Summary of Editorials from the Hebrew Press – January 2nd, 2012

Yediot Aharonot dismisses the claim by "rabbis and others in the ultra-Orthodox sector" that the actions in question were those of a marginal few and that "most of our public opposes such actions," and contends that "this is not true, simply not true." The author, a Holocaust survivor, avers that "not a handful but thousands – at every opportunity, every demonstration and every struggle against police and soldiers – hurl the word ‘Nazis’ and also say ‘We feel here like the Jews in Europe under the Germans did’ (which, by the way, is a strange statement since the subject known as ‘the Holocaust’ practically does not exist in the ultra-orthodox sector and is not studied)." The paper suggests that "if for the expression ‘Nazi’ or for wearing a yellow star, it would be possible to arrest someone and bring them before a judge – the problem would solve itself and this despicable phenomenon would disappear."

Yisrael Hayom reminds its readers that extremist ultra-Orthodox elements have not been the only ones to use symbols of the Holocaust or hurl the epithet ‘Nazi’ at police or soldiers and says, "While every sector has the right to protest, the ultra-Orthodox, like other sectors, must not abuse the freedom that the state gives them." The author believes that "those who equate what goes on here in the country to what happened in the Third Reich, and it does not matter in what aspect, in effect perpetrates an act that borders on actual Holocaust-denial. Any attempt to present social discourse in Israel and the conduct of the law-enforcement authorities as identical to those that existed in the Third Reich is a terrible historical and moral distortion." The paper concludes, "The protest of those ultra-orthodox demonstrators is legitimate; the manner of their protest is invalid and condemnable."

Ma’ariv reminds its readers when a young Israeli begins his or her compulsory service in the IDF, his or her parents stop receiving child support payments, despite the continued expenses of maintaining their son or daughter, even as the soldier receives a minimal remuneration from the state for his or her service, while those (Arabs, ultra-Orthodox and others) who do not serve in the IDF are either free to work or receive support payments from the public till. The author, a father of a young woman soldier, says, "Especially now, when the issue of the exclusion of women is raising tensions between those who serve and pay taxes and those who do not, the time has come to put an end to these distortions and this discrimination. As the proportion of those not serving increases, so does the inequality," and asks, "Why should a young ultra-Orthodox man be eligible to pursue Torah studies full time and receive a budget, courtesy of those who pay taxes, for his studies while those in his age bracket lose years in which they could be building their careers, and finance it out of their own pockets? The time has come to transfer budgets for the maintenance of soldiers in compulsory service. They and their parents should be eligible to receive full financing for all needs related to their service and their living [expenses]."

The Jerusalem Post comments: "A massive arms deal clinched between the US and Saudi Arabia – 84 top-of-theline F-15SA fighter jets to the Saudi air force – has received surprisingly little attention at home. Though Washington’s intention is to build the Saudis’ confidence in the face of an increasingly belligerent Iran, these fighter planes could, in theory, just as soon be used against the Jewish State as against the Islamic Republic. The present Saudi regime seems stable – but so did the Mubarak’s and Ben Ali’s. In what is euphemistically being called the "Arab Spring", the US need to reevaluate its military ties in the region, not primarily out of a concern for Israeli interests, rather as a means of preventing religious extremists from imposing their radical policies with the aid of advanced US arms."

Haaretz comments on the proposed legislation aimed at restructuring the Supreme Court: "The proposed legislation to oust the IBA’s elected representatives, in the words of the Knesset’s deputy legal advisor and the Knesset’s Constitution, Law and Justice Committee’s legal counsel, bears the signs of being retroactive, arbitrary and personal, and is constitutionally flawed and indefensibly unproportional. PM Netanyahu must make it clear to the justice minister what a proper justice minister should have understood by himself: There is no room for constitutional changes to meet momentary needs that change from one day to the next into something totally different. If he does not do so, the coalition will be disgraced when the law is ruled unconstitutional."

[Noah Kliger, Lior Alperovitch and Nadav Haetzni wrote today’s articles in Yediot Aharonot, Yisrael Hayom and Ma’ariv, respectively.]