Tough Stance on Budget Leads to Progress on Draft Law

Last week, I began my humble column with the subject of Iran. I mentioned that President Trump was putting pressure on the Iranian regime, which led to indirect tension for the rest of the world — including all of us in Israel, of course. It is believed that if Iran decides to respond to a U.S. attack with missile fire, they will target not only Israel but the countries of Europe as well. A week has now gone by, and nothing has changed. America and Iran are holding talks, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that an agreement is in the works. It might be no more than a smokescreen for imminent military action. Perhaps the more important development is the planned meeting between Netanyahu and President Trump this Wednesday. Everyone in Israel would like to know what it is about and why Netanyahu asked to meet with the president. Above all, everyone is interested in how this meeting was arranged so quickly. Is the goal for the two leaders to coordinate an attack on Iran? Or, perhaps, is it the opposite — that Trump wants to explain to Netanyahu the terms of the agreement in the works?

I presume that we will know the answers to these questions before long. Meanwhile, Netanyahu’s enemies are rejoicing over one thing: He wasn’t invited to stay in Blair House.

The tension in the air reminds me of the old story about the man who used to remove his boots and drop them loudly on the floor when he returned home from work late at night. This was a nightly occurrence, and each boot hit the floor with an echoing thud. The sound reverberated throughout his home, but it also woke the neighbor who lived one flight down, who repeatedly begged him to remove his boots quietly; however, his pleas fell on deaf ears. Every night, the neighbor was awakened by the twin thuds marking the boots falling on the floor. One night, however, the upstairs neighbor removed one boot and dropped it loudly, but then realized the error of his ways as he recalled his neighbor’s pleas. He decided to change his habits immediately, and he gently removed his second boot and placed it silently on the floor beside the first. About half an hour later, someone rapped frantically at his door. Opening the door, he was surprised to discover his frazzled-looking neighbor standing on his doorstep, clad in pajamas and with exhaustion etched on his face. “Please,” the man begged, “just take off the second boot already so that I can go back to sleep!”

We, too, are waiting for the other boot to drop, so to speak, and for the next step in the conflict between America and Iran to come. And as we wait, our nerves become equally frayed.

In other news, the draft crisis remains at the top of the religious community’s agenda. Last Motzoei Shabbos, Avrohom Ben-Dayan, a yungerman from Netivot and a former talmid in Yeshivas Maor HaTalmud in Rechovot, was arrested in Tifrach after spending Shabbos in the southern community. Ben-Dayan, who has been married for only two months, was arrested by the traffic police and then transferred to the police station in Ofakim because he was listed as a draft evader; the incident brought thousands of bnei yeshivos to a protest outside the Ofakim police station. Of course, the protest made no difference, and Ben-Dayan was sentenced to ten days in prison. This arrest sparked a major uproar when it was revealed that Ben-Dayan’s lawyer was not permitted to bring him his tefillin, and he was unable to lay tefillin at all on Sunday. Ben-Dayan’s wife received a personal phone call from Rav Moshe Hillel Hirsch offering her encouragement. Meanwhile, a talmid in Yeshivas Beer Yaakov was arrested for draft evasion as well. These two arrests triggered public demonstrations on Monday.

As for the draft law, the progress on the bill slowed to a halt this week when the legal advisor to the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee announced that she was unable to work on the bill due to her husband’s illness. In response, the chareidi Knesset members decided that they would not participate in a vote to split the clauses in the budget bill among various committees, which would effectively torpedo the beginning of discussions to advance the budget toward its second and third readings at the end of March. This led the legal advisor to reconsider her decision, and she announced at the beginning of the week that she would expedite the approval of the draft bill, allowing the chareidi parties to retract their opposition to the budget vote. All we can do now is daven!

Rav Dov Landau to Yeshiva Bochurim: Just Learn Torah!

Rav Dov Landau, one of the leading gedolei Torah of our generation, has begun emulating the actions of Rav Aharon Leib Shteinman in his day. Rav Landau has become responsible for the chareidi community’s public policy together with his fellow rosh yeshiva in Slabodka, Rav Moshe Hillel Hirsch. Today, Rav Landau determines the chareidi community’s position on the draft law. It is no secret that the spiritual leadership of the Shas party abides by his decisions, which means that he essentially sets the policy of both Degel HaTorah and Shas. Rav Landau, who spends his days immersed in Torah learning, also dedicates innumerable hours to the people who seek his advice, guidance, or brachos. Despite all that, he also somehow finds the time to travel around the country, visiting various yeshivos to deliver shiurim and words of chizuk. In recent times, he has visited numerous yeshivos and has created a wave of inspiration. Rav Landau is over 95 years old, and these travels are no small feat for him. Over the past two weeks, he has spoken in Yeshivas Mishkenos HaTorah in Bnei Brak, Yeshiva L’Tzeirim Imrei Moshe in Yerushalayim, and Yeshivas Ohr Elchonon in Yerushalayim, among other institutions.

Last Wednesday, Rav Landau visited the south and appeared in three yeshivos on a single evening: Yeshivas Kiryat Malachi in Kiryat Malachi and Shaarei Shemuos and Yeshivas Belz, both in Bais Chilkiya. Yeshivas Kiryat Malachi is a very special institution headed by Rav Yehuda Amit, with a student body of about 300 that consists of a mix of ordinary yeshiva bochurim and baalei teshuvah. Yeshivas Belz, of course, is a chassidish yeshiva. Yeshivas Shaarei Shemuos was founded by the late Rav Naftoli Tzvi Yehuda Shapiro, the son of Rav Moshe Shmuel Shapiro, together with his nephew Rav Aryeh Shapiro (the son of Rav Dovid Yitzchok Shapiro, who is currently serving as rosh yeshiva in Be’er Yaakov along with another son, Rav Shimon). I will admit that I feel a special sense of connection to Yeshivas Shaarei Shemuos, since the two roshei yeshiva (including the recently deceased Rav Naftoli) were my friends, and I have been watching the yeshiva’s development since it was founded. My brother-in-law Rav Moshe Tzvi Kaplan, a talmid chochom and one of the heads of Keren HaTorah in the neighborhood of Ramot, recently joined the yeshiva’s faculty as well. And my good friend Rav Yaakov Shapiro, the son of Rav Moshe Shmuel, who learned with his father throughout the day for thirty years, has moved to Bais Chilkiya and is affiliated with the yeshiva there as well. Naturally, I was excited to see a picture of Rav Dov delivering a shiur in the bais medrash, with Rav Aryeh Shapiro seated before him and Rav Yisroel Yaakov Pincus, the rov of Ofakim and a maggid shiur in the yeshiva since its inception, beside him. The yeshiva has enjoyed exceptional siyatta diShmaya and has truly flourished. Today, it is considered one of the foremost yeshivos in Eretz Yisroel, with about 800 talmidim.

In every yeshiva he visited, Rav Landau’s speech was perfectly tailored to his audience. He addressed the baalei teshuvah in their own language and the bnei Torah in theirs. When he spoke in Belz, he expressed warm wishes for the roshei yeshiva and the Rebbe. In Yeshivas Shaarei Shemuos, he said, “We all sense that we are living through a difficult period of time. The middas hadin is in force over the Jewish people in general and the bnei yeshivos in particular. Unfortunately, there have been some terrible tragedies in recent times, and the people of Israel are facing a possible war. Worst of all, our misguided brethren are making every possible effort to harass people who learn Torah and to lower the honor of the Torah and those who study it. But we are maaminim bnei maaminim who believe with absolute faith that everything comes from Hashem, and we have confidence in His eternal goodness. No matter what happens and how the problems are resolved, bnei yeshivos have only one responsibility — to be immersed in Torah learning, to acquire knowledge of the Torah, and to exert themselves with iyun and ameilus in the sugyos studied in their yeshivos while ignoring everything outside the bais medrash. Just learn! That is the job of the bnei yeshivos; it is their privilege and their obligation to learn, and learn, and learn some more.”

The Public Is Convinced: The Shin Bet Director Is the Target of a Witch Hunt

The people of Israel have lost their last shreds of confidence in the judiciary. Any confidence they may have still retained was unquestionably shattered by the most recent politically motivated witch hunt.

The Shin Bet is headed by a man named David Zini, a general in the IDF reserves who wears a yarmulke. The fact that the Shin Bet is headed by a religious man is a source of endless aggravation to the left. Zini has been denounced as “messianic” and a tragedy for the State of Israel, and the political left did everything in their power to torpedo his nomination after he was tapped by the prime minister to serve in this position. Because of the slanderous complaints against Zini, the Grunis Committee (headed by former Chief Justice Asher Grunis, who is now the chairman of the committee that approves government appointments) ruled that if any member of Zini’s family falls under suspicion of criminal activities, Zini himself would be barred from dealing with the case. In certain extreme circumstances, the committee added, he might even have to step down from his position.

The committee based its ruling on the claims that Zini’s father is an extremist. And in a bid to exploit this ruling, the judiciary recently managed to ensnare a different member of the family — his brother, Betzalel Zini.

The story began with vague reports about a “serious security scandal” concerning a family member of the head of the Shin Bet. The details were reported last week: Betzalel Zini, the brother of the Shin Bet director, was involved in three rounds of cigarette smuggling into the Gaza Strip. Last Thursday, Betzalel Zini was indicted in Be’er Sheva, and the prosecution asked the court to order him held in custody until the conclusion of the legal proceedings against him. They also added a significant charge — aiding the enemy during wartime. This was outrageous, since a different recent case of cigarette smuggling, in which the defendants were Bedouin, was treated only as a case of tax evasion. That begs the question of what makes Betzalel Zini different from the Bedouins accused of the same crime. The answer, however, is obvious, and it lies in his last name.

The charge sheet noted that the defendants and their collaborators were aware that the smuggled goods might fall into the hands of terrorists, either Hamas activists or others affiliated with them, and that the cigarettes might help the terrorists increase their strength or finance their activities. “They committed these acts for monetary gain, knowing that their actions violated the restrictions imposed by the State of Israel on bringing goods into Gaza, as part of the war effort, and despite the clear damage to state security that would be caused by their actions,” the prosecution wrote.

Adi Keidar and Assaf Klein, the attorneys representing Betzalel Zini, responded, “We read the indictment, and we will refute the charges one by one. Despite everything written there, Betzalel maintains his unequivocal innocence. These are fabrications. He completely denies the charges attributed to him. He has cooperated completely with the authorities, and we believe in his innocence. Regarding the charge of aiding the enemy in wartime, it is a sign of an upside-down world. This is a man who has spent his entire life contributing to the state and has risked his life for it. He is a Zionist with every fiber of his being. The charge is completely absurd.”

Betzalel Zini was interrogated by the police rather than the Shin Bet, due to his connection to the head of the Shin Bet. Zini claims that he did not receive a single cent and had no knowledge of any smuggling taking place, and that he merely accepted a donation for his soldiers. But even if the charges are true, and he did sell cigarettes to someone in Gaza, the consensus is that he is merely being used as a pawn in a bid to remove his brother from his position.

Gearing Up for an Election

No week would be complete without some political news, and this week is no exception. As the next election draws closer, the playing field is beginning to heat up, and a number of politicians have begun releasing statements that border on madness. Take Gadi Eizenkot, for instance. Eizenkot is a former partner of Benny Gantz, who recently left his party to launch his own slate, which he dubbed Yashar. He recently took aim at Prime Minister Netanyahu, claiming that the leak of a classified military document to the German newspaper Bild, which was done to prove that the Egyptians were being deceitful in their handling of the hostages in Gaza, was an act of treason since it exposed a crucial Palestinian informant. Eizenkot’s comment managed to stoke a major uproar for several hours, until someone pointed out that if the informant was really such a valuable source of information, he should have alerted Israel in advance to Hamas’s plans for the October 7 massacre.

Another outrageous statement came from Yair Golan, the chairman of the most liberal party in the Knesset, who promised to cut off all government aid to settlers. Golan’s comment was condemned by his left-wing and centrist allies alike, who accused him of seriously harming their chances of defeating Netanyahu in the election with his inflammatory words. Golan hurried to apologize in response.

The politicians who are united only by their hatred for Netanyahu — Bennett and Lieberman on the right and Lapid, Eizenkot, and Golan on the left — never seem to stop squabbling among themselves. It is impossible even to gather them together for a simple joint photograph. They are also severely divided over the question of whether the Arabs are legitimate political partners. This week, a Kaplan protest leader who joined Yair Golan’s party remarked derisively about Lapid, “Don’t we deserve better than him?”

Another politician who has done tremendous damage to the left is Ehud Barak. The media recently reported that Barak commented to an American friend a year or two ago that he would certainly be able to defeat Netanyahu if Israel made sure to bring a million non-Jewish immigrants from Russia or Ukraine. In his view, Barak added, the best source of immigrants would be Belarus. He proposed reaching an agreement with Putin on that subject, as well as introducing more flexibility into the legal requirements for giyur, to ensure that his ploy would succeed. “This will also make it possible for us to bring quality immigrants to the country,” Barak added, “unlike at the time of the founding of the state, when Israel had to settle for immigrants of lower caliber.” In other words, Barak views the immigrants from Yemen and Arab countries as inferior to European immigrants. One can hardly imagine a more blatantly racist comment.

Barak was roundly condemned for his comments, and for good reason. At the cabinet meeting this Sunday, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared, “I was appalled to hear about Ehud Barak’s new racism. The man simply lacks any shame! Eli Goldschmidt of the Labor Party, who used to support him, announced, ‘I am ashamed of Ehud Barak. I am ashamed that I supported him in the past.’ The fact that no one on the left has expressed disgust or reacted to Barak’s appalling statements simply shows that they share his sentiments. On the other hand, if I were to make such a statement,” Netanyahu added, “every news program in the country would make a tremendous amount of noise about it, and everyone would have some sort of reaction.”

At this time, there is a clear difference between the respective positions of the right-wing bloc, which includes the chareidi parties, and the left-wing bloc. The right-wing bloc is operating with a single clear candidate for prime minister (Netanyahu), with no one else coming close to competing for his position. The opposing bloc, on the other hand, has six parties with six candidates who will compete with each other for the top position. If the race is close, the leaders of the top two parties on the left might decide to enter into a rotation agreement, but the left, unlike the right, does not have a clear-cut, universally acknowledged leader.

Another issue of contention is the timing of the next election. A specific date is already under discussion, but the right-wing parties are opposed to it because it falls immediately before Rosh Hashanah. The problem, as far as they are concerned, is that at least two mandates’ worth of voters will probably be in Uman at the time.

Netanyahu Reveals Evidence of IDF and Shin Bet Failures

No treatment of the news in Israel would be complete this week without mentioning the furor that was triggered by Prime Minister Netanyahu last weekend. Netanyahu appeared before the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee for a closed discussion (in fact, most of the committee’s discussions are closed to the public) and brought along a briefcase filled with documents. The prime minister explained that he had brought copies of his responses to questions from the state comptroller about the October 7 disaster.

Let me explain. Two weeks ago, Netanyahu surprised the Knesset by revealing that he had met with the state comptroller during the latter’s investigation of the October 7 massacre and had provided him with classified documents that indicate who is truly to blame for the disaster. According to Netanyahu, the blame lies with the army and the Shin Bet, and the documents that he showed the comptroller serve as incontrovertible evidence of that fact. For instance, one document shows that the director of the Shin Bet assured the prime minister just hours before the massacre that everything was all right and there were no imminent threats. Seeing the shocked expressions of the Knesset members, Netanyahu added, “I met with the comptroller and answered his questions, while everyone else evaded him when he summoned them.” In other words, if anyone should be afraid of the comptroller’s investigation, it is surely the heads of the army and Shin Bet, not the prime minister. “Immediately after that, the Supreme Court ordered the state comptroller to halt his investigation,” Netanyahu revealed. “The judges claimed that the matter would be probed by a special investigative commission.”

If you think that something seems rotten about that, you are undoubtedly correct.

But Netanyahu wasn’t done yet. When he appeared before the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, he shocked everyone by revealing his position on the failures that led to the October 7 onslaught. Netanyahu read aloud from classified protocols that proved beyond a doubt that no one had warned him in advance, and that the entire defense establishment was blinded to the imminent danger. The most severe criticism was leveled against Ronen Bar, who served as director of the Shin Bet at the time. A report signed by Bar three days before the massacre asserted that “quiet has returned to the border fence.” Netanyahu also accused Bar of falsifying a document dated prior to October 7, adding a line to a real communique to indicate that he had sounded some kind of warning in advance. The line containing the warning does not appear in the original version of that document.

Netanyahu went on to read quotes from Naftoli Bennett, Gadi Eizenkot, Yoav Gallant, and former Chief of Staff Kochavi from security discussions dating up to a decade before October 7, which proved that they all made the grave mistake of severely underestimating Hamas. “We were held captive by a misconception,” Netanyahu said. “The difference between me and most of the defense establishment was that I felt that we needed to ‘mow the grass’ more in Gaza, and they wanted to invest more in economic aspects of the situation. Since October 7, I have learned my lesson from those events and have made at least ten significant decisions that were contrary to the defense establishment’s position. Those decisions changed the course of the campaign in Gaza.”

Netanyahu’s main point was that he had been deceived by the defense establishment into thinking that Hamas was deterred from further violence, and that he had personally taken the most aggressive positions in security discussions behind the scenes but was repeatedly prevented from carrying out his suggestions.

It was widely believed that Netanyahu would be pleased if his address to the committee was publicized. In fact, the other members of the Likud called for him to publicize the information he had shared (as long as it did not compromise state security). Netanyahu accepted their suggestion and published his responses to the state comptroller for public consumption on Thursday evening, a few hours after he addressed the committee, omitting any details that were classified. Without getting into too many details, I will tell you that it triggered a veritable earthquake in Israel. Netanyahu was quickly attacked by many people who were personally affected by his accusations, who claimed that he was publishing partial accounts or even lying outright to the public. But despite their protestations, Netanyahu scored a massive public relations victory.

Shuls Vandalized, Authorities Yawn

Five shuls in Israel have been vandalized over the past month, a phenomenon that is simply appalling. Personally, however, I am even more outraged by the fact that these incidents haven’t evoked more fury. If such a thing happened in Kyiv, for instance, everyone in Israel would have condemned it fiercely. But when shuls are desecrated in Lod, Yaffo, and Petach Tikvah, most of the country is indifferent.

There is a tool available to members of the Knesset known as an urgent parliamentary query. This is one of three types of queries; the other two, known as regular and direct queries, allow a minister a certain period of time to formulate a response. An urgent query, on the other hand, must be answered almost immediately. The Knesset regulations call for an urgent query to be submitted no later than 12:00 on Monday, at which point the responding minister is required to relay his answer by 11:00 on Wednesday of the same week. A Knesset member who submits an urgent query is also entitled to ask an additional question after he receives a response, and two other members of the Knesset are likewise permitted to join him and ask questions of their own. It is an excellent opportunity to hold a tribunal of sorts and to extract information from the government.

Two members of the Knesset submitted urgent parliamentary queries last week: Yoav Ben-Tzur and Michoel Malchieli. These two men, who previously held ministerial posts, thereby made it clear that they do not consider it beneath their dignity to engage in ordinary parliamentary work now that they have been downgraded to the status of rank-and-file members of the Knesset. Malchieli’s question dealt with the shul on Rechov Kedem in Yaffo that was vandalized with graffiti insults and nationalistic slogans. He added that the students in a nearby hesder yeshiva feel that they are living under constant threat, and he called on the minister of internal security to reveal what the government has determined in its investigation thus far. The second urgent query dealt with the monthly stipends that the Palestinian Authority is still paying to terrorists. In 2024, the PA was paying 470 million shekels for this purpose, while its commitments in 2025 added up to 700 million shekels. Ben-Tzur asked the minister of finance to reveal how he plans to put an end to this madness, especially in light of the fact that Israel transfers hundreds of millions of shekels to the PA every year due to various agreements. This issue has been taken up by Sander Gerber, an American philanthropist whom I have mentioned in a number of previous articles. Nevertheless, neither of these topics seemed sufficiently important by Knesset speaker Amir Ochana, who refused to approve them as urgent queries. To make matters worse, I was even more astounded when I saw the topic that he did approve: “Israel’s Commitment to the Framework on Climate Change and the Paris Accords.” Is that truly more important?

Meanwhile, yet another shul fell prey to vandals —a shul known as Degel Dovid in Rishon Letzion, where the perpetrators desecrated five sifrei Torah. Are we witnessing the fruits of the rampant incitement against chareidim and Torah learners? Is this a consequence of the indifference shown by the police and courts toward similar crimes? Those questions are difficult to answer, but one thing is clear: It is a mark of shame for this country!

An Injustice to Parents of Children with Disabilities

The former minister of health, Uriel Bosso, submitted a different urgent query this week. The topic of his question might seem marginal, but for the families who are affected by the issue, it could be a life-changing subject.

The query began with a specific case but moved on to a more general inquiry. There is a chareidi child with special needs who lives in the city of Carmiel and is transported every day to a special daycare center in Rechasim. His transportation was funded by the municipality of Carmiel but was recently terminated on the grounds that he had become violent. The staff at the facility caring for him responded that he has since become calmer, and Bosso stepped in to assist the family. While this particular issue was worked out, Bosso took advantage of the opportunity to inquire about the general rules. In a query addressed to the minister of education, he wrote, “Following an appeal from the organization Mesugalim [a fantastic organization founded by Avi Mimran, who is himself the father of a child with special needs] you shared some good news with the parents of children with special needs who are entitled to government-funded transportation: The parents may provide the transportation themselves on behalf of the municipality rather than relying on an external company. There is nothing better than a father providing transportation for his own child, and the pilot program has been working well in Yerushalayim. I am familiar with it, and it is truly a blessing, but it hasn’t been expanded to the rest of the country. I would like to ask if your ministry plans to release an instruction to this effect to other local governments. We have been contacted by parents who understand the idea and believe that the best thing for a child is for a parent to provide his transportation and thus to give him the best possible service.”

Let me explain: The Ministry of Education transfers funding to local governments to provide transportation for students with special needs. Mesugalim proposed allowing the money to be paid directly to parents who personally transport their children to their schools or other programs, thus allowing them to take on the responsibility rather than leaving it in the hands of an external company.

Education Minister Yoav Kisch surprised everyone with his response: “The issue of transportation for students with special needs is handled by local governments. Every local government is responsible for transportation within its borders. We provide subsidies; it is only a partial subsidy, and the local government is responsible for part of the burden as well as for managing the service. We certainly help when we receive inquiries, such as in this case, and we make an effort to try to find solutions. The successful pilot program in Yerushalayim is one of the initiatives that I began. We are continuing it there, and we wanted to expand it to the rest of the country, but to my dismay — and I must tell you that this is based on my recollections, and I will have to check if I am remembering accurately — the Treasury did not permit it. I can tell you sincerely that I do not know why they blocked it, and that we will continue to push for it.”

Yaakov Margi of the Shas party, who served until recently as minister of welfare, interrupted to set the record straight. “The transportation service has failed significantly,” he said. “As of now, it is estimated that between 30 and 40 percent of parents are driving their children to their programs and do not receive government support.”

“And they are not receiving payments?” Kisch asked.

“Exactly,” Margi replied. “The Treasury is saving money because the parents continue driving their children to their programs even though they are not being paid.”

A Law to Commemorate the Klausenberger Rebbe

As usual, I perused some of the proposed laws that have been placed on the Knesset table. By now, over 6500 bills have been submitted in the current Knesset. It can be both amusing and saddening to observe the ideas that are sometimes generated by the parliamentary mind. For instance, Oded Forer and his fellow party members came up with a bill that would require every dayan or chief rabbi of a city to have served in the IDF. One must wonder why they didn’t suggest applying the same requirement to the judges of the Supreme Court, some of whom are Arabs. As I’ve mentioned in the past, the Arabs do not serve in the IDF despite the absence of any legal framework exempting them from the draft, yet no one, including the Supreme Court justices, seems to be troubled by this.

Avi (Avigdor) Maoz resubmitted his “Who Is a Jew?” law after it was removed by a landslide vote. I pointed out to him in the past that although his bill includes a clause requiring a conversion to be halachically valid, the Supreme Court might very well decide that Reform conversions fit that criterion as well, and the law would therefore cause more harm than good. Maoz replied that his bill actually states that a giyur must be approved by a bais din.

Another interesting bill, which echoes seven or eight other such laws that were submitted in the past, is meant to correct an error made by MK Lazimi. In an effort to assist car owners, Lazimi introduced a law concerning parking regulations that only served to harm their interests. Another bill, introduced by MK Eli Dalal, imposes a legal ban on the social isolation of a minor; however, I cannot imagine how a law will be of any benefit in such situations. Perhaps it is the fact that in some situations, the law imposes responsibility on the parents of the offending children.

I was surprised when I came across a bill drafted by MK Sasson Guetta, which would require commemorating the life and legacy of Rav Yekusiel Yehuda Halberstam, the Sanz-Klausenberger Rebbe. Guetta, a poultry farmer from Moshav Goren, is a member of the Likud party who received his seat under the Norwegian Law and sounds like a devoted chossid in the text of the bill, which asserts, “The Rebbe’s life was a historic feat of revival and rebuilding amid destruction.” He mentioned Mifal HaShas and Laniado Hospital, both of which were founded by the Rebbe, and paid tribute to his successor, the current Sanzer Rebbe. But I can only imagine how the author of this bill would have reacted had he read the Klausenberger Rebbe’s shiurim on Chumash and found out the Rebbe’s true feelings about the State of Israel and the Knesset.

Other bills on the table were downright bizarre. For instance, MK Elazar Stern introduced a bill titled “Prohibition of Defamation — Compensation Without Proof of Damage.” One need only remember what Stern himself did to Chananel Dayan, the soldier who refused to shake hands with then-Chief of Staff Dan Chalutz. Stern, who was serving as head of the IDF Manpower Directorate at the time, teamed up with Yair Lapid, then a journalist, to humiliate Dayan, even publishing documents from his personal file in the IDF. They were ultimately forced to compensate him.

Another bill comes from the Yesh Atid party, headed by Yair Lapid, and is titled “Declaring Qatar an Enemy State.” This is a downright foolish proposal. For one thing, there is no sense in passing a bill categorizing a specific country as an enemy state; instead, the bill should define an enemy. Besides, what will happen if Qatar signs a peace agreement with Israel? In the explanatory text of the bill, Lapid and his colleagues write, “The Israeli law today does not include a general, comprehensive definition of an enemy state.” But if that is the problem, then this law did not solve it.

Meanwhile, while Lapid is busy attacking everyone who met with anyone from Qatar under the auspices of Jay Footlik, it has been revealed that Lapid himself met with Qataris in France in a meeting brokered by the very same man — and not, as Lapid claimed, together with families of the hostages.

A Rebuke from the Court to the Attorney General

Here is a brief overview of a few stories that cannot be covered in full here due to space constraints. First, the “skunk water law,” which would prohibit the police from using the foul-smelling substance to disperse riots or protests, is approaching its final approval. This degrading and undemocratic crowd control tactic has been used mainly against the chareidi community, as well as right-wing youths holding demonstrations.

Second, there is a chassidish yungerman from Beit Shemesh who was somehow enticed to share information with Iran (on matters that are utterly insignificant) and who was sentenced to three years in prison. He was the first of a series of Israelis to be tried on such charges after falling into the Iranian trap.

In other news, a child in Yerushalayim died this week of complications from measles, which was highly tragic. In addition, for the past two weeks, the country has been witnessing fierce battles over the dairy market, as the Treasury attempted to introduce a reform that would harm Israeli dairy farmers. Everyone wants milk to be imported from abroad, which would lead to a dramatic reduction in dairy prices, but such a move would also be a mortal blow to Israel’s domestic dairy industry (and would lead to kashrus problems due to the laws of cholov Yisroel). Since many of the dairy farmers are observant, the chareidi parties were pressured to block the reform.

On the legal front, the Supreme Court delivered a stinging rebuke to the attorney general. To make a long story short, the government had appointed an official to the position of civil service commissioner, and petitions were filed with the Supreme Court claiming that the appointment required a tender, which was not issued. The government argued in response that no tender is required for this position. Chief Justice Yitzchok Amit had ruled many years ago, in fact, that this position can be filled without a tender, but he backtracked on his own ruling this time and issued an interim order against the government. While the government responded that a tender is not necessary, Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara sent a response to the court, as if on behalf of the government, acknowledging that the petitioners were correct. The case was transferred to an expanded panel of judges, who ruled that a tender is indeed not necessary. This was a ringing slap in the face to the attorney general and, indirectly, to Justice Amit as well. To put it plainly, a majority of the judges on the panel told Amit that his decision last month to halt the appointment had been unlawful.

The investigation into the military advocate general is also moving forward. The police announced that they have finished their work on the investigation, but that there is no one who can oversee it at this time. The attorney general suffers from a conflict of interest; even though she claims that she is completely impartial, the Supreme Court has already ruled that she is not permitted to handle the investigation. Every other candidate suggested by the minister of justice to oversee the probe has been disqualified by the Supreme Court. The police, therefore, decided to transfer the investigative material to the legal advisor of the Ministry of Justice, who is one of the most vocal opponents of the attorney general’s positions. This promises to be an interesting story.

Finally, the Supreme Court was petitioned to order the dismissal of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, on the grounds that he interferes with investigations and commits other offenses. As usual, the attorney general supported the petitioners. Prime Minister Netanyahu responded curtly that it is up to him, not the court, to decide whether to dismiss a minister. This placed the judges in a tough position. If they order the prime minister to fire Ben-Gvir, they will simply be handing Ben-Gvir several more mandates in the next election. On the other hand, the judges tend to find it very difficult to let go of their hatred for Netanyahu or to forgive a slight to their honor.