Overriding the Supreme Court the Smart and Democratic Way

by Emanuel Shilo, Editor, Besheva Newspaper, translated by Hillel Fendel

1. The weekly anti-judicial reform protests have waned considerably in recent weeks, and it's not only because of the summer heat. Nor can it be attributed solely to a mass exodus to summer vacations abroad, or to the fact that the Knesset is in recess, or to the general tiredness, both physical and ideological, that has overtaken many of the protestors. A more precise reason would be that everyone is anxiously awaiting the results of the petitions against the recently-passed judicial reform outlawing "Not Reasonable" as a reason to nullify a duly-passed Knesset law; these cases are scheduled to be heard by the entire Supreme Court in another ten days or so. 

But the most precise reason for the ebbing of the protests is that there is barely anything to protest against! From the large, far-reaching judicial reform package that Justice Minister Yariv Levine presented several months ago, barely any of it is left on the table. 

It's true that for the hard core protestors, judicial reform had nothing really to do with the protests in the first place; they wanted nothing less than the toppling of the government, with judicial reform just their excuse. These professional protestors began their demonstrations years ago outside the Balfour St. home of Prime Minister Netanyahu. The main excuse then was the indictments handed down against him. Even before the judges in the case told the prosecutors how weak their bribery case against the prime minister was, the protest leaders quickly pivoted and adopted the judicial reform as their new "main" reason for protest. If judicial reform truly drops from the public eye, a new excuse can be expected to be used – for as long as the government still stands. 

But while the hard core can be expected to keep the protests going even for years, these will just be a nuisance, not more. To maintain a long series of genuine country-paralyzing protests, they need hundreds of thousands of people. How were these attained until now? Simple: they came out in droves only because of the lying propaganda that presented the judicial reform legislation as a bona fide drive to turn Israel into a dictatorship. No other excuse would actually get reservists in the Air Force, IDF Intelligence and the like to threaten not to serve. They are basically patriotic Israelis, after all, who agreed to weaken Israel militarily and economically only because they were lied to that Israel's government ministers and Knesset majority are preparing a revolution to overthrow Israel's democracy.  

2. There are in fact indications that the nationalist government's plans for genuine judicial reform are waning and ebbing away. For one thing, there are those on the right who see the societal crisis that has developed, and the threats of civil war, as well as the economic and security damage that has resulted – and feel that the government should unfurl a white flag and announce that further judicial reform has been placed on hold. And there are others on the right who agree with them simply because of the cold reality that a Knesset majority to pass additional such legislation is not likely to be found. Still others say there's no point in continuing since in any event the Supreme Court will do as it pleases, including abolishing any judicial changes it doesn't like. 

However, to give up now is not a good idea. For one thing, it would mean the perpetuation of the judicial system's many egregious faults and distortions, and this is a high price to pay. In addition, though it can be hoped that ending judicial reform will ensure that the protestors go home and leave us in peace, there is no guarantee that this will happen. After succeeding in thwarting a homogeneous, stable, 64-MK government, why should the coalition of leftists and elites not continue to use the same unconventional weapons to further trample the democratic majority and the government on every issue regarding which it holds a differing opinion? Since it is far from clear that this will not happen, why should we cave in now and possibly motivate them to continue their destructive and non-democratic behavior?

3. It has been reported that Netanyahu intends to pass into law only one more judicial reform: a change in the composition of the Committee for the Selection of Judges, to give the largely left-wing judges less of a decisive say in the appointment of new High Court judges. In this scenario, further changes would be made only in consensus with the opposition. 

Allow us to note that if it has been decided to suffice with only one more change, it is far from certain that the most important of the planned reforms is a change in the Committee.

As far as is currently known, the idea of giving the Committee a clear government majority, so that it could fill Supreme Court vacancies as it pleases, is no longer on the table. There are other proposals instead that would simply provide more balance. One idea, which might be the most far-reaching compromise the coalition would be willing to accept, is that the Committee would be comprised of an equal number of members from each of the coalition and the opposition, with no judges or Bar Association members. 

Certainly this idea is considerably better than the present situation, in which the government and the coalition have only three representatives out of nine. But still, it is not at all democratic, in that it gives the opposition minority equal power to that of the coalition majority. In any case, this formula is also not expected to pass without a strong fight – for why should Chief Justice Esther Hayut and her colleagues give up their place and power in the committee?  If we have to fight, then, why should we not fight for an even better proposal for the nationalist camp, such as having the judges elected in the Knesset Constitution Committee or in the Knesset itself, where the coalition always has a majority?

Another proposal, suggested by former Justice Minister Chaim Ramon, would also be a slight improvement for the right-wing – but very slight. Not for this did we make such a major effort to introduce judicial reform. If it is impossible today to make a major change in the composition of the Committee, it would perhaps be better to wait for a more favorable opportunity rather than to suffice with such a minimum achievement.

4. In any event, many years will pass before a change in the Committee for the Appointment of Judges will actually make a real difference in the High Court's decisions. Even if right now, judges with a Jewish-national outlook would be appointed, years will pass before they amass sufficient seniority to hear important cases. In fact, the composition of the Supreme Court for the coming few years does not look very good for the nationalist camp. Activist judges will control the Court for the coming years, which will continue to chip away at the authority of the government to rule and of the Knesset to legislate. It appears that the only way out is to restore these bodies their original authorities via a general, gradated "overruling clause." 

That is, it is hereby proposed as follows: The law must state that if the Supreme Court wishes to hear a case involving the possible overturning of a Knesset law, all 15 of its justices must hear the case, and may overrule the law only if at least 10 justices vote to do so. In such a case, the Knesset can then overrule the overruling with a majority vote of 61 MKs. If 13-14 justices vote to overrule the law, then a special Knesset majority of 65 would be required in order to restore it. And if all 15 High Court justices feel the law must be overturned because it violates a Basic Law, then 80 MKs would be needed to override the overruling and reinstate the Knesset law. 

It would seem that if the coalition has the power only to pass one law of judicial reform, the above would be the correct law to pass. 

Big News: Haredi Students Receiving Degrees, Entering Workforce, in Droves

by Kobi Nachshoni, Besheva Newspaper, translated & by Hillel Fendel

It's hard to remain unmoved by the findings of a survey publicized earlier this month showing the rapid growth of haredim (sometimes called ultra-orthodox Jews) in Israel's workforce. The numbers, crunched by Israel's Central Bureau of Statistics, show that the percentage in haredi society of those who officially work has reached a record high of 55.8%. This is still a far cry from the 63% target set by the government back in 2020, and much further still from the 87% of the general Jewish populace. But the trend is positive and very encouraging: After nearly a decade with no real change in the percentages, the number of gainfully employed haredim is clearly rising, and appears on track to continue to do so. 

Just a few days after the release of the above, apparently coincidentally, another report was published indicating a similar trend. This time it was the Council for Higher Education that released its findings that the 5782 school year (2021-22) showed a jump of over 25% in the number of haredi recipients of academic degrees. Among men, the increase was 18%. That is, 4,725 haredi students received degrees last year (up from 3,760 the year before), which is double the number six years ago, and three times that of a decade ago. Even more significantly, the number of M.A. and Ph.D. degrees awarded to haredi candidates this past year was up 45%, reaching a record high of 1,085. This indicates clearly that the haredi sector is taking the idea of higher education and making a comfortable living more seriously now, and no longer suffices with the very basics. 

What has brought about this change? The sour-faced commentators, such as Nechemia Strassler of Haaretz, have various ideas, such as that the jobs being filled by the haredi graduates are unnecessary and a waste of taxpayers' money. Politicians also have their explanations, having to do with themselves, such as that of Labor Minister Yoav Ben-Tzur (Shas), who said that the welcome increase is "the fruit of our efforts, and thanks to wide-spread investment." Not too surprising.

But the true experts, those who have no position to defend, have a different approach. They mainly attribute the change to economic circumstances in which the government cannot really take pride, such as the rising cost of living and interest rates. These incentivize young haredi parents to realize that they must place full-time Torah study on hold while they seek ways to increase their income. 

Economist Dr. Eitan Regev, Deputy Director of Research at the Haredi Institute for Public Affairs, predicted some months ago that the new economic circumstances, including the changes in the mortgage market, would have this effect. He now estimates that "this is only the tip of the iceberg," and that the percentages of haredim in the workforce will soon reach 60% of their sector. "There's no doubt that the trend will continue," he said. "The only question is how fast." He added that the rise of interest rates, affecting mortgages quite significantly, could even have an effect on haredi-sector birth rates. 

According to Dr. Regev, haredi families with only one breadwinner have always lived on the edge financially, consistently managing to overcome the periodic "bumps in the road" that hit their pockets. These included the cutting of child allowances, reductions in other government stipends, and the tax on disposable dishes and sugary drinks (both of which are consumed in large measures in large families). But the latest developments, Regev says, are more significant than what they have experienced until now, and are actually "a watershed event." The increase in interest rates not only costs them hundreds of shekels a month in mortgage payments, but actually affects the mechanism by which they survived such challenges in the past and still managed to both buy apartments and save money for their children. How so?

Regev explains that these young families no longer have the strong financial backbone that their parents used to provide, enabling them to purchase an apartment with no need for a large down payment. This, together with increased mortgage prices, "was a sharp and very unexpected jump that threw them off balance. Not only can't they buy apartments, but they also face climbing rent prices."

Until now, the rising cost of living caused these families to turn first to seek to increase the wife's earning capacity, by choosing more lucrative professions than those they had customarily worked in, and by increasing the number of hours they worked. The main goal was to maintain the husband's level of Torah study. But around four years ago, this began to change, leading to the great increase in academic degrees this past year, most of which was due to women who began their studies around 2018 and graduated now.

Regev feels that the current trend will not stop even if interest rates begin to drop. This is because the increasing numbers of young haredi husbands in the labor market has already had its effect on their society, and the resulting cultural changes are already in place. Regev says that the next step may well be that many parents will provide their young children with math and English studies at home alongside their Cheder learning, to ease their expected integration into higher education and employment.

Itzik Krombi, who heads an employment and innovation center for haredim, and who authored the curiosity-piquing book, "When the Haredim Become the Majority," has his own opinions on this topic: "It's not just because of the current economics. Certainly that has some influence, but the bottom line is that it's happening now, and not during the previous government, when Lieberman was Finance Minister [and enacted some decrees that particularly hurt the haredi public], but rather now, when monthly allowances to young Torah scholars are at a record high!" 

Krombi feels that the main difference now is a result of changes that the State and many employers have made to facilitate comfortable work and study environments for haredim, suited to their needs without a danger to their spiritual needs or religious life-style. This paved the way for many haredim looking for an economic solution to take the first not-simple step with relative ease. 

"The Council for Higher Studies opened new tracks, the Labor Ministry opened more guidance centers, and the MeGo Program for haredi integration in hi-tech has expanded," Krombi numbered off some of the factors. "Many employers now better understand how to work with haredim. There are also increasingly more opportunities for men and women to work and study separately, and this is the result."

Krombi also notes another very welcome aspect of this story: the choice of many of the haredi graduates to move into new professions such as medicine and engineering, as opposed to the traditional education and law careers of many of their predecessors. "We have here an upgrade not only in quantity but also in quality, and this is our biggest challenge," he said.

Krombi agrees with Dr. Regev that the new situation is likely to have a broad societal influence, way beyond just the families whose income has now increased. "The young fathers and husbands see their friends who have gone out to work and still remained haredim, and this gives them the confidence that they can do the same thing," he said. "The rabbis, too, see their students leaving the kollel but remaining men of Torah just as they were before – and they can thus encourage others to take this step as well. It's a process that takes time, but it is clear that the sharp increase we're seeing is not just temporary, but rather a trend that is here to stay. We see this on the ground as well."

Attorney Avraham Yustman is the Deputy Director of the KEMACH Foundation <https://kemach.org>, whose website says it "provides effective solutions to increase the income and welfare of Haredi society in Israel, through career guidance, scholarships, job placement, encouragement of entrepreneurship, and developing future employment leaders." He has another explanation for the change: "This trend started already two years ago, and is the result of a few factors, primarily the historic detachment between army service and making a living. [Working gainfully without having performed military service or received an exemption is not permitted – ed.] Lowering the age of exemption [at which one who has not served may receive an exemption], and the possibility of its further lowering, certainly contribute to the increase in employment."

Yustman does not attribute great significance to the removal of government subsidies to some kollel families as a factor in the change, as these sums are "negligible in comparison with a regular salary that one receives from a steady job, not to mention the possibilities for future increases and promotions."

Like Krombi, Yustman also has compliments for the Council of Higher Education, which of late has been "investing more in creating a positive atmosphere for haredi students. Scholarships alone are not sufficient." As a top figure in KEMACH, which has been active for years in the field of finding economic incentives for haredi students, he certainly knows what he is talking about.

Did You Sit Back When They Tried to Destroy the State?

 by Emanuel Shilo, Editor of Besheva, translated & by Hillel Fendel

Where are our pilots, hi-tech workers, doctors and professors? Why aren't they calling out the politicization of our precious institutions? If not now, when?

1. The parties of the coalition government – the nationalist/right-wing/religious/hareidi coalition – cannot really afford to give up seeking to reform the judicial system. Despite the temptation to say, as some of us are saying, "We tried, it didn't work, oh well; let's turn to other challenges," the fact is that this is untenable. If the current situation continues, our very large camp, the camp of the majority, will be stricken again and again, as will the values it holds holy and precious. 

If the composition of the High Court, and consequently its attitude and spirit, do not change – the ongoing erosion of any national or religious issue will simply continue, and the judicial system's intolerable takeover of the powers of the Knesset and the government will only intensify. If the legal establishment comes out of this confrontation with a resounding victory, its leaders will continue to trample us, knowing that any threat from the political system to restrain them no longer exists. 

2.  As of now, the justices of the Supreme Court, both past and present, show no signs of willingness to soften their stance. As if they have no responsibility for what is happening! As if it were not they who caused the entire problem by adopting such a forceful and trampling activist approach. All indications show that there is a broad public consensus that changes are needed in the judicial system, and that the question is just how much. But our Chief Justice, Esther Chayut, Attorney General Gali Bahrav-Miara, and their colleagues are totally apathetic, and show no signs of willingness to compromise.

The Knesset and government and at least half the nation are groaning under their heavy yoke, but their response is like that of the Biblical King Rehavam: "Former Chief Justice Aharon Barak flogged you with whips, and we will flog you with scorpions. Barak claimed that he is authorized to abolish laws that he believes stand in opposition to Basic Laws, but we will take the authority to nullify Basic Laws themselves!"

And then when we complain that they are selectively enforcing the law, dealing with the left-wing protestors infinitely more leniently than they treated the Gush Katif protestors 18 years ago, they roll their eyes and say they don’t know what we're talking about. When we compare the kid gloves of today and the draconian measures against the "orange" protestors then, they either lie and deny; explain with impressive pilpul why the two can't be compared; or ask self-righteously, "Two wrongs don't make a right! Should we repeat today the injustices of yesteryear?!"

As if there are only two options! As if we must either extend "until the end of the proceedings" the custody of masses of teenage protestors for having tried to block a road somewhere for a few minutes, or totally ignore the adults who block the main highway in Tel Aviv for hours at a time, with police officers marching in their ranks! Did they never consider that the correct approach might run somewhere in the middle? How about arresting the leaders of the protest and the adult road-blockers for 2-3 days and handing down serious indictments against them? 

3.  It's true that given the paltry gains we have made so far, and given the tremendous damage the unrestrained, anarchistic, criminal, fight-picking protestors have caused the State, it is definitely worthwhile to ask whether our stubborn insistence on improving the judicial system is actually worth it. But the damage that can be expected from a long-term suspension of our efforts in this area – as opposed to a limited, tactical suspension – will be no less grave. 

It must also be remembered that the other side likes to exaggerate, and this must not intimidate us. Just as they constantly overstate the number of demonstrators in Tel Aviv, so too do they embellish the threats to the country's security and economy, and constantly warn of civil war. This psychological warfare has served them well until now, so why shouldn't they continue? In actuality, however, the economy is holding up, and the IDF's readiness has not declined as much as they would have us believe.

4.  Why is there a sense of helplessness in the right-wing public and in the government? It is because we seem to believe we are facing forces that are much stronger than us. Yes, they have extensive resources and much money, including significant amounts from abroad. And just like in Gush Katif 18 years ago, there are those who seek to have us "make peace" with our failure, and to take comfort in the fact that our influence and numbers are growing and that very soon in the future we will be more successful. 

But is it really true that we are so weak? Are we truly not yet sufficiently represented in the various power centers of the country for us to have practical influence today? 

In Gush Katif, we were told that we should not even try to win – for if a group of protestors would defeat the government and army of Israel, that would be the end of our democracy, not to mention the end of the IDF's deterrence power against our enemies! Yet, that is exactly what is happening today, except even more so: We ourselves are the government! We ourselves are the majority! And still we're being told that we are too weak – while at the same time, the left-wing is doing exactly what we were told we should not do! If the left's protest is successful, would that not be the end of our democracy?!

5.  I would like, with all modesty, to propose here a new approach. We are simply not doing enough. The other side is totally enlisted for the struggle, and each one does what he can to make a difference. But us? Every two months we come out to a giant demonstration, and then go home. This is not the way to win a public struggle.

The fact is this: The religious-nationalist public is already sufficiently integrated into the various sectors of the State – academia, the army, the economy, public service, and even the media – but yet, simply does not dare to stand up for its rights and to struggle for what it believes!

It's not that each of us has to be an avid supporter of every aspect of the judicial reform package. All that is needed is to strongly oppose the politicization of institutions that are supposed to be apolitical! Why should the many right-wingers in hi-tech not stand up and oppose the hijacking of some of their companies for clearly political purposes? The poor excuses provided for the companies' political stances clearly do not camouflage their obvious political motives. The same is true for academia, the media, and the army – where is everyone?!

Of course, it's easier to leave the hard work to the government. After all, we voted for them precisely so that they can work for us. This is true in normal time, but behold – we clearly see that the government cannot do the work by itself! It needs a home-front backbone for the civilian struggle. The other side is enlisted totally and disproportionately – and we must respond in kind. Are we too busy with "meetings of the minds" and looking for dialogue? Not that these aren't important; I've been to some of those get-togethers myself. But when the other side has no restraints and is not willing to budge even a millimeter, we have to be willing to fight as well.  

The anti-reform campaign has a giant budget and over 100 (!) organizations and associations devoted to toppling the government and perpetuating the continued control of the elites over the democratic majority. Even if we don't have the hundreds of millions that they have, we most certainly do have manpower and the spirit of volunteerism. We are lacking in leadership, initiative, and organization. It is easier to sit on the fence – but will we think the same after we lose the battle??

What will we answer in a few years when we ask ourselves, or our children ask us, "Where were you when they destroyed the State? What were you doing when they disintegrated the IDF? Did you lift a finger when the attempt to restore to the democratic majority the authorities that were stolen from them scored a decisive defeat at the hands of an anarchistic, irresponsible, unrestrained minority?" 

Where are our pilots? Why do I know only one IDF pilot – Shai Kelach is his name – who runs from studio to studio to protest against his refusenik colleagues, those who are willing to abandon their critical roles in our military for political purposes? I am working hard to restrain myself from mentioning the names of senior and admired pilots in our circles, whose silence is enabling the refusals in the Israel Air Force to become a threat to the security of the State of Israel. Why are our senior army officers in the reserves, from the rank of Lt.-Col. and up, – aside from isolated individuals, such as Gen. Yaakov Amidror – not making the effort to sound their voices heard and organize themselves into a contra force opposing those who are willing to dangerously politicize our precious army? They don't even have to publicly support the judicial reform; all they have to do is fight against the phenomenon of desertion in the IDF. Do we not have sufficient courage to express this elementary message? 

And where are our doctors? Why aren't they demanding the resignation of the Chairman of the Israeli Medical Association, who took full, shameful advantage of his position to call a wildcat strike and thus abandon the patients for whom he and they are responsible? 

Here are two exceptions: Veteran journalist and broadcaster Kalman Liebskind announced today that he is suspending his purchases of Strauss products, after Strauss announced that it was boycotting the right-wing Channel 14.  "I am ending my monthly subscription for Tami-4 water [produced by Strauss]," Liebskind tweeted. "We want to drink water, not politics." 

 In this week's edition of Besheva, you can read an interview with a young and promising doctoral candidate who is endangering her future advancement in order to call out Haifa University's entry into politics. 

If the examples of these two would be replicated a hundred-fold or more, the chances are overwhelming that sanity will return to our country, and the State will be run by the Knesset and government that were democratically elected precisely for that purpose. 

As long as we have not tried this method, it is still way too early to declare defeat. 

Photo Essay: Signs at the Pro-Judicial Reform Demonstration

Pro-government protesters came out 300,000 strong Sunday night in Tel Aviv’s Kaplan Square to express support for changing Israel’s judicial system to be comparable to those of normative Western countries like the USA. Bet El Institutions’ Baruch Gordon captured the slogans on the signs which are an indicator of the crowd’s sentiments. Translations to English are below each image.

click here to see

Our Unconditional Pledge of Allegiance to Defend Israel

 by Rabbi Eliezer Shenvald, translated & by Hillel Fendel

Pilots and Officers have, tragically, threatened not to show up for the privilege of defending our country, in the mistaken thought that their pledge to serve was taken conditionally.

One of the most exciting and emotional moments in the process of young cadets joining the IDF is the hashbaah, the swearing-in ceremony. 

When the Israel Defense Forces was established (Order of the Day, 22 Iyar 5708/May 31, 1948), the General Staff instituted that every new soldier take an oath of loyalty (or simply "declare," if he is religious, which generally precludes taking an oath) as he receives his first IDF rifle and Bible. 

Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, understood the special importance of this occasion in a democratic state. It guarantees that the soldiers are totally subordinate to the "recognized authorities" of the State of Israel, without reservations or conditions. 

Before the establishment of the State in 1948, the Jewish entity in the Holy Land was engaged in years of struggle with the ruling British – not as part of one army, but rather in separate ideological groups, such as the Palmach (part of the Haganah), Irgun, and Lechi. Such an arrangement is unthinkable in a democratic state, for there must be one single, popularly-elected, authoritative body. As Ben-Gurion himself wrote in his book Uniqueness and Destiny: "An army that is not absolutely subservient to the democratic regime of the people, ultimately takes control over the nation and leads to military anarchy."

This is why he dismantled the Palmach as an independent military organization, and ordered its integration within the IDF. This decision was strongly opposed, especially among members of the left-wing Mapam party, which felt that the Palmach should continue under the auspices of the Histadrut. Most fortunately, Ben Gurion remained firm.

It was also Ben-Gurion who very precisely formulated the oath of allegiance "to the State, to its laws, and to its authorized governing bodies." Specifically, it states: "I hereby swear and commit myself by my word of honor to maintain loyalty to the State of Israel, to its laws, and to its authorized authorities; to accept unconditionally and without reservation the yoke of the discipline of the Israel Defense Forces; to obey all orders and instructions given by the authorized commanders; and to devote all my strengths and even sacrifice my life to the defense of the homeland and the freedom of Israel."

Not for naught did Ben-Gurion specify that every soldier accept this oath upon himself "unconditionally and without reservation" – for he understood that this was not a "conditional contract" of a give-and-take nature. Rather, each soldier was to give of himself during his time in uniform to the "recognized authorities" of the State, without preconditions.

In the thick of the military campaign for Israel's independence, when the country's fate and the lives of its residents faced mortal danger, this understanding was sharpened: The soldier, a citizen of the state, enlists in a "people's army" – a "compulsory army" and not a "mercenary army," and certainly not a "volunteer army," for the protection of the State and the lives of its residents and his own family.

The soldier and the State are one body, not separate entities; an army of the people that protects and defends the lives of your neighbors, families, and even yourself. The trust it places in us, and the commitments we take upon ourselves for it, are therefore absolute. As such, there is no difference between obligatory service and volunteerism [as some opponents of the judicial reform legislation tried to claim these past weeks in maintaining that though they would not avoid obligatory service, their political stance permitted them to stop volunteering for the army]. Nor is our military service stipulated by a mutually-signed contract, with restrictions and conditions. Only mercenary soldiers sign a contract with their employers! In our case, we are obligated as soldiers of the IDF to serve, with no give-and-take and with no ifs, ands, or buts.  

When is a contract necessary? When one side refuses to recognize his obligations. This is what appeared to happen with the Tribes of Reuven and Gad when the Israelites were about to enter the Promised Land. These tribes said they wanted to settle the eastern banks of the Jordan River, and Moshe Rabbeinu feared that they wished to separate from the nation and not take part with their brethren in fighting for and settling the western side of the Promised Land. 

Moshe therefore formulated a "contract" with them that would unambiguously define their obligations to take part in the war for the Land, and never to part ways with the rest of the nation: 

"Moshe said to them: If you do the following, and go out before G-d to war, and cross the Jordan before G-d [and fight] until He drives out His enemies before Him, and [until] the land is conquered before G-d – then you may return [to the eastern bank of the Jordan River]…" (Bamidbar 32,20-30)

Moshe made it quite clear in his lengthy speech to Gad and Reuven, and to part of the Tribe of Menashe who joined them, what would be the consequences if they would not fulfill their side of the bargain. Moshe made what is known as a "double condition," spelling out both what would happen if they fulfilled the condition, and what would happen if they did not. This "contract" became the archetype of Jewish business contracts, which must include the "conditions of Gad and Reuven," to avoid any possibility of a misunderstanding, and to preclude either side from saying, "The contract says only what must happen, but not what will be if it does not happen."

Moshe, in his wisdom, understood the need for a contract with clear obligations. When it comes time to fulfill commitments, there is an inclination among those for whom those commitments are not convenient at that given time to try to reinterpret and explain the contract in an imaginary way that jibes with their desires. 

In the end, Gad, Reuven and Menashe fulfilled all their obligations in the contract, and received their inheritance in the lands of Gilad, Bashan, and environs, east of the Jordan. However, the geographic separation caused more than one incident of tensions between the 2.5 tribes and the rest of Israel; see Joshua 25, for instance. 

During these days preceding Tisha B'Av – the ninth day of the month of Av, the anniversary of the destruction of both Holy Temples and other calamities in Jewish history – we mourn not only the tragedies, but the sins that led up to them. We must be particularly mindful of causeless hatred and lack of unity, and must certainly not allow the readiness and strength of the IDF to deteriorate. As the Rambam wrote some 850 years ago about the events of our defeat by the Romans: 

"And it is for this that we lost our kingdom, and our Holy Temple was destroyed, and our Exile has lengthened until now – because our forefathers sinned and are no longer, for they found many books about astrology, etc., and did not engage in military studies and conquests, but rather thought that those things [astrology, etc.] would help them." (from the Rambam's letter to sages in southern France)

Our generation has the great privilege of being able to enlist in our "national army," to protect our very own State. Let us not forfeit our unconditional allegiance for contractual agreements that allow for all sorts of loopholes and belie our natural bonds with our people.