Degel Hatorah MK Yaakov Asher says the chareidi parties can no longer take their alliance with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the Likud for granted, declaring that the political partnership will have to be earned after the next election. In a wide-ranging interview, Asher also argued that recent legislation concerning the yeshivah world should not be viewed as a success, sharply criticized Religious Zionist leaders, and insisted that Israel’s legal establishment—not politics alone—is preventing a solution to the draft crisis.

Asher rejected the notion that last week’s passage of the Basic Law on Torah study and the law freezing certain arrests constituted a major victory for the chareidi parties.

“The definition of this legislation as an ‘achievement’ is a mistaken one. This legislation was passed only because the draft law—the central issue, the law regulating the status of Torah learners—did not pass. The draft law, as everyone likes to call it, failed. We know what we have gone through over the past two years on this issue. People may tend to forget, but it all began with Edelstein when Gallant was still serving as defense minister.”

He said the controversy over the draft law predated the war and was only intensified by the conflict.

“The issue began before the war, and of course the war did not make things any easier. But I agree with you—in this Knesset term, after the last election, we came in with a feeling of complete euphoria. We kept adding everything we wanted into the coalition agreements. Every good thing that needed to be included was included.”

According to Asher, the coalition then lost valuable time by focusing on judicial reform instead of resolving the draft issue.

“But unfortunately, the significant part of the beginning of this term was devoted to judicial reform. Nobody imagined what would emerge from the Kaplan Street protests and everything that followed. Nobody imagined it—not even Likud. In hindsight, with the benefit of hindsight, Likud made a mistake by trying to do everything at once.”

Turning to Deputy Supreme Court President Justice Noam Sohlberg, Asher accused the judge of allowing his personal worldview to shape his legal decisions regarding the chareidi community.

“Here we have a conservative judge today—Justice Noam Sohlberg—but he has had ideological disagreements with us from the very beginning. He uses his judicial office to educate us according to the values with which he educates his own children.”

Asher continued, “He is a human being, not an angel. Sohlberg is not an angel, and Amit certainly is not an angel. Clearly, he comes from a place of deep conviction. Anyone who is not chareidi and is not connected to our faith, our guidance and the outlook of our gedolim has difficulty understanding us.”

He added, “Especially after the longstanding dispute between the Religious Zionist community and the chareidi community over religion and state became public, I can appreciate him personally—he is not motivated by hatred or anything like that—but he comes with his own ideology. People do not become angels when they put on a judicial robe. He disagrees with us because he was raised on the teachings of different rabbanim.”

Asked whether the chareidi parties themselves bore responsibility for the failure to pass a draft law, Asher acknowledged mistakes had been made across the political spectrum.

“First of all, there is no such thing as saying we didn’t fail. There are always failures. And you know what? It wasn’t only us who failed—and I’m not saying this to provoke anyone—everyone failed. The entire atmosphere failed. We were all caught up in this.”

He argued, however, that the current struggle extends beyond ordinary politics.

“Now I’ll explain the difference between the situation we’re in today and ordinary politics. We are no longer conducting normal politics. Our battle is not political. We haven’t suddenly become less talented or less capable.”

“There is a political arena, and mistakes may have been made there that need to be corrected. But the arena we’re in now is not political. These are completely different rules. We’re facing judges and legal advisers. This is no longer simply a political question.”

Asher concluded that only sweeping legal reforms would enable elected officials to implement policy.

“Therefore, it may be that we have to understand that different methods will be required, and perhaps there is no alternative but a profound change in the entire legal outlook of the State. When someone like Gil Limon or the attorney general issues a legal opinion with judicial force, even if you bring 95 Knesset members—including the left-wing opposition—to vote with you, it won’t matter if they’ve decided they want to stop you.”

Addressing Prime Minister Netanyahu directly, Asher said his party has significant grievances with the premier’s handling of the issue.

“We have serious complaints against Netanyahu. Nevertheless, when we look at reality, we see that in this same legal arena in which we are struggling—they are struggling as well.”

“But from our perspective, we certainly have complaints that our partnership became something taken for granted when it never should have been. In certain cases it became one-sided. Beyond that, the rules of the game have changed. You can pass confidence votes, win committee majorities and do whatever you want, but in the end you run into a legal opinion that stops everything.”

He specifically argued that Netanyahu waited too long to remove Yuli Edelstein as chairman of the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.

“There is no doubt there were many points along the way when deadlines were missed. In my opinion, Netanyahu should have replaced Yuli Edelstein much earlier, and perhaps we would have been in a different place today. They kept delaying things and saying, ‘Let’s get over this hurdle and then the next one.’ The same thing happened with Gallant. There were other steps that could have been taken.”

Asher then delivered one of his sharpest political assessments.

“There is no doubt that we have a serious trust problem with this bloc—with Likud, with the person leading it, and with the various parties such as Religious Zionism.”

He also launched a blistering attack on leaders and activists within the Religious Zionist camp.

“I don’t like making generalizations because there are many knitted-kippah people who sat on the committee, fought for their yeshivos, and endured the same embarrassment and public shaming that we did because they are chardalim.”

“But the political leadership of Religious Zionism absolutely betrayed the bloc it always claimed to represent. I told Smotrich’s people just last week: ‘Without us, who is going to take you? The left views you as messianic extremists and a danger to the state. They want to close your yeshivos for different reasons. Today we’re the ones on the skewer; tomorrow it will be you. Who will defend you? So why are you suddenly acting so self-righteous?'”

He continued by criticizing coalition partners who, in his view, abandoned commitments made before entering government.

“There is nothing more hypocritical than becoming finance minister or absorption minister—like Ofir Sofer—because of a coalition agreement that explicitly states that the first thing we are seeking is to regulate the status of bnei yeshivah, and then distancing yourself from it.”

Responding to claims that the war fundamentally changed the political reality, Asher argued that such reasoning should apply consistently.

“But if the war changed everything, then let’s also reconsider whether we should establish settlements and invest so much money there. This partnership includes the Likud right, the Religious Zionist הציבור and the chareidi ציבור. If we cannot understand what is most precious to one another, then why does this partnership exist at all?”

Looking ahead to the next election, Asher made clear that Degel Hatorah is not committed in advance to any political camp.

“No one knows what will happen after the election or what political earthquakes may or may not occur. But one thing is certain: we are no longer automatically with anyone. Our bloc is Torah and our deepest commitment is to Torah. Without Torah this country will be destroyed. Whoever wants us as partners will have to come and join us.”

Asked whether that means the party could negotiate with figures such as Gadi Eisenkot if Netanyahu fails to secure 61 seats, Asher replied that every option remains open.

“I already explained—we are not coming into this attached to any bloc. We are our own bloc. We will go with whoever knows how to accommodate our needs, and it is also possible that we won’t go with anyone.”

He noted that while Degel Hatorah and Shas do not always agree politically, they remained united throughout the battle over the draft issue.

“There are differences between us and Shas, and this is not the first or the last. Nevertheless, on the issues of the Torah world and the draft law we worked shoulder to shoulder—both politically and under the guidance of the gedolei Yisrael. Rav Dov Lando gave his instructions to us, the members of Degel Hatorah, and that is the path we follow.”

When asked whether he had spoken recently with Naftali Bennett, Asher dismissed the idea with sarcasm.

“Naftali Bennett? Why, am I bored or something? Look, Bennett is the kind of person who, if he needs you on a certain day, will sing chassidishe songs to you. On another day, when he needs campaign headlines, you’ll hear him launch harsh attacks against the chareidi public. In my opinion, he is not worthy of leadership or even serious attention. He is simply trying to recycle old ideas and live off headlines. We had a relationship with him in the past, but in truth we had a much better relationship with Ayelet Shaked than with him.”

He added, “I’m not afraid of anything. Right now there is a competition between Bennett, Lapid and Liberman over who can issue the harshest attacks against the chareidim. The broader public sees the emptiness of it all.”

Asher also dismissed concerns that the unresolved status of yeshivah students could weaken the electoral strength of the chareidi parties.

“Anything can happen, but history has a good memory. Before the last election people also claimed that chareidim would vote for Bennett, join Likud or support Ben Gvir. In the end we learned one thing: only chareidim truly care about the chareidi interest. Everyone else clucks from the sidelines. When the court froze the arrests law, none of our partners on the right came to defend us. But when the communications law was challenged, everyone rushed to speak out.”

Finally, Asher dismissed the newly formed “Chareidi Public” faction in Beit Shemesh, suggesting outside forces were attempting to reshape chareidi politics.

“I have more than a feeling that this is one of the first signs of people sitting in their kibbutzim or their villas in Savyon or Herzliya Pituach who are operating various individuals.”

“I don’t know, and I’m not accusing anyone personally, but anyone who wants to help should simply come and help. I can show you the list of people who contact me every day: avreichim from Chazon Ish Kollel and Ponevezh Kollel, alongside people working in high-tech, accountants and lawyers. These are our people, and we help them both personally and publicly. We are facing an enormous challenge—a legal battle during wartime while people are being killed—and it is an extremely complex and sensitive situation.”