haredi population fear that military service will undermine their religious lifestyle and as a result cause some Haredi soldiers to drop out of their community. Military service is rightly perceived as leading to exposure to secularism or to foreign cultural influences.
Integrating Arab Youth – The Arab community is unwilling to participate in any form of national civilian service, which its leadership sees as contradicting their national identity and as recognition of the state’s institutions. This does not prevent members of this population from making use of state budgets and institutions for purposes such as higher education, placement in government positions, receiving affirmative action benefits, and more.
Judicial Intervention – Over the years, the High Court of Justice has intervened in matters relating to mandatory service. On the one hand, it has struck down laws such as the Tal Law on the grounds that they violate the principle of equality; on the other hand, it has voided benefits for military veterans, such as allowances, affirmative hiring policies for veterans in the public sector, and a law that barred academic studies before the age of 21. These interventions have created a sense of inconsistency and difficulty in formulating stable policy as the judicial system is seen as intervening in political issues and striking down every proposed solution.
Mandatory Service for All
To address these challenges, we propose a comprehensive framework for mandatory military, national, or civilian service for all citizens of the state, tailored to the needs and characteristics of its various communities.
The framework is based on three core requirements:
- The participation of all sectors of society in the duty to defend and contribute to the state, whether through military service or civilian contribution.
- Meaningful recognition for those who serve—especially those who take on demanding roles such as combat soldiers and combat-support personnel in both active duty and the reserves.
- Integration of the maximum number of citizens into the workforce and society, while developing skills and capabilities that will benefit them in the future.
The proposed framework includes the elements outlined below:
Mandatory service – All citizens of the state, without exception, will be required to serve—either in the military or in a civilian capacity—for a period of about two to three years. The obligation will apply to all populations, including Haredim, Arabs, women, and men, with no distinction on the basis of gender, religion, or nationality. The goal is to create a sense of national partnership and ensure that every citizen contributes to the state in some way.
Service exemptions – Exemptions will be limited: up to 5 percent of each draft cohort, allocated among high achievers from all sectors and other exceptional talents (in sports, music, etc.). These exemptions will be granted on the recommendation of relevant professional bodies, such as the Sports Council or the Council of Yeshivas (Vaad HaYeshivos). This quota will be reviewed during the law’s implementation. Alternative service arrangements may be defined to accommodate Torah study in the Haredi sector.
Priority for the military – The army will have first choice in selecting service members according to its needs. It will be able to choose from among the annual draft cohort those best suited for combat roles, combat-support positions, or technological assignments, taking into account the candidates’ physical, mental, and professional abilities.
Those who do not join the army—whether for personal, cultural, or religious reasons—will be directed to national service in diverse frameworks, such as:
- Emergency and rescue organizations: for example, the police, the prison service, Magen David Adom, the fire service, ZAKA, rescue units, or as auxiliary support for national emergency units.
- Civil society organizations: groups such as Ezer Mizion, Yad Sarah, Yedidim; programs for the elderly, the sick, or the needy in hospitals and communities; or volunteer activities to promote social welfare.
- National projects: teaching in schools in disadvantaged areas, working in agriculture, contributing to national infrastructure projects, construction, community rehabilitation, or supporting national missions such as environmental protection.
Cultural and religious accommodation – Service tracks will be adapted to the needs of different communities so as to reduce opposition and encourage participation. For example, Haredim could serve in dedicated IDF units or in religious organizations such as ZAKA or Yad Sarah, where they can maintain a religious lifestyle, including strict kashrut and gender separation. For the Arab population, tracks could be offered in fields such as education, welfare, health, or community development—within their own communities and in line with their cultural and national identity. Women, some of whom may prefer non-military frameworks, would be able to choose tracks that meet their needs.
Benefits for those who serve – Service members—especially those in significant roles such as combat soldiers or active reservists—would receive substantial benefits reflecting appreciation for their contribution. These benefits would include:
- Tax relief: reduced taxes or partial/full income tax exemption for several years after service.
- Housing benefits: priority in allocation of land or housing; access to government housing programs at discounted rates.
- Higher education benefits: priority in admission to universities and colleges, and scholarships.
- Employment benefits: priority for positions in the public sector.
The framework is based on the principle of “more carrots, fewer sticks”—offering incentives for service rather than imposing sanctions for non-compliance. In this way, it aims to encourage voluntary participation while reducing social tensions.
Sanctions – Administrative sanctions would be imposed on those who do not perform the service assigned to them by the military induction authority. These sanctions could include: suspension of a driver’s license during the service-eligible age period (18–21 for men, 18–20 for women; in cases of deferred service, sanctions would be adjusted accordingly—for example, deferral to age 22 followed by noncompliance would trigger sanctions from ages 22–25); restrictions on access to financial services (loans, bank accounts, credit cards) during the service period; restrictions on holding public-sector positions until age 40; and limitations on leaving the country during service-eligible ages except in approved cases.
We recommend that no institutional sanctions be imposed that reflect collective rather than individual responsibility—and if they are imposed, they should apply equally to all educational institutions at draft age in Israel, including universities. We also oppose “family sanctions” that harm the family unit (such as denial of daycare subsidies); such measures have proven ineffective and generate antagonism that undermines the value of military service.
The proposed framework may face opposition from various quarters, but it contains mechanisms to address these concerns. Some Haredim may object to service out of fear it will compromise their religious lifestyle, such as exposure to secularism or violation of religious principles like gender separation; the framework offers service tracks adapted to religious needs, such as in dedicated IDF units or in organizations like ZAKA, Yad Sarah, or other religious bodies, where kashrut, daily prayer, and gender separation can be maintained. In addition, vocational training could be incorporated into service to help Haredim enter the workforce afterward, reducing fears of economic harm. Some in the Arab population may view service—especially military service—as contradicting their national identity; the framework offers civilian tracks that contribute to their local communities rather than directly to the state, thus reducing opposition. Examples include teaching in Arab schools or assisting the elderly in the community.
Some may fear that granting significant benefits to service members would harm equality and create social gaps. These benefits are justified as recognition for meaningful contributions to the state, especially by those in demanding roles such as combat soldiers. To prevent a sense of discrimination, benefits could be graded according to the nature of service, so that civilian service members also receive benefits—though at a lower level than those serving in key military roles.
Finally, some in the public may oppose the very concept of mandatory service, arguing that it infringes on personal freedom. The flexibility of the tracks allows each citizen to find a path that fits his or her values and way of life.
Conclusion
The issue of mandatory service in Israel is a major challenge that combines questions of equality, national security, social justice, and identity. Over the years, repeated attempts to regulate the matter have encountered political, social, and cultural obstacles. High Court rulings on the draft law, political disputes, and opposition from various population groups have all hindered the formation of an agreed-upon solution. The Swords of Iron War has underscored the urgency of finding a framework that would enable broader enlistment while taking into account the country’s diverse populations and their needs.
The proposed framework—mandatory national or civilian service for all, with priority for military service, varied and tailored tracks, and substantial benefits for those who serve—offers a practical solution that could bridge the gaps. By focusing on incentives rather than sanctions, and by including all sectors of society while accommodating their needs, it is possible to achieve equality in sharing the burden, strengthen national security, and build a more cohesive society. The framework not only addresses security needs but also contributes to social integration.
Instead of continuing with fruitless arguments and political confrontations, Israel can choose to move toward a solution that makes mandatory service a shared value uniting its entire society.
[1] From Deferral of Military Service for Yeshiva Students – Historical Background 1948–2002, Knesset Research and Information Center, Knesset website. “On October 1, 1948, Prime Minister and Minister of Defense David Ben-Gurion reported to the Provisional State Council on his decision not to draft yeshiva students. At that time, the arrangement covered some 400 yeshiva students whose Torah study was their occupation, as can be seen from Ben-Gurion’s reply to questions by Member of Knesset Meir Argov during a meeting of the Knesset Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee in October 1948.”
[2] HCJ 3267/97 together with HCJ 715/98.
[3] Deferment of Military Draft for Yeshiva Students whose Occupation Is the Study of Torah Law (Tal Law), Knesset website, June 24, 2012.
JISS Policy Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family.
