IDI.2018

R
Report
The Jerusalem
CELEBRATING
70 years
of independence
The Democracy Pavilion
Opening April 10, 2018
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 1

The Jerusalem
ReportR
MARC ISRAEL SELLEM IDI
3 The Democracy Pavilion
Greetings from Thaddeus (Tad) N. Taube
4 The Jewish State’s balancing act Justice Dorit Beinisch and
Yohanan Plesner voice optimism about Israel’s future by Steve Linde
TABLE OF CONTENTS
8 A people’s army amidst social change
A round- table discussion with Yuval Shany,
Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Orna Barbivai and Amichai Cohen
by Arieh O’Sullivan
10 Israel needs to invest in the skills of the
future Shraga Brosh and Daphna Aviram-Nitzan urge
the government to train workers for the future job market
by Steve Linde
12 Media in crisis: Who should decide what
enters the public domain?
by Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler
13 Women in local government: The 2018
municipal elections are a golden opportunity
by Ofer Kenig
14 A balanced policy: The key to ultra-Orthodox
integration
by Gilad Malach and Lee Cahaner
15 The ultra-Orthodox community in Israel
Select facts and figures
16 Progress in informal education plan: A
victory for Israel and its Arab youth
by Nasreen Hadad Haj-Yahya
17 Jews and Arabs: A conditional partnership
18 Israeli democracy at 70: Facts and figures
from the 2017 Israeli Democracy Index
20 IDI in numbers
YOCHEVED LAUREN LAUFER
6 The rift between religion and state
Yedidia Stern and Alan Hoffmann recommend an ‘all in the family’
perspective to overcome challenges between Jews in Israel and the
Diaspora by Maayan Hoffman
Magazine Editor: STEVE LINDE
Copy Editors: ILANIT CHERNICK
Manager of Business Development: REUT LEVY LAURSEN
IDI Director of International Communications: DANAE MARX CALLAF
Graphic Artists: DARIA LEMESHKIN and DANIELA MICHAL GLEISER
Cover photo: Illustration of the planned Democracy Pavilion
in Tel Aviv; Planning and production: Disk-In;
Architecture and Design: Ollech Studio
2
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE

Dear Friends,
APRIL 19 th marks the 70th anniversary
of the establishment of the State of Israel.
The return of the Jewish people to their
ancestral homeland and the creation of an
independent state after the Holocaust is one
of the greatest miracles of the twentieth
century. Israelis have overcome tremendous
odds, made the desert bloom, absorbed
millions of immigrants, created a thriving first-world economy, and
founded a flourishing democracy in a sea of authoritarian hostility.
Part of my life’s mission, and the mission of Taube Philanthropies,
is to support the survival of Jewish life and culture in the face of
unprecedented global threats to the Jewish people, especially in
Israel. The resilience exhibited by Israelis over the last seventy years
owes much to the extraordinary vision put forth by their founding
fathers in the Declaration of Independence of May 15, 1948. I am
therefore very proud to support IDI’s exciting initiative to showcase
the values embedded in the Declaration on the occasion of Israel’s
70th anniversary.
The Democracy Pavilion – a joint venture between IDI and the
City of Tel Aviv – is a world-class exhibition designed to share
the principles upon which the state was founded with millions of
visitors from Israel and abroad.
Situated in the heart of Tel Aviv, at the very site of Israel’s birth,
outside Independence Hall, where David Ben-Gurion signed the
Declaration of Independence, the pavilion will offer an evocative
audiovisual experience grounded in that sacred text. It will also
serve as the starting point for the city’s Independence Trail –
modeled after Boston’s Freedom Trail – on a 1 km stretch of the
historic Rothschild Boulevard.
At this moment, it is important to underscore Israel’s many
challenges and triumphs, while highlighting its moral contributions
to the world of nations and reinforcing the unshakable bond between
Israel and the Diaspora. I am proud to be a part of this opportunity to
display Israel’s democracy to the world, and hope the Pavilion will
inspire pride in Israelis, Jews and supporters of Israel everywhere.
This timely initiative reaffirms the enduring value of these
founding principles for present-day Israel. May these values
continue to guide Israel and its people through the next 70 years of
achievement.
Happy Independence Day,
Thaddeus N. “Tad” Taube
Welcome to the Democracy Pavilion!
TO CELEBRATE Israel’s 70th birthday at
the scene of its birth, the Israel Democracy
Institute and the City of Tel Aviv are
building a world-class visitors’ center
outside Independence Hall. The cover
photograph of this special magazine is an
illustration of what the center will look like.
The center will feature an inspiring
multi-media experience, showcasing the
values embedded in Israel’s Declaration of
Independence. It will serve as a gateway for
millions of Israeli citizens and visitors from
around the world as they embark on the new
Independence Trail, Tel Aviv’s hottest new
tourist attraction.
The center will be inaugurated this
coming April 10th, 70 years after David
Ben-Gurion, the country’s first prime
minister, read out Israel’s Declaration of
Independence, founding the State of Israel.
It will serve as the first station of Tel Aviv’s
Independence Trail, which is modeled after
Boston’s Freedom Trail.
“We aim to design a profound audiovisual
experience that will evoke the values
upon which Israel was founded,” said
Yohanan Plesner, the President of the Israel
Democracy Institute. “The experience will
An illustration of the projected interior of the Democracy Pavilion in Tel Aviv
showcase Israeli democracy to the world
while impressing upon millions of Israelis
the critical importance of preserving Israel’s
democratic vitality – at a time of mounting
challenges to democracy globally.
Ultimately, we aim to reinforce the values
and institutions that have driven Israel’s
success story over the last seven decades.”
IDI
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 3

Democracy
Fertile ground
for growth: the
Jewish State’s
balancing act
MARC ISRAEL SELLEM
Beinisch and Plesner voice optimism
about the future of Israel despite
current tensions and threats to its
democracy By Steve Linde
Yohanan Plesner, the President of the Israel Democracy
Institute, and Justice Dorit Beinisch, the former President of
the Supreme Court of Israel
FORMER SUPREME Court President, Justice
Dorit Beinisch and Israel Democracy
Institute President, Yohanan Plesner, believe
that Israel can strike the right balance between
being a strong democracy and a Jewish
state. In an interview at the Israel Democracy
Institute in Jerusalem, they both said that in
spite of the challenges and threats to Israel’s
fragile democracy as it celebrates its 70th
birthday, they are upbeat about the future of
the country.
How do you see the state of democracy in
Israel today?
Beinisch: I believe our democracy will be
here for years, but it’s a fragile democracy.
There are many dangers we have to overcome
if we truly wish to sustain a liberal democracy,
despite the multifaceted challenges we face in
Israel. Israel has many problems, but I want
to believe and do believe that our democracy
will remain stable in spite of the dangers
that we face. Considering the history of the
State of Israel, it’s actually a miracle that we
have established a democracy here, amidst
such difficult conditions. At the beginning it
was hard, but I believe that we have many
significant achievements to show for it. The
problem will be to uphold our achievements,
given the global climate and the turbulence of
our region. This is a challenge that we, as a
4
nation, will have to confront in the future.
Plesner: There are some unique pressures
on Israel’s democracy, and some global trends
that are threatening Western democracies in
general, as the explosive growth of social
media. Israel’s democracy has proven to
be extremely resilient if we consider the
challenges it has had to overcome since the
establishment of the state. At the same time,
we are discovering how fragile it is. I believe
the next few years are going to continue to
pose significant challenges to our democracy.
Thankfully, I think we can count on the Israeli
public. It turns out Israeli public opinion is
deeply supportive of Israel as a Jewish and
democratic state, and favors constitutional
freedoms such as freedom of speech. Our
institutions have also proven to be strong.
So I believe that we have the two pillars
needed to maintain and foster Israeli
democracy; the support of the people and
robust institutions. But both of these need
nurturing.
Justice Beinisch, how do you see the
relationship between the judicial and
executive branches in the country?
Beinisch: There is tension. It happens
everywhere. It is normal for there to be
a tension between the judiciary and the
legislature, because the judiciary also applies
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE
judicial review on the legislature. Yet in
Israel, judicial review is not practiced enough.
The legislature does not fully comprehend
the significance of judicial review, because
Israel has never had a constitution. We have a
parliamentary system, so extending the court’s
responsibilities to reviewing legislation isn’t
easy, and this tension is endangering the
strength of the court, which is crucial for a
functioning democracy.
As Israel approaches its 70th birthday, do
you think it needs a constitution?
Beinisch: I’m sure we need one, but I’m
not too optimistic about the prospect of
adopting a constitution. Considering the
current situation in the Knesset, I often think
it’d be better to wait, because I don’t think we
can rely on our current legislature to pass the
best possible constitution. Actually, we lost
our constitutional moment when the state was
established. There were many reasons for
that, and since then, the process has been very
difficult. It will take time
Plesner: There are some major underlying
disputes that have yet to be resolved. One
concerns the constitution. We are a functioning
democracy without a foundational document,
which is unique. We haven’t decided basic
questions of religion and state. We left them
undecided, and that creates constant pressures

and tensions. Should Israel be more Jewish or
more democratic, and how do we strike the
right balance? The social fragmentation in
Israeli society adds additional pressure to the
system, as do ongoing security pressures. So
when you take into consideration all of these
pressures, it underscores how remarkable it
truly is that we have preserved a functioning
democracy against all odds.
Some observers argue that there has been
an erosion of democracy in Israel, and
they point to a range of bills that have been
presented to the Knesset. Do you see this
erosion or are you hopeful that this process
will be reversed in the future?
Plesner: Definitely over the past seven or
eight years, we’ve seen a wave of populist
legislative and policy initiatives. This is
obviously bad news for Israeli democracy,
for its strength, resilience and viability. At
the same time, we have to recognize that the
vast majority of those initiatives have been
suspended, mitigated or taken off the table,
and very few have actually passed into law.
If this wave of populist initiatives continues,
it might constitute an increasing threat to
our democracy. But in comparison to other
countries, like some in Eastern Europe,
where we’ve witnessed a subversion of
constitutional arrangements over the past two
years, very little has changed in Israel except
for a tainted discourse.
What do you see as the main challenges
and threats to Israeli democracy, including
the tainted discourse?
Beinisch: The problem is that there is
still no consensus as to what it means to be
a Jewish, democratic state; we don’t know
how to balance these two components of our
state. I think almost everybody agrees that it’s
a Jewish and democratic state. But what does
this mean? There is no agreement between
religious and secular groups on what it means
to be a Jewish state. And moreover, what does
it mean to be a democracy? Our executive
branch and our politicians say democracy is
the rule of the majority. Of course, there is no
democracy without a majority. But this is not
enough. What about the rights of minorities?
What is your own answer to those
questions?
Beinisch: Well, I think we can find the right
balance. There is no doubt that since World
War II, when we speak about democracy
we include the idea of democratic values,
human rights and protecting minorities.
This is understood almost everywhere. I’m
afraid that this understanding is now on
shaky ground, and not only in Israel. We
all understand that it’s not enough to have
a majority. When it comes to Judaism, this
state wasn’t established as a religious state.
Halacha (Jewish law) was not part of our
judicial system from the beginning. Israel is
about Jewish values, a homeland for Jews,
and here lies the tension. What does it mean to
be a Jewish state? I think we have a long way
to go until we can reach a consensus among
all the very different sectors of our society.
Can Israel strike a balance between being a
Jewish and democratic state?
Plesner: Of course, this is the essence of
Zionism, and it is also the essence of what
this institute, the Israel Democracy Institute,
is all about. It’s our role, and it’s what we
expect of our leaders, to try to constantly find
the balance between being a nation state of
the Jewish people and a democratic state that
is committed to equality for all its citizens.
Finding the right balance is a major challenge,
because it’s a reflection of deep tensions
within Israeli society. If you look at some of
the sub-sectors, such as the ultra-Orthodox
community, they’re a growing and important
element of Israeli society. And if you examine
their perception of our democratic values and
institutions, you see what a major challenge it
is to integrate them into our broader systems
such as the job market, military service and
education.
Does Israel also not require a political
solution to the Palestinian issue if it is to
remain a democratic state?
Plesner: As long as the conflict with the
Palestinians is unresolved, it’s yet another
pressure on our democracy. For example, it is
contributing to an ongoing struggle between
the fringes of the settler movement and
the rule of law. This also erodes trust in the
Supreme Court, which must intervene on the
side of the rule of law.
Are you optimistic about the future? What is
your vision, and what is your message to the
next generation?
Beinisch: I once heard someone say
that I’m an optimistic pessimist. Without
optimism, you cannot do anything. But I
must say that I am worried. I’m a worried
optimist. I can’t say what our future will
bring--for our children, and with me, it’s for
my grandchildren already. The aim l, I think,
is to ensure our values continue to thrive in
Israeli society. We also have major gaps in
our society, economic and social, which have
a significant influence on people’s views. So
there’s a lot to do. My message is not to give
up, we fought hard for our achievements, and
we must uphold them by continuing to fight
for them. We cannot lose sight of our main
goal, which is to stay here as a Jewish and
a democratic state. So we have to work for
that. One of the tools is to bridge the gaps
that divide us. As a judge, I can’t say what
the political solution is, but we must strive to
achieve a solution.
Plesner: Alongside our challenges, there is
much reason for optimism. First of all, we see
an Israeli populace that is proud to be Israeli
and uninterested in emigrating. We even see
high levels of pride among Israeli Arabs. More
than half are proud to be Israeli, feel solidarity
and feel relatively little alienation. They feel
alienated from the political system, but not
from the state and from their Israeli identity.
I think this is a good starting point: The vast
majority of Israelis are optimistic about the
future of the Israeli state. With this outburst
of optimism, positive changes are taking
place among the people. The major wave of
immigration from the former Soviet Union
has been successfully integrated, there are
now significant changes taking place among
the ultra-Orthodox community and among the
Arab minority. Almost 80 percent of the Arabs
want their representatives to be part of the
government, in the governing coalition. One
couldn’t imagine this just a few years ago. So
there are a lot to build on. When taking into
account the challenges, I don’t believe any
other state in the world could have preserved
a stable democracy when facing such major
social and security challenges. So when we
take into account all the positive aspects;
the human capital created by our people,
our extraordinary resourcefulness, I think as
long as we hold on to our fundamental values
and continue to innovate, there’s no reason
why in about 30 years, as we move towards
our 100th birthday, we won’t be one of the
leading democracies in the world, and among
the leading economies as well.
Beinisch: I agree with much of your
optimism. We have touched on our many
problems, and we do have many problems,
but we also have to see the bright side. I hope
the bright side will prevail and become the
strong side. I want to believe in it, because
there are many areas in which we can be
proud of the achievements of this country;
cultural, scientific and others. We have fertile
ground for growth.
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 5

Diaspora
YOCHEVED LAUREN LAUFER
Yedidia Stern and Alan Hoffman
The rift between religion and state
Thought leaders recommend an ‘all in the family’ perspective when it comes
to challenges between Jews in Israel and the Diaspora By Maayan Hoffman
MOST JEWS – four out of five in the world,
live in either Israel or the United States. The
Atlantic Ocean has forever geographically
separated these two societies. Yet, despite
the physical distance, American and Israeli
Jewish communities have long celebrated
shared values.
Today, however, the bonds between the
two communities seem to be fraying. Part
of the problem has to do with perceptions
of present-day Israel.
“The State of Israel was historically a
source of pride and hope for many Jews in
the Diaspora,” said Professor Yedidia Stern,
Vice President of the Israel Democracy
Institute, one of the country’s largest
independent centers of research and action.
“However, this is changing…the perception
of Israel today is not as bright as it used to
be.”
Stern identified three areas of conflict
between Jews in Israel and the Diaspora.
The first, he said, is that Israelis are more
conservative while most Diaspora Jews are
6
liberal. Second, while Israelis have voted
for more hawkish governments for the last
two or more decades, American Jews tend
to vote Democratic.
Stern believes these two gaps can
be overcome. He said differences in
perspective provide a richness to Jewish life
and dialogue, so long as the two sides are
tolerant and respect one another.
The third divide, however, threatens to
unhinge an already precarious relationship,
and that is the divide on issues of religion
and state.
In Israel, decisions about Shabbat,
kashrut at state institutions and in the Israel
Defense Forces, military conscription,
conversion to Judaism, marriage, divorce
and other questions of personal status are
all governed by a mechanism that maintains
existing arrangements that date back to
the pre-state period, known as the “status
quo.” Most of the government coalition
agreements signed in recent decades contain
a stipulation that the status quo in matters
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE
of religion be maintained, in order to win
ultra-Orthodox support and ensure ultra-
Orthodox participation in the coalition.
Stern said the government has long
pandered to the needs of the ultra-Orthodox
minority in Israel at the expense of more
moderate Israelis and of Diaspora Jews,
who connect to Israel largely based on
religion. He said, for example, continual
delays on a government decision to upgrade
the egalitarian space at the Western Wall
was “a slap in the face of the Jewish
Diaspora.”
“We do not want a society where one’s
dream is another’s nightmare,” Stern said.
Faithful complex
To understand the complexity of
the situation, one must appreciate the
differences between the way Jews on both
sides of the ocean relate to their faith. In
Israel, the public space is Jewish by nature
– from the language, to the calendar, to the
state holidays, and even street names.

Secular Israeli Jews report taking part
in Jewish rituals that have become deeply
embedded in Israeli culture. For instance,
nearly 87% of Israelis say they attend
or hold a Passover Seder, according to a
January 2017 report by the Pew Research
Center. About a third of Israeli secular Jews
say they keep kosher at home, and a similar
share (30%) fast all day on Yom Kippur.
In the United States, Judaism is expressed
on an individual, familial or communal
level, Stern explained. American Jews
represent only about 2% of the US adult
population, and only about one-third of
American Jews say “all” or “most” of their
close friends are Jewish, according to that
same Pew report.
Alan Hoffmann, CEO and Director
General of The Jewish Agency, said that
while Diaspora Jews are diverse on a micro
level, they all have one macro thing in
common: Jews in the Diaspora live their
Jewish lives without exercising sovereignty.
As such, they are not involved or necessarily
interested in the “hurly burly of political life
in Israel that forces political compromises
that come out of having sovereignty,”
Hoffmann told The Report. Instead, “the
expectations of world Jewry from Israel are
expectations about religious life, which is
not of much interest to many Israelis.”
To help bridge this gap, Hoffmann
recommends a change in perspective.
“We need to think of the Jewish people as
a family,” said Hoffmann. “In every family
there are lots of people who are not the
same as each other, who disagree with each
other – even fundamentally. But there is an
overarching sense of loyalty to the entire
family.”
Hoffmann said the global Jewish
community is quickly losing this notion
of “one family,” in part because of
the deterioration of what was once a
“mutual taking advantage of each of these
populations” by the other. On the one hand,
American Jews for many years would send
money to Israel, creating a Jewish haven
from which they might one day benefit, and
burnishing Israelis’ sense of justification
for serving on the front lines of a Jewish
cause. On the other hand, as American Jews
were assimilating and thriving in the US,
they did not necessarily want to have Israel
interfering in their lives, so keeping Israel at
a distance worked for them.
Today, Israel is thriving and has less
need for American dollars. In fact, after
a hurricane recently ravaged the Jewish
community of Houston, Texas, the State of
Israel signed an agreement with the Jewish
Federation of Greater Houston to transfer
$1 million in aid. It is the first time Israel
has sent such support to American Jews hit
by a natural disaster.
Further, technology advancements
are bringing people together like never
before, making the world smaller and more
accessible, and the Diaspora Jews and Israel
more easily connected. Moreover, easier
travel and programs like Taglit-Birthright
Israel and Masa Israel Journey have brought
a collective 750,000 young Jews to Israel.
The 2017 Pew Research Center report
found that four out of every ten Americans
Jews have been to Israel at least once and
many have been there more than once.
Hoffmann explained that sometimes
when these young Jews decide to stay, they
are quickly disillusioned by their inability
to practice Judaism in their homeland the
way they did back home.
“You have to learn the skills of how
to deal with the different people in your
family,” said Hoffmann.
He recommended the establishment
of “some kind of structure” to allow the
Jewish people to come together and resolve
some of these issues.
“We’ve lost the notion of a place in
which some of the critical issues that create
tension in the family can be explored and
better understood,” said Hoffmann. “Not
everything has to be resolved, but if we
get to the point where people understand
each other better and are more aware of
how different members of the family feel
and why they feel the way they feel, I think
there will be much more understanding.”
Hoffmann said the Jewish Agency could
serve as a convener for this type of meeting
ground.
Tied together
But Stern said that while American
Jews’ opinions must be heard and taken
into account by policymakers, they should
not be equally crucial to Israel’s decisionmaking
processes in all areas.
“For example, Israel should refrain from
conducting its security policies according
to what Americans feel Israel should do,”
said Stern. “If you want to take part in all
decision-making processes in Israel, you
have to pay taxes and send your kids to the
army.”
Nonetheless, Stern and Hoffmann both
feel that Israel should alter its approach
to issues of religion and state to be more
inclusive—and think Diaspora Jews could
be important allies in this regard.
For example, the Knesset is in the final
stages of debate on what is known as the
Nation-State bill, which includes ideas
about the Israeli national anthem and state
symbol, having Saturdays and Jewish
holidays as national days of rest, the Law of
Return, and commitment to Diaspora Jewry,
among other items.
IDI has expressed concern that the bill
in its current iteration upsets the delicate
balance between Israel’s democratic
and Jewish identities, subordinating the
democratic dimension to the Jewish.
Institute leadership proposed a positive
alternative to the bill, clarifying that Israel
will not be governed by religious law and
that any Nation State bill must also protect
the rights of minority citizens.
“World Jewry is watching this bill,” said
Hoffmann. “I think to the degree that this
bill tries to frame the relationship between
Israel and world Jewry, it is a minefield.”
He said if the government wants young
Jews to be excited about, or eventually even
to move to Israel, the country will need to
offer a Judaism “that is attractive to those
young Jews.”
Both men agreed there is scope for action
on other fronts as well. As Professor Stern
put it, “given the ignorance and apathy
among broad swathes of the Israeli public
on the concerns that motivate Diaspora Jews
and the price Israel is paying for inaction on
matters of religion and state, there is room
to launch an educational campaign designed
to sway public opinion on these issues.
Israelis need to be better informed about
these issues so that they may apply pressure
on their representatives to change reality.”
All in all, despite the challenges, Stern
emphasized that we live in what he called
“the golden age of Jewish civilization”,
with the State of Israel giving the Jewish
people sovereignty, self-determination and
a renaissance of Hebrew culture, while the
United States affords Jews more freedom
and security than ever before. So now is not
the time to deepen divisions but to come
together and effect change, building on the
strengths of the two communities.
As Stern concluded, “We can debate
many things, but we need to act together for
“tikkun olam”.
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 7

Military
A people’s army
amidst social change
A round-table discussion with Prof. Yuval Shany,
Maj.-Gen. (ret.) Orna Barbivai and Prof. Amichai Cohen By Arieh O’Sullivan
AGAINST THE backdrop of significant
— and often dramatic social changes,
which Israel is experiencing, it is striking
that the IDF is still perceived as a People’s
Army. Military service continues to be a
rite of passage for young Israelis, and as
revealed in the Israel Democracy Institute’s
annual Democracy Index, the IDF retains
its status as the most trusted government
institution in the eyes of the public. Social
change notwithstanding, it continues to be
perceived as non-partisan, apolitical, and
serving the common good.
“I think this is to the military’s credit,”
says Prof. Yuval Shany, Vice President of
Research and Director of IDI’s Center for
Security and Democracy. “The army gives
Israeli society a sense of security. It protects
the public and provides something which
is truly lacking in our political landscape,
a well-functioning government institution.”
In a roundtable discussion, Israel
Democracy Institute researchers concluded
that the relationship between the IDF and
Israeli society, while being as strong as ever,
is nevertheless evolving and undergoing
significant change.
In Israel, army service is compulsory for
both men and women. For decades the IDF
was perceived as something of a melting
pot, with its activities extending far beyond
core military tasks. These included, among
other things, teaching immigrants Hebrew
and cultivating a shared ethos. Furthermore,
army service opened up opportunities for
young people growing up in disadvantaged
circumstances to “make it” in Israeli society,
with a prominent example being Major
General (ret.) Orna Barbivai, who made
the long journey from the large Mizrahi (of
Asian or African origins) family in which
she grew up, to the one of the highest ranks
8
in the IDF.
At the same time, Prof. Shany ponders
whether the IDF, which has been so
successful in adapting itself to a wide
variety of security threats, will be equally
successful in adapting to major changes in
Israeli society.
“Israeli society is a lot more divided
than in the past; Some say it’s now just a
confederation of different tribes, each of
which subscribes to its own world view. The
common ethos is much narrower than in the
past,” Shany says.
Prof. Amichai Cohen, a Senior Fellow
and Co-Director of the Amnon Lipkin-
Shahak Program on National Security
and Democracy at the Israel Democracy
Institute, notes that IDF’s status and prestige
should not be taken for granted, particularly
when there are growing attempts at its
politicization.
“We have seen politicians try to dictate
a political agenda when it comes to the
army, and this could undoubtedly shake
the public’s confidence. Once the IDF
is perceived as a political institution,
confidence in the IDF (will decline),”
Cohen says.
He added that this was evident in the
case of Israel’s Supreme Court which has
come under incessant fire from politicians,
causing the public’s confidence in it to
shrink.
Until now, the IDF has managed to avoid
such politicization, but the influx of more
religiously observant soldiers into IDF’s
higher ranks over the past 20 years has
generated anxiety as to the danger of the
army becoming “God’s Army”, in which
rabbis, rather than generals, have the final
say.
“The IDF has been very successful in
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE
integrating different groups in Israeli society
into the military, and we have not seen any
dramatic shift, despite the warnings, in the
way that officers treat civilians, adhere to the
military code of ethics or to the rules of just
war,” says Cohen, who is himself Orthodox,
and until recently served as the Dean of the
Faculty of Law at Ono Academic College.
Defiance of a military command, for
example — soldiers refusing to participate
in the 2005 disengagement from Gush
Katif, or soldiers opposing the dismantling
of illegal Jewish settlements in Judea and
Samaria — is relatively rare.
“We have seen refusal here and there. But
the IDF has learned how to deal with this
so far,” says Shany, former Dean of Hebrew
University’s Faculty of Law.
Where the transformation of Israeli society
has had a greater impact on the IDF is in the
draft of ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) soldiers.
From Barbivai’s perspective, as former head
of the IDF Personnel Directorate, she notes
that the decision to draft Haredim required
the army to create conditions that would
ensure that a proper balance be maintained
between respecting the ultra-Orthodox
soldiers’ way of life and the requirements
of military service. She noted that the army
was successful in meeting the specific
challenge of integrating Haredim into its
ranks, while at the same time creating more
opportunities for female soldiers, despite
the issues which women’s’ service creates
for Haredi soldiers.
Still, today only roughly half of women
who are eligible for military service, do
indeed serve; and about a quarter of eligible
men don’t serve, mainly for religious and
health-related reasons.
“The question on this 70th anniversary
of the State is: Has the time come for the

(Left to right) Prof. Amichai Cohen,
Maj.-Gen.(ret.) Orna Barbivai
and Prof. Yuval Shany
MARC ISRAEL SELLEM
army’s role to change?” says Barbivai. “I
personally believe that the army is the glue
that keeps Israeli society together, and if it
changes its character as a People’s Army to
something else, then not only will we not
be the same army, we won’t be the same
nation.”
But Cohen believes the IDF is slowly
moving away from a People’s Army to
a professional one, with more soldiers
required to extend their period of service in
order to serve in top units. Cohen believes
that this issue needs to be opened up to
public debate, and should not be regarded
as an internal military issue.
“I think that for Israeli society there are
clear advantages in having a military that
enjoys broad public support. In a way, this
represents our common fate as Israelis,”
says Shany. “If you take that away, we
would lose our sense of unity, one which
makes it possible for us to see ourselves
as interdependent. In that respect, the army
serves a very important social purpose.
Maybe in the long run, when the situation
improves and we no longer need such a
level of social cohesion and solidarity, I
would certainly be open to reconsidering
this question. However, at this point in time,
as the State of Israel celebrates 70 years,
this may be premature.”
Shany’s words echo those of the Chief
of Staff, Gen. Gadi Eizenkot who at a
workshop recently held at IDI said, “if there
is anything that could jeopardize the IDF’s
ability to fulfill its mission, it would be loss
of the public’s trust. This trust is crucial to
our ability to recruit young people every
year and demand that they serve in the best
units and risk their lives to protect Israel’s
security”.
What they all agree on, is the profound
impact that service in the IDF has on Israeli
society, its economy and its capacity for
innovation.
“I don’t think there is any domain of Israeli
society in which the army doesn’t play an
integral role. Look at our leadership —
youth go into the army and undergo a fasttrack
process of leadership development.
Once they are released, the skills they
acquire are put to good use in civilian life.”
Barbivai says. “Look at the technology
industry. Everyone agrees that our identity
as a Start Up nation is strongly rooted in
the transformation the army underwent to
succeed on the battlefield”. Noting IDF’s
work in areas such as teaching Hebrew
to immigrants and enabling soldiers to
complete their high-school diploma , she
said, “I have no doubt that the impact of the
army is very great”.
Since its very inception, Israel has been
in a state of conflict with its neighbors and
yet it has been able to maintain itself as a
democracy. Barbivai says she can’t imagine
any scenario in which the army would
not take its orders from the government.
Actually, the reality is quite the contrary.
“They (the government) expect the army to
display more activism”.
“The army doesn’t choose its assignments.
It has developed a combat doctrine, though
sometimes, when it comes to the West Bank,
it is not always clear how the army should
enforce that doctrine”, Barbivai says.
She noted the incident in which a
Palestinian teenaged girl (Ahed Tamimi)
slapped an IDF commander in order to
deliberately provoke him to retaliate.
“This aroused a great deal of public
debate. Was his restraint one that reflected
weakness? How could he not react? Or, was
his restraint a sign of strength because he
was committed to refraining from the use
of force against a minor? What matters is
the fact that an army operating in this sort
of reality must develop the capacity to cope
with a wide variety of situations, and in my
eyes – copes with them very well.”
In some cases, the IDF has chosen to
take the moral high ground, particularly
regarding the ongoing conflict with the
Palestinians. Prof. Shany spoke in particular
of the Azaria affair, in which IDF combat
soldier Sgt. Elor Azaria shot an incapacitated
Arab terrorist in the head after an attack in
Hebron. He was court martialed in a highly
public trial that deeply divided the nation.
“In the Azaria affair, military leadership
spoke of values like the purity of arms,
military ethics, and restrained use of lethal
force,” Shany says. “The politicians actually
took a very different line of argument,
and in a sense, criticized the military for
upholding human rights. This was quite an
exceptional turn of events.” How to resolve
these tensions between national security and
human rights, while retaining public trust
are the focus of IDI’s Center for Security
and Democracy.
Clearly, no army is devoid of problems
or violations, especially when subject to
complex situations, as it encounters in
the West Bank. The IDF’s leadership has
developed over time greater sensitivity to
such issues and to the need to take strict
measures and disciplinary procedures
against soldiers who violate orders or
disobey the law” says Shany.
All in all, Cohen, Shany and Barbivai
agree that the IDF needs to adapt both
to changes in Israeli society and to the
nature of modern warfare. But the IDF still
stands out among Israeli institutions for its
excellence in pursuit of its mission.
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 9

Economy
Israel needs to invest
in the skills of the future
Brosh and Aviram-Nitzan urge the government to
train workers for the future job market By Steve Linde
THE MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION
President Shraga Brosh and Daphna Aviram-
Nitzan, Director of the Center for Governance
and the Economy at IDI, are calling on the
government to change its priorities when it
comes to subsidizing education for Israel’s
future labor market.
In an exclusive interview in Brosh’s Tel
Aviv office, they also urged the younger
generation to learn skills that will be
relevant in the coming years, and those
already in the job market to adapt to the
rapidly changing requirements of Israeli
society.
“If you look at what has been going on
in the last 10 to 15 years, you can see that
the Israeli economy is well equipped with
advanced technology, tech-savviness and
innovation,” Brosh said. “This promises
to keep us on the front line and maintain
our competitive edge with our competitors
abroad. This is also what allows us to export
abroad, because as you know the labor
costs are quite high here in Israel, and we
lack other advantages such as cheap raw
materials and so on.
“This means we have to focus on
technology. Right now we are looking to
increase our productivity and create new
technologies to boost our capacity and
competitiveness,” he continued. “Of course,
this will affect the workforce in Israel. The
moment you bring smarter, better machines
to your factories to increase productivity,
you need to employ better-educated
workers, people who understand what they
are doing. You can’t do on-the-job training.
You have to start the training process in
high schools and technical schools. We will
need more engineers and technicians. The
10
scale and orientation of our workers must
change and grow, to allow us to adapt to
new technologies.”
Aviram-Nitzan agreed, urging the
government not to be complacent.
“I would like to focus on the labor market,
which is currently experiencing a record
low 4% unemployment rate,” she said.
“This is a huge achievement for the Israeli
economy, but we shouldn’t be complacent.
If we look toward the not-so-distant future,
according to international experts, the sharp
increase in the use of technology in industry
and throughout the labor market will mean
that many jobs and entire occupations will
become irrelevant. They say that between
30% and 50% of workers will have to
change their occupation.
“The most common example is drivers,
but also there are many others, such as
technicians in the medical profession who
work in ultrasound and x-ray departments, or
people who manage investment portfolios,
or those in the service industry, who will
probably be replaced by machines,” Aviram-
Nitzan explained. “They have to be ready
to learn new skills and new occupations to
adapt to a new labor market. According to
these experts, the technological education
that about half of our students now study
will be irrelevant to the labor market and to
the needs of employers in the future.”
Brosh said that so far, the government has
welcomed their appeal to prepare for the
future.
“I agree 100% with Daphna that skills
are going to have changed, and that’s what
we are working on right now with the
government,” he said. “Together, we are
trying to identify what the needs and skills
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE
will be in the near future, even five years
from now, and of course in the next 15
years. It’s not so easy to do this, but if we
don’t try to prepare properly, we will face a
huge human resources deficit.
“Also,” he said, “it takes time for people
to grow up, go to the army and learn new
skills. Even if you look at the last 70 years,
you will see a big movement from people
who did manual labor with very low skill
sets, and lower levels of job education to
highly educated and skilled workers. Today
it’s not good enough to have good hands;
you have to have a good mind, to learn
fast. That’s what has happened in recent
years, and it will be much more critical in
the future. My appeal to the government
in this regard has been met with a good
response, because in the upcoming budget,
about NIS 3.5 billion has been allocated to
vocational education and training (VET)
over the next 10 years, in addition to what
we are currently investing. This will make
it possible to make the necessary changes.”
Aviram-Nitzan said that while she
applauds what the government is planning
to spend in the coming years, she believes
the government is currently not investing
enough money in teaching workers new
skills.
“The Israeli government is not putting
enough money in this area right now,” she
said. “All over the world, OECD countries
are allocating more than triple what Israel
is investing in their current budgets. If the
government wants people to stay employed
in today’s market, they have to incentivize
employers and the employees to go and
learn new skills in order to be able to adapt
to new technologies. The market will not do

MARC ISRAEL SELLEM
Daphna Aviram-Nitzan, the Director of the Center for Governance and the Economy at
the Israel Democracy Institute, with Shraga Brosh, the President of the Manufacturers
Association of Israel
this by itself. Employers don’t have enough
money, or the mindset or the time for that
because they don’t make long-term plans
for the future.
“They don’t see the whole picture because
they are focused soley on the profitability
of their businesses. They have to survive
and grow. I believe it is the government’s
responsibility to lead change in the market
and shift it in the right direction, the
government must encourage employees to
learn new skills, it won’t happen by itself,”
Aviram-Nitzan emphasized.
She warned that if action is not taken, the
economic gap in Israel could widen further.
“Both the hi-tech sector and the rest of
the economy are already suffering from a
mismatch of workers, and that’s why there
is such a gap between rich and poor. The hitech
sector is faced with a huge obstacle, it is
in need of more engineers and technicians,
which the market cannot supply. In addition,
other sectors also needs occupations that the
market has not provided. So the government
must roll up its sleeves, get involved and
bridge these gaps. If we don’t deal with this
now, both the Israeli economy and society
will face a dramatic crisis. I fear that this
gap could grow even further between those
who have the technological skills and
those who don’t, who will be increasingly
redundent to the future job market.”
Brosh urged Israelis to engage in what he
called “life-long self-learning.”
“Today it only takes three or four years for
the latest technologies to become irrelevant.
If people want to keep their jobs and remain
relevant to the future job market, they have
to engage in a constant process of selflearning”.
“This is the education system’s
responsibility,” he highlighted. “It has
to teach the new generation to continue
learning on a permanent basis, from the
moment they finish high school until they
reach retirement. This was not the case in
the past. If you learned to be a carpenter or
a welder, you could stay one until the end
of your career. Today, every three or four
years you have to move forward, and the
government has to provide you with the
skills to do it.”
Aviram-Nitzan added: “It’s a huge
challenge for the educational system to
provide us with the people that the labor
market will need in 20 years time. Half of
the children who are starting school now
will work in occupations that may not yet
exist. So we need to provide our children
with tools for life-long learning, selflearning
and technological abilities. Most
importantly, we need to teach our children
to adapt to rapid and significant changes,
because this will be the new reality 10 or 20
years from now. I think everyone who gets
an education should think about what he or
she is going to do with it when they grow
up and go to work. It doesn’t have to be a
technical occupation but it must be relevant
to the needs of the market.
“I would just like to add that If we want
to maintain the stability of our Israeli
democracy, it is very important that people
get the right education so that they can
support themselves, and live and work
with dignity in a stable environment,” said
Aviram-Nitzan.
Asked about his advice to young Israelis,
Brosh said with a smile: “Come and be part
of the Israeli industry. Believe me, it’s a big
challenge. You have to go to high school,
study technical courses, go to the army, then
try to gain experience in those areas you
learned about. When you get out of the army,
some people will directly begin working,
and some will go on to study at higher
educational institutions, universities or
technical colleges. My advice is, come back
to the industry you’re interested in because,
as I said, technology will constantly change
in the future. For the younger generation,
it’s a big challenge to learn new things and
adapt to new situations and standards here
in Israel.”
Addressing their optimism about the
future of the country’s economy as it
approaches its 70th anniversary, Brosh
said: “First of all, as a manufacturer, I am
always optimistic, otherwise I could never
run a factory. Seriously though, I think we
need to focus on closing the gaps between
the different sectors in Israeli economy
and society. We don’t like the fact that this
gap is growing bigger and bigger. It’s very
risky. One of the ways to close this gap is
education. Education is the key to making
more money, and adapting to the needs of
our society. But yes, I am optimistic, and
I’m sure that the next 70 years will be even
better than the last 70 years.”
Aviram-Nitzan added that “at IDI, we
try to work with partners in civil society,
the private sector and government, to drive
forward-looking thinking, planning and
policymaking. I continue to be optimistic
about our future, despite the many
challenges. I see an awakening among
policymakers, employers and labor unions
with regards to the need for change. The
future is uncertain, but if we work together,
we will be ready for whatever it brings.”
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 11

VIEWPOINT TEHILLA SHWARTZ ALTSHULER
Media in crisis: Who should decide
what enters the public domain?
AT A TIME when everyone is talking about “fake news,” it’s
fascinating to see the release of a movie like Steven Spielberg’s The
Post, a film that portrays the publication of the Pentagon Papers in
1971, and their remarkable content regarding the Vietnam War.
The Post is another in a long line of movies depicting the
relationship between the media and the subject of their investigations,
such as All the President’s Men from 1976, on the Watergate scandal,
and especially the 2015 Oscar-winning movie Spotlight, on the
systematic cover-up child molestation by the Catholic Church in
Boston, which was adapted for the silver screen by Josh Singer, who
also created the adaptation of The Post.
These two recent movies complement one another. While
Spotlight is about how a story is developed; the meticulous research
involved such as interviewing victims of sexual abuse, crossreferencing
sources, searching archives and libraries, and laying
bare an institutional conspiracy of silence, The Post explores the
question; who decides whether a story should be published? Part of
the discussion about whether to publish the Pentagon Papers takes
place in the US Supreme Court, which the paper’s editors petition to
in order to exercise their right to freedom of the press, arguing that
“the founding fathers gave the free press the protection it must have
to fulfil its essential role...to serve the governed, not the governors.”
No less important than a storyline, is the debate between the
editors and the paper’s owners and shareholders about money as a
means to exercise freedom of expression.
Should those with the deepest pockets be the ones to decide
what enters the public domain? What are the interests of a media
corporation’s shareholders? Are they aligned with the interests of
the public?
At the Globes Business Conference in January, Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu said: “The weak cannot survive.”
Netanyahu meant the State of Israel, but the same sentiment could
be applied to media corporations. Nowadays, the entire media
milieu in Israel [and around the world] is on its knees, whether
due to financial woes, huge subscription losses, lack of a stable
business model, threats from social networks and their siphoning
off wholesale advertising revenue, or due to political challenges –
threats from changes in media regulation, and harsh attacks on the
media made by politicians.
Against this backdrop, we need to recognize that weak media
organizations are unable to conduct meaningful investigative
journalism. They don’t have the resources to invest in long months
of research that can sometimes lead nowhere. They are wary of libel
suits and the huge sums that may be required of them to pay in order
to settle them. They censor themselves in order not to lose the few
advertisers they have left. When this is the reality, exposes like those
recounted in The Post and Spotlight are no longer feasible.
Some would claim that in the brave new world of social media,
there is no need for old-school journalism. Now, all of the information
is out there, and all that’s needed is someone who is willing to share
it with others.
The recent #MeToo campaign is just one example of excellent
investigative journalism, fueled by individual posts and tweets.
But, in reality, this is an illusion. First, old-school, traditional
journalism offers us the necessary context to interpret the vast
swathes of information produced by social media. It provides a
narrative with a beginning, a middle, and an end, which enables us to
connect the dots. Without it, in a world bombarded by information,
we are left confused and unable to comprehend.
Second, social media networks also have a dark side. The algorithms
which dictate how information is shared and with whom, and the
never-ending desire of the major platforms to grow and increase
their revenue, have created fertile ground for states, organizations,
and individuals who seek to spread disinformation rather than share
news. As noted by BuzzFeed in 2016, “The top fake election news
stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than the top
election stories from 19 major news outlets combined.”
It’s no coincidence that the decline of public trust in the media
has come to a stop over the last year, both in Israel and the United
States. Nor is it a surprise that there has been a noticeable rise in
subscriptions to the major newspapers.
This is the public’s reaction to the assault on news organizations
and accusations of “fake news,” and to the understanding that social
networks are not quite as free and open a medium as we initially
thought they were.
IDI’s project on media reform is tackling questions regarding
the role of traditional media – as an exposer of corruption and
institutional failure; as a defender of victims, the weak, and the
silenced; and as a guardian of our democracy.
This role is now more crucial than ever during a time that might, on
the face of it, appear to be a golden age for free speech. In fact, this
is an immense opportunity for journalism to renew its commitment
to professional ethics and public integrity, and to display the same
courage and determination that eventually find their way to the silver
screen.
Dr. Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler is a Senior Fellow at the Center for
Democratic Values and Institutions and Director of the Media
Reform Program and the Open Government Program at the Israel
Democracy Institute
12
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE

VIEWPOINT OFER KENIG
Women in politics:
The 2018 municipal elections
are a golden opportunity
THE UPCOMING Israeli municipal
elections this October, are a golden
opportunity to increase the scarce
representation of women in local
government.
In contrast to the substantial
improvement in the representation of
women in the Knesset (from nine to
34 female MKs in just two decades),
the change in local government lags
behind. A look at Israel’s fifty largest
cities reveals that only about 17% of city
council members are women.
Among these fifty cities, there is only
one female mayor: Miriam Feirberg
of Netanya. In contrast, in many other
countries, there is a sharp rise in the
number of female mayors. As of 2017,
more than 20% of mayors in US cities,
with populations larger than 30,000,
are women. Global cities such as Paris,
Madrid, Rome, Tokyo, Montreal, and
Prague all currently have female mayors.
The absence of substantial numbers of
women in Israeli local politics is far from being a mere statistic.
According to theories of political representation, the underrepresentation
of social groups in decision making bodies fosters
sentiments of exclusion, frustration, and alienation. It also
undermines the effectiveness of promoting the interests of these
groups in the public sphere. Thus, the importance of women in public
positions embodies ramifications beyond proper representation or
political visibility.
The Israel Democracy Institute’s political reform program
recently analyzed the operational patterns of Members of Knesset.
The research found that female MKs are more involved than their
male counterparts in promoting bills and presenting parliamentary
questions on issues concerning family affairs, children affairs and
women’s rights. Therefore, the appointment of more women to key
political positions is likely to result in the promotion of a variety of
issues that otherwise may not be properly addressed.
Our research has also found that local government is the dominant
career path on the way to national-level politics. Underrepresentation
of women in local politics could make it harder to further improve
the representation of women in national politics. It is therefore vital
to foster a substantial cadre of local female politicians.
MARC ISRAEL SELLEM
Yael German, the former mayor of Herzliya,
now serves as a member of Knesset for
Yesh Atid
How, then, can we persuade more
women to throw their hats into the ring
and campaign in local elections? Over the
past years, several NGOs have launched
various programs intended to motivate,
train and assist women to participate in
local politics.
For example, We Power operates
a program named Women for Future
Leadership; Nivcharot Union offers
a toolbox for incumbent female
local council members and potential
candidates; and Women Against Violence
encourages Arab women to compete in
local elections.
One should also add the pioneering
efforts of ultra-Orthodox women to break
cultural and religious barriers and present
themselves as political representatives
of a large public sector with specific
interests.
THE STATE must also be an active agent
of change in this effort. Whilst this should
not be done through compulsory measures, such as banning parties
that forbid female candidates to participate in elections, Israel
should adopt a clear moral position by creating incentives for
parties to include more female candidates. A precedent on this issue
was established four years ago and is about to be tested for the first
time in the coming municipal elections.
The Knesset amended the local elections law and now incentivizes
municipal parties in which at least one-third of their elected
councilors are women. Even if the financial bonus is not very
high (a 15% addition to the public financing the party receives),
this institutional incentive is groundbreaking and in-line with IDI’s
policy recommendations from our project on the representation of
women in politics.
While the equal representation of women in politics remains a
faraway goal, incentives by the state and nonprofit organizations
are invaluable to removing the barriers and paving the way forward,
and IDI will continue to promote our policy recommendations in
this ever critical endeavor.
Dr. Ofer Kenig is a researcher in the Israel Democracy Institute and
a Senior Lecturer at Ashkelon Academic College
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 13

VIEWPOINT GILAD MALACH AND LEE CAHANER
A balanced policy: The key
to ultra-Orthodox integration
MOST PEOPLE tend to think of ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) society
as being closed off and isolationist. Yet over the last few years,
this community which numbers more than a million people and
represents some 12% of the population in Israel, has been influenced
in a variety of ways by the broader Israeli society in which it is
situated.
If we look at the lifestyle of Haredi Jews in other countries – in
the United States, Britain, and Belgium – we see that it is common
there for men to work from a relatively young age and not just to
study, and that most Haredi schools teach core secular subjects
as part of their curriculum. These Haredi Jews travel on public
transport without gender segregation, and some of them go on to
pursue higher education at secular institutions. However, the Haredi
community in Israel has been far more extreme in its separatism,
paradoxically, because of the state’s Jewish character. The fact
that the Haredi parties often play a pivotal role in the formation
of government coalitions, has enabled them to consistently garner
special state budgets and other forms of support, as well as receive
an exemption from military service so that their men can spend
years studying in Yeshivas.
This isolationism is reflected in the Haredi community’s way of
life. For example, the ultra-Orthodox community is geographically
separated from the secular population and maintains its own media
outlets, an independent education system, and a very different
leisure culture from that of Israeli society at large.
However, IDI’s latest Statistical Report on the ultra-Orthodox
in Israel reveals some new and interesting trends: Over the last
decade, there has been a rise in the average age of first marriages;
the number of Haredi students in higher education has soared,
increasing tenfold; and the percentage of ultra-Orthodox girls
taking high school matriculation exams has risen by around 40%,
and now stands at 51%. There has even been a transformation when
it comes to the most controversial issue, military service.
Today, around one-third of ultra-Orthodox males serve in the IDF,
a sharp rise in comparison to the numbers just over a decade ago.
So what has changed? Just as “no man is an island,” the Haredi
community cannot live in total segregation from its surroundings.
While the community has worked hard to build buffers against the
outside world, it has also been forced to respond to the volatile
economic environment in Israel and elsewhere – a rise in housing
prices and the cost of living; technological changes, such as the
proliferation of the Internet and smartphones, and changes in the
labor market that increasingly require professionalization and
academic training.
However, this new flexibility demonstrated by the Haredi
community does not signify a surrender of identity, but rather a
quest for ways to preserve ultra-Orthodoxy in the 21st century – to
preserve ultra-Orthodox identity, with a modern twist.
Meanwhile, government policy has also changed. In recent years,
special programs to integrate the Haredi community have been
incorporated into the IDF, academia, and professional employment
training.
These programs, combined with the economic and technological
constraints described above, have played a particularly important
role in the transformation we are witnessing in ultra-Orthodox
lifestyles.
Evidence of the far-reaching effects of government policy can
be seen in the less encouraging figures published recently, which
show that after employment rates of ultra-orthodox men grew
consistently for a decade, reaching up to 52% in 2016, we saw a
decline of 2% in 2017.
This decline is a result of the current government’s decision
to restore financial incentives for unemployed members of the
ultra-Orthodox community, such as stipends for full-time yeshiva
students, an increase in child benefit payments, and financial
support for child daycare even for families in which the father is
unemployed.
There is no doubt then, that government policy has a critical
impact on these social changes. Too harsh a policy toward the
ultra-Orthodox community may only serve to strengthen those
conservative forces that seek to prevent the integration of its
members into Israeli society. But the opposite approach, i.e.
policies that are all carrot and no stick, has proved over the years
to be ineffective.
Accordingly, a sound policy for Israel’s ultra-Orthodox society
must adopt a balanced approach. One that will allow optimal
integration into Israeli society for those who seek it, without
imposing demands on the ultra-Orthodox community that they
cannot possibly meet.
Ultra-Orthodox society has drawn closer and closer to mainstream
Israeli society in recent years, and the state’s policy makers must
now act wisely to ensure that these processes continue apace, for the
good of both the ultra-Orthodox population and Israeli society as a
whole.
Dr. Gilad Malach is the Director of the Ultra-Orthodox in Israel
Program at the Israel Democracy Institute
Dr. Lee Cahaner is a Researcher in the Ultra-Orthodox in
Israel Program at the Israel Democracy Institute and head of
interdisciplinary studies at Oranim Academic College of Education
14
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE

The ultra-Orthodox
community in Israel
Select facts and figures
The report brings to light many significant changes
and trends among the ultra-Orthodox community,
including its participation in academic studies and
information on employment conditions.
Education
Employment
Population
Lifestyle
This research project was made possible by the generous
support of the Russell Berrie Foundation
and the UJA-Federation of New York
To read the full report: en.idi.org.il/publications/20879 70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 15

VIEWPOINT NASREEN HADAD HAJ-YAHYA
Progress in informal education plan:
A victory for Israel and its Arab youth
AS BOTH a mother and a scholar with an MA in education and
social geography, I believe in the power of informal education.
Until now, unfortunately, Israel’s Arab citizens have had limited
access to informal education programs. But that is changing.
My team at the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) has completed a
master plan for informal education in the Arab Israeli community.
We assessed the situation, analyzed needs, and developed
recommendations. Now, we are disseminating our proposal to the
relevant partners and implementing it together.
Advancing informal education in Arab communities in Israel
could play a pivotal role in reducing local crime, violence and
vandalism, and increase leadership, social cohesion and positive
personal and cultural identity.
What does informal education actually mean?
It can be any kind of informal or experiential learning that
happens inside or outside the classroom. This includes sports, art,
educational tours or hikes, computers or robotics courses, career
counseling, scouting and youth groups.
Israeli Arabs have had limited access to informal education
compared to Jewish Israelis, while also suffering from higher rates
of poverty, school dropouts and delinquency.
A 2008 report by Mifneh found that only 5% of Arab youth
participate in informal education versus 30% of Jewish youth, and
that the Israel Association of Community Centers – the country’s
largest youth movement provider – operates in only 37% of Arab
municipalities versus in 70% of Jewish municipalities.
The gap stems from both structural and cultural factors.
Informal education generally in Israel is largely unregulated
and resources for such programs are handled by individual
municipalities. Arab municipalities are among the country’s
weakest, in part due to years of disproportionately low government
funding. There’s a shortage of qualified staff, and a lack of cultural
exposure to, and familiarity with, the benefits of informal education
among Arab leaders.
Additionally, many Arab municipalities lack the appropriate
infrastructures, such as community centers, playing fields, game
courts, libraries and parks. And with so much of the population
living under the poverty line, parents could not afford to enroll their
children in these programs anyway.
Yet, we know that if we can deliver informal education programs
to Arab youth, they could prove life-changing. New role models
could open their minds to a new future with higher education and
better jobs. Also, as Arab and Jewish youth engage in similar extracurricular
activities there will be greater integration, which will
build mutual respect at younger ages and improve the opportunities
available to Arab citizens of Israel in all aspects of Israeli life.
As such, over the last several months, IDI has enhanced the
understanding of informal education’s importance for Arab-Israeli
children and youth and has served as an impetus for policy changes.
We have met with leading players and decision-makers in
government on the national and municipal levels and leading
NGOs working in the Arab-Israeli community. We have actively
participated in relevant forums and conducted our own conference
on 10 years of the Israeli government’s socioeconomic activity
in Arab society. At each opportunity we shared the plan with our
partners in government, doing our best to ensure their buy-in and
maximize the chances our recommendations will be implemented.
The plan includes a roadmap for integrating informal education
into every local authority, as well as recommendations for how
to develop culturally appropriate informal education tools and
content for Israel’s Arab citizens. This roadmap includes financial
collaboration with several ministries and nonprofits, setting up a
dedicated unit of the Education Ministry to allocate resources to
informal education in Arab society, and a plan for training the staff
needed to carry out such a plan. We hope also to set up a system that
will enable Arab municipalities to share best practices.
A key to the plan’s implementation is turning parents into
advocates and agents of change. Accordingly, we recommend
that the Education Ministry run a marketing campaign to increase
awareness as to the advantages of informal education among Arab
parents, and hold workshops for parents.
Many of the recommendations in the draft report are already
being acted upon. For example, in our research, we discovered that
mixed cities – joint Arab-Jewish communities in Israel – did not
receive budgets for informal education among the Arab population.
This issue is being addressed.
Further, we’ve convinced the Education Ministry’s Director of
Informal Education for the Arab Community that existing materials
used in Jewish programs could not simply be translated from
Hebrew to Arabic but had to be redone with Arab cultural needs
and interests in mind. This is transformative.
How will we know when we’re successful?
When we see increased participation in informal education
activities, enrollment in leadership development programs,
involvement in sports and recreational activities, and volunteerism
among the young people, fewer cases of risky behavior among
Arab teens, and greater cohesion between Israel’s Arab and Jewish
populations.
Implementing IDI’s masterplan for informal education in the
Arab-Israel community would be a victory for Israel and its Arab
youth.
Nasreen Hadad Haj-Yahya is a Co-Director of the Arab-Jewish
Relations Program at the Israel Democracy Institute
16
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE

Jews and Arabs:
A conditional partnership
The Arab citizens of Israel represent a little over
20% of the state’s overall population. That 20%
is comprised of a majority of Muslims (83.5%),
Christians (8.9%) and Druze (7.6%). The complex
relationship between Jews and Arabs in the State
of Israel exists on three not necessarily interrelated
levels – state, societal and interpersonal.
The study shows that definite, substantial
disagreements exist between Jews and Arabs on
a state level. Yet, relations on a societal and to an
even greater extent personal level, are less tense.
In certain areas, the situation is actually quite
positive, as indicated by the data here below.
Sense of Belonging to Israeli Society
Relations in Society
To read the full report: en.idi.org.il/publications/18942
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 17

Israeli
democracy
at 70
facts and
figures
from
the 2017
Israeli
Democracy
Index
The Index examines multiple aspects of
Israel’s democracy, including its structure,
effectiveness and values. The Index offers a
multifaceted, up-to-date portrait of Israeli
public opinion, identifying ongoing trends as
well as new phenomena in the political and
social arenas.
To read the full report: en.idi.org.il/
publications/20280
18
70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE

70 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE 19

Facebook Followers
Hebrew
55,500
English
16,000
Publications
43
Newsletter Subscribers TV Interviews Press Mentions
17,000 100 1400
IDI in NUMBERS
Op Eds published
in print media
265
Radio Interviews
Seminars,
roundtables
and other
events
200 54 19
IDI research quoted by
judges in court rulings
Meetings with Knesset
members, ministers
and government officials
Presentations before
Knesset Committees
Policy statements sent
to Knesset committees
139 60 36
The Israel Democracy Institute | 4 Pinsker Street. POB 4702. Jerusalem
Tel. +972-2-530-0888 | en.idi.org.il | info@idi.org.il |