Who are the Jews - Japanese

April 3, 2025

今日教会の中でユダヤ人の本当のアイデンティティーについての議論があります。誰がイ スラエルの十二部族の血を引いた子孫なのか、また教会はどこに位置するのか、神は異邦 人教会のためにイスラエルを永遠に諦めたのか、また現代イスラエルの世俗の市民たちは 神の選民なのかなど。これらはクリスチャンの間でイスラエルについて話す時に頻繁に登 場する質問です。

まずはじめに、異邦人の時について語っているふたつの聖書箇所を見ることから始めてみ ましょう。ひとつはローマ 11 章 25 節で、そこでパウロは救いという観点から語っていま

す。「異邦人の完成のなる時」。イエスはルカ 21 章 24 節で異邦人の時を、国家の預言的側 面から語っています。「異邦人の時の終わるまで、エルサレムは異邦人に踏み荒らされま す」

ユダヤ人への神の目的は部分的また一時的に保留されました。しかし個人的にイエスを信 じるユダヤ人はいつの時代でも存在しました。それはただ一日にして終わったのではあり ません。神は「もう終わりだ――私は異邦人に行く」とは言いませんでした。異邦人の時は 使徒 10 章でコルネリオの家で最初に異邦人が信じたときに始まります。その後、使徒 13 章でパウロやバルナバの働きがあります。

異邦人への移行は漸進的な(少しずつ進む)ものでした。一日の間にユダヤ人から異邦人 へ恵みが移ったのではなく、そこには移行期があったのです。そしてそれと同じように異 邦人の時は終わりに至ります。これは神がご自身の恵みを異邦人からユダヤ人に戻される 移行期のことです。

イザヤはメシアが千年王国に到来することを預言しました。初代教会はすべて前千年王国 説を信じていました。そして新約聖書は神が恵みをイスラエルに対して回復される時にキ リストは再臨すると書いています。神がユダヤ人を頑なにしたことは部分的であり、一時 的です。なので神はあたかもこう言っているようです。「私はあなたがたを呼んだが、あ なたがたは私の契約を破った。私はエレミヤを遣わしたがあなたがたは牢獄に入れた。イ ザヤを遣わしたがあなたがたは半分に切り裂いた。私はリバイバルをもたらす義の説教者

たちを遣わした。ヨシヤ王を遣わし、ヒゼキヤ王を遣わした。またエズラやネヘミヤを遣

わしたが、あなたがたはそのようなリバイバルを忘れてしまった。あなたがたは私の契約 を破り、今度は私の息子、メシアを退けた。私は異邦人のほうに行く」

しかしパウロはその状況が入れ替わる時が来ると私たちに語っています。したがってそこ には異邦人とユダヤ人という区別があるのです。それではユダヤ人とは一体誰のことなの でしょう?

創世記 12 章にはアブラハムへの 5 つの約束があります。またパウロはローマ 2 章 29 節で 本当のユダヤ人がどのようなものかを説明しています。パウロはそこで言葉遊びを用いて 書きました。

『かえって人目に隠れたユダヤ人がユダヤ人であり、文字ではなく、御霊による、 心の割礼こそ割礼です。その誉れは、人からではなく、神から来るものです』

誉れという言葉が鍵となる言葉です。“ユダヤ人”という言葉はユダ部族――イェフダから来 ています。その本来の意味は“神の礼拝者(誉れを与える者)”というものです。パウロはこ こで言葉遊びをしています。パウロは誉れが人から来るものではないと言っているのです

。それは“ユダヤ人”の意味――ユダ部族からの神の礼拝者とかけた言葉遊びです。

“ユダヤ人”と再定義される異邦人

私たちが今日“ユダヤ人”と呼ぶものの一般的な定義は主にバビロン捕囚から生じたもので す。本来、彼らはイスラエル人と呼ばれていました。“ユダヤ人”という言葉がユダヤ人自 身からではなく、異邦人によりアブラハム、イサク、ヤコブのすべての子孫へ付けられた ことは興味深いことです。これは福音書でも顕著な事柄です。マルコ 15 章 32 節ではイエ

スはユダヤ人から“イスラエルの王”と呼ばれています。しかし同じ章の 2 節では彼はロー マ人たちから“ユダヤ人の王”と呼ばれています。イエスはユダヤ人にとっては“イスラエル 人”だったのです。“ユダヤ人”という一般的な言葉は主にバビロン捕囚の期間またその後に 主に発達したものです。第二列王記 16 章を見ると、南王国ユダに住んでいた住民の地理的 な位置を知ることができます。当時の“ユダヤ人”はただ、バビロン捕囚から戻ってきたユ ダの住民を指す言葉でした。本来彼らは“イスラエル人”と呼ばれていて、それはへブル人 から来ていました。“イスラエル人”はヤコブ、神と闘う者の子孫であり、それがユダヤ人 の特徴を形作っています。ユダヤ人は神と闘う者です。ヤコブは主の御使いと格闘しまし た。ラビたちはその御使いを“メタトロン”と呼んでいます。私たちはそれがキリストの顕 現――旧約聖書でのキリストの顕れであることを知っています。

ここで思い出してほしいのが、ヤコブは主の御使いと顔が見えるまで夜を通して格闘した

ということです。夜とは大患難に関して最も一般的に用いられる聖書象徴の比喩のひとつ です。「夜回りよ。今は夜の何時か。夜回りよ。今は夜の何時か」彼が戻って来るのは第 二の夜回りか、第三の夜回りか。「夜中の盗人のように来る」「わざを、昼の間に行なわ なければなりません。だれも働くことのできない夜が来ます」ヤコブは夜の終わりまで格 闘しました。未信のイスラエルは大患難全体を経験し、その後、大患難の終わりにイエス を認めます。聖書中でヤコブという言い方がなされているとき、それはユダヤ民族に特化 した表現です。ユダヤ民族は神と格闘しています。一方彼らが国になる前、出エジプトか ら彼らは“ヘブル人”と呼ばれていました。

新約聖書はこれをさらに展開しています。新約聖書ではユダヤ人とは南部イスラエル人の 子孫、つまり、バビロン捕囚から帰還したユダヤの民、またマカベア家の後のハスモン王 朝を通ってきた者たちのことです。ですがヨハネはそれに特別な見解を加えています。彼 は他の福音書と違った独特な意味で“ユダヤ人”という用語を使っています。そのために誤 ってヨハネの福音書がクリスチャンの反ユダヤ主義を伝えているといわれていますが、私 たちは当時の背景を理解する必要があります。ギリシア語の“ユーダイオス(Ioudaios)” の翻訳に問題があるのです。ヨハネは、ヨハネ 4 章を除いて、“ユダヤ人”という単語を、 エルサレム内外に住みサンヘドリンが支配していた宗教組織のメンバーという意味で使っ ていました。したがって「ユダヤ人のために」や「信じたユダヤ人は」という表現を見る 時、彼らはみなユダヤ人であったことは確かなのです。それが意味していることは、その 宗教組織の一員であった者のこと、たいていがパリサイ人、時に他の分派のこともありま した。しかしそのすべての者がサンヘドリンの支配下にあったのです。使徒の働きはより 一般的な用語を使うか、“ユダヤ人”という単語をより一般的な意味で使っています。それ は異邦人ではない者、ガアル(在留異国人)ではないもの、サマリヤ人ではない者という 意味です。

ユダヤ教には主要な三種類があります。モーセ的ユダヤ教、タルムード的ユダヤ教、イス ラエルの法的ユダヤ教です。このうちふたつは有効で、ひとつはそうではありません。最 初のモーセ的ユダヤ教はタナク、旧約聖書の最初の五書、モーセ五書に見られるものです

。このユダヤ教は紀元 70 年から存在しえないユダヤ教です。預言者ダニエルはメシアは大 事神殿が崩壊する前に来て、死ななければならないと言いました。ミシュナのサンヘドリ ン 96b にもそうあります。実際、人々はイザヤ 53 章を禁断の章と呼んでいます。タルムー ドは事実ダニエル 9 章を読む者には呪いが下ると書いています。なぜでしょうか。それは

その箇所にメシアの到来の時期が予告されていたからです。メシアはやって来て、死なな

ければなりませんでした。ユダヤ人の多くは尋ねます。「もしイエスがメシアなら、なぜ 今も戦争があるのか」彼らはきちんと理解していません。ダニエルにはメシアが来て死に

、終わりまで戦いが続いて、荒廃が定められていると書いてあります。メシアはその第二 の到来において世界的な平和をもたらすのです。

ユダヤ教ではふたつのメシア像があります。マシアハ・ベン・ヨセフ、それとマシアハ・ ベン・ダヴィード、つまりヨセフの子とダビデの子です。最初の到来においてイエスはヨ セフの特徴をもってやって来ました。それはユダヤ人兄弟たちに裏切られ、異邦人の手に 引き渡されるという特徴です。彼の兄弟はヨセフを最初の出会いで認識しませんでしたが

、2度目に会った時に彼だと分かりました。そして彼らはヨセフと共に激しく泣き、それ と同じことをヨセフの子にも行うのです。第二の到来においてダビデの子はメシアの王国 を建て上げます。そうです、イエスは平和をもたらします。ですが最初の到来は救いをも たらすために来られました。モーセ的ユダヤ教に関しては、それは紀元 70 年以降は存在し ていません。

誰も自分で聖書を読むだけでは、人々が信じさせようとしているものと同じ結論に至る人 はいません。本当に多くの人がただ新約聖書を読むだけで新生に至っています。誰もただ 新約聖書を読んだだけでエホバの証人になることはありません。誰もただ新約聖書を読ん だだけでモルモン教徒にならないし、(私の母親にこう言ったと言わないでほしいですが

)誰もただ新約聖書を読んだだけでローマ・カトリック教徒にはなりはしません。そして ユダヤ人の誰もトーラーを呼んで、タルムード的ユダヤ教がモーセや預言者のユダヤ教だ と思う人はいないのです。“ラビ”という単語はタナク(旧約聖書)に一度も登場しません。

二つ目のユダヤ教がタルムード的ユダヤ教です。それは紀元 90 年のヤブネの会議にてラビ

・モーシェ・ヨハナン・ベン・ザッカイが創設したものです。彼はガマリエルの学派出身 の聖パウロと同級生でした。彼はラビ・ヒレルの孫ガマリエルの元に、ヒレルのパリサイ 派神学校で他のラビたちと学んでいました。これはふたりのラビの物語です。ふたりの同 級生がいました。タルソのラビ・サウルとラビ・ベン・ザッカイです。紀元 70 年に神殿が 崩壊した時、ラビ・ヨハナン・ベン・ザッカイはエルサレムから箱、棺桶に入れられなん とか脱出しました。そしてヘブライ語の正典――旧約聖書が定められた会議に集ったので す。彼は神殿の代わりにシナゴーグにしようと言いました。大祭司の代わりにラビたちを 置き換えました。そしていけにえの代わりにより多くのミツヴォート――善行を行おうと 決めたのです。

すべてのユダヤ人はこのふたりの同級生どちらかに従います。救いの確信が無かったヨハ

ナン・ベン・ザッカイか、イェシュアを自分のメシアと信じていたために救いの確信があ

ったタルソのラビ・サウロのどちらかです。

タルムード的ユダヤ教はモーセや預言者のユダヤ教ではありません。それは混ざり合った のものです――まさに名ばかりのキリスト教と同じです。タルムード的ユダヤ教にはさま ざまな形があり――ハシド派、正統派、保守派とあります。またリベラルな改革派は基本 的に人間主義者です。その宗教は本当の信仰に関するよりも文化や倫理的なことにかりあ っています。これがタルムード的ユダヤ教です。ですが三種類目のユダヤ教があります。 これは有効なものです。これがパウロや使徒たちが守ったものです。それはイエスがトー ラーを成就したメシアだと信じるユダヤ教、「メシアニック的ユダヤ教」です。しかしな がら今日のメシアニック運動の中にはさまざまなものがあります。

ユダヤ人が何でないかという地位の定義について考えてみましょう。パウロはローマ人へ の手紙 2 章 28 節-29 節でこう書いています。「外見上のユダヤ人がユダヤ人なのではな く、外見上のからだの割礼が割礼なのではありません。かえって人目に隠れたユダヤ人が ユダヤ人であり、文字ではなく、御霊による、心の割礼こそ割礼です。その誉れは、人か らではなく、神から来るものです」文字ではなく霊によります。

さて人目に隠れたユダヤ人についてですが、このふたつの節の誤解によって置換神学の考 えに推進力が与えられています。「我々が人目に隠れたユダヤ人なのだ。私たちの心は割 礼を受けている」というものです。しかしながら、もし誰かが手紙を受け取ったなら、手 紙全体の文脈を無視して、ある部分だけを引用することはできません。ローマ人への手紙 は手紙であり、そのような解釈は手紙のその先に書いてあるものと正反対のものです。11 章全体では、この手紙の著者であるパウロが聖霊(ルアハ・ハ・コデシュ)の導きのもと

、本来のオリーブの枝(ユダヤ人)と接木された枝(異邦人)の区別を付けています。

エレミヤ 31 章 31 節ではこのようにあります。「わたしは、イスラエルの家とユダの家と に、新しい契約を結ぶ。その契約は…(父祖たちと結んだもの)のようではない」神は新 契約を誰と結んだのでしょうか?教会でしょうか?イエスは教会とひとつも契約を結びま せんでした。彼はイスラエルとユダヤ人に結ばれたのです。もし神がユダヤ人との関係を 終わらせたのなら、神は教会とも関係を終わらせたことでしょう。もし神がユダヤ人との 関係を終わらせたのなら、私たちとの関係も終わっていました。幸運なことに、契約の有 効性は人の忠実さによるものではなく、神の忠実さによるものです。神は初めからご自分 の民が不忠実であることを知っておられました。イスラエルの背信に関することでも、そ れと同等またはイスラエル以上の背信が実際に教会の中にあります。

信じた非ユダヤ人、すなわち異邦人が信じないユダヤ人に取って代わったのは事実です。

自分の木から切り折られた不信のユダヤ人が信じた異邦人に取って代えられました。しか しそれは新しい木ではなく、同じ木 なのです。根は見ることができません。しかしもし 根が死んでいたなら、木そのものも死んでいるのです。もし神がイスラエルとの関係を終 わらせているなら、自動的に教会との関係も終わらせていることになります。

北王国の失われた十部族についてはどうでしょうか。聖書は彼らに何が起こったかを記し ています。北王国からの忠実な者たちはアサ王の治世に南に下り、自分たちの部族として のアイデンティティーを守りました。そのためにヤコブの手紙は“十二部族”に向けて書か れているのです。ルカの福音書の誕生物語に登場するアンナは、アシェル部族の出身でし た。ミシュナはずっと 3 世紀、4 世紀までそれぞれの部族の記録をたくさん残しています。 十部族は聖書によれば決して失われていないのです。他の者たちはアッシリア人侵略者た ちと雑婚し、サマリヤ人となりました。そしてその他はアッシリア帝国に散らばり、中央 アジアのユダヤ人共同体を形作ったり、ただ吸収されてしまいました。

ローマ人への手紙 2 章 28 節から 29 節を見てみましょう。「かえって人目に隠れたユダヤ

人がユダヤ人であり、文字ではなく、御霊による、心の割礼こそ割礼です」エレミヤ 9 章 25 節から 26 節は“割礼を受けているが割礼を受けていない者”という言葉を使っています。 そのような者たちに対して「エジプト、ユダ、エドム、アモン人、モアブ、および荒野の 住人でこめかみを刈り上げているすべての者を罰する」と書かれてあります。ユダが異邦 人の国々のただ中に書かれていることに注目してください。これはなぜなのでしょうか。 それは異教徒のようにふるまうなら、ユダヤ人は彼らに勝ったところが無くなるからです

。そのような人はユダヤの遺産を捨て去ってしまっています。自分たちのメシアを退けた ユダヤ人は自分たちのユダヤの遺産を放棄してしまっています。パウロが言うように彼ら はもう一度自分たちの木に戻されることができます。神はユダヤ人をとても簡単に信じさ せることができます。なぜなら神はそれより困難なことをもうすでにされたからです。そ れはエスキモーにユダヤの神を信じさせ、ベネズエラ人にユダヤの神を信じさせ、中国の 民に信じさせ、ヨーロッパ人にユダヤの神を信じさせたからです。イザヤ 11 章 1 節にある

、異邦人がエッサイの根のもとに来るという言葉が諸国の上に成就するなら、また軽蔑さ れたこの小さな国の神を非ユダヤ人に信じさせられるのなら、自分たちのメシアをユダヤ 人に信じさせることはいかに容易なことでしょうか。

割礼は改宗のひとつの象徴です。それでは非ユダヤ人で新生した者はどうなるのでしょう

?私たちはその答えをイザヤ 56 章 3 節とエペソ 2 章 12 節で見ることができます。「主に 連なる外国人は言ってはならない。『主はきっと、私をその民から切り離される』と」(イ ザヤ 56 章 3 節)神はあなたがユダヤ人のメシアに信仰を持つなら、ユダヤ人から切り離し

はしません。アブラハムがすべて信じる者の父と書かれていることを思い出してください

。それはアブラハムが異邦人からユダヤ人へ改宗した者であるからです。アブラハムは民 族的にユダヤ人であり、同時に異邦人でした。このためにアブラハムはすべて信じる者の 父なのです。このためにイエスの系図の中に異邦人が登場します。彼がすべての救い主と なるためです。パウロはエペソ 2 章 12 節においてギリシア語で政治的な市民権に関する言 葉を使っています。

『そのころのあなたがたは、キリストから離れ、イスラエルの国から除外され、約 束の契約については他国人であり、この世にあって望みもなく、神もない人たちで した。しかし、以前は遠く離れていたあなたがたも、今ではキリスト・イエスの中 にあることにより、キリストの血によって近い者とされたのです』(エペソ 2 章 12 節-13 節)

異邦人はイエスへの信仰を通して接ぎ木されました。それは養子にされることと、父祖へ なされた約束のためです。養子をする時、父親は法律的に子どもの父親になります。母親 は法律的に母親となるのです。そしてこれと共に聖書では、父祖の約束にあずかることも 書かれてあります。大半が異邦人で占められていたコリントの教会に対して第一コリント でパウロは「私たちの父祖たちはみな、雲の下におり、みな海を通って行きました」と書 いています。アブラハムの子孫(種)を信じる信仰によって、アブラハムは人種に関わら ずすべて者の父となりました。

第二に、改宗――信仰の転換によってです。改宗(回心)にもふたつ種類があります。仏教 徒が救われるとき、仏教徒であることをやめます。ヒンドゥー教徒が救われれば、ヒンド ゥー教徒であることをやめます。ユダヤ人が救われれば、その改宗には違った言葉――テ シュバー(立ち返ること)が使われます。その人は罪から神に立ち返り、ユダヤ人として のアイデンティティーが完全となるのです。異邦人のみが改宗できます。ユダヤ人は完成 されるのです。ユダヤ人の完成はテシュバーです。これは異教徒の背景を持つ黒人アフリ カ人の子どもがクリスチャンのポーランド人家庭に養子されることで説明できます。その 子は法律的な養子制度によりポーランド人となり、キリスト教に改宗しました。しかしそ の子が今度は大きくなり、ポーランド人の女性と結婚するとします。そうすると彼は結婚 によりポーランド人となり、ポーランド語を話し始めます。したがって彼は文化によりポ ーランド人になったのですが、彼の肌は黒いままです。これが非ユダヤ人がイエスの信者 となる場合に起こることです。父祖の約束を受けることによりユダヤ人ではありませんが 子となります。それは養子――改宗、宗教的な改宗によるものです。または婚姻関係によ り子となります。それはキリストが主に異邦人でなる教会の花婿であるからです。第一コ リント 9 章では、異邦人が主の聖餐にあずかる場合の文化変容について書いてあります。

彼らは本来の相続者とペサハ、過越の祭りの意義を祝います。これが異邦人クリスチャン

の地位です。

貧しさのためにヨーロッパの家族に養子されたこのアフリカ人の子どもを考えてみてくだ さい。いかなる法律的、婚姻的または文化的理由においても彼はポーランド人となりまし た。しかし彼はまだ黒人アフリカ人であるのです。彼はまだ自分のアイデンティティーを 保っています。それでも彼は本当のポーランド人なのです。彼は他のどの子どもとも同じ ように親から愛されています。子どもをひとり生むことと、子どもを養子することは同じ くらいの大きな愛を必要とします。その子どもは同じ法律的権利を持ち、法律的地位を保 っているのです。

次にユダヤ人に関しては法的な立場があります。最初のものはイスラエルの帰還法です。 シオニズム運動の父祖たちはこれを議論しました――数年間ではなく、数十年間にわたっ てです。最終的にベン・グリオンが言いました。「誰がユダヤ人なのか、我々の敵に決め させよう」彼らはその通りにしました。ユダヤ人の祖父をひとりでも持っていれば強制収 容所に行けとナチスが言ったために、イスラエル政府もユダヤ人の祖父がひとりいればア リヤー(帰還)を行い、イスラエルに移住する権利があると定めました。これが本来の帰 還法です。

第二にハラハー的な(ユダヤ法的)法律があります。これはユダヤ人の宗教法で立てられ たものです。ハラハーによるとそれは母系の血筋によるものです。ある人の母親がユダヤ 人で、その人がユダヤ教へのハラハー的な改宗を経ているなら――言い換えるなら割礼で すが――父祖の約束に入ることができるというのです。第三のものは、イスラエルのラビ が定めるユダヤ人の定義で、それは本来ハラハーの定めるものと同じであるべきものです

。ですが現実はイスラエル政権の窮状によって物事は複雑化しています。世界には約 55 の 民主主義の国がありますが、その中で唯一ユダヤ人が宗教の自由を持てない国があります

。それがイスラエルです。これはイスラエルのラビが定めるユダヤ人の地位です。彼らは 数世紀前にラビ・ヨセフ・カロ(Yosef Karo)が定めたミツヴォートの法典『シュルハン

・アルーフ(Shulchan Aruch)』を受け入れなければならないと言います。そしてもし『 シュルハン・アルーフ』を受入れないならば正式にユダヤ人となれないのです。このため にアフリカ系ユダヤ人(ファラシェ)の中で葛藤が起こり、インド系ユダヤ人( イェフデ ィン )また正統派でないユダヤ人の間でも葛藤が起こります。反シオニズム主義のラビは 何の問題もなくラビでいられますが、改革派やリベラルのラビたちは資格を持てないので す。私たちはこれまで人々がどのようにユダヤ人の宗教の自由を奪ってきたかを話してき ました。ユダヤ人の歴史的な惨劇や侮辱を私は認めます。しかしイスラエルもユダヤ人の 宗教の自由を否定し、特にメシアニックジューに対して同じことを行っているのです。

これによりイスラエルの法律的立場が考えられます。数年前に彼らは、他の信仰にかつて

改宗したことのある人はユダヤ人ではないと定めました。特にミクベー・ブリット( mikve-brit)、洗礼を受けた場合です。その当時にあってもそれは政治的圧力の強い決定で した。法律的な立場におけるユダヤ人の定義をこれまで 4 つ見てきましたが、それを見る とそこに共通認識が無いことが分かります。そこには法律的共通認識も、宗教的共通認識 も無いのです。彼らは政治の便宜に合わせてユダヤ人のアイデンティティーの定義を気ま ぐれに定めているのです。

聖書的な分類

聖書はどう語っているでしょうか。旧約聖書、タナクにあるのは主に父方の系図ですが、 歴代誌には母方の系図もあり、ルツ記の記述もあります。これは非常に重要です。正統派 のラビたちは系図に基づいてイエスのメシア性の信用を落とし、新約聖書の正当性を攻撃 します。しかし彼らが言いたがらないことは、ラビ的な文書自体(サンヘドリン 25C)が ルカの系図はマリヤのものだと言っていることです。「いや、ユダヤ人のアイデンティテ ィーは父からでなくてはならないのだ」との反論が返ってくることがありますが、ラビた ち自身がユダヤ人は母方の系図によると言っているではありませんか。ラビたちは自分た ちの中で矛盾を起こしています。一方で、歴代誌とルツ記には母方の系図の前例となるも のがあるのです。

新約聖書はより寛大です。系図は母方であ



October 12, 2026
Written by - Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM Examples abound in history of how the responses to innovations in technology that disrupted and transformed the nature of warfare have taken a delayed time to be adapted. Chain mail and armour had to be altered and bolstered to repel arrows from the English Longbow in Medieval Europe, but this didn't occur in time to the dismay of the French at Agincourt. It took the Spanish decades to redesign their cumbersome Galleons that lay prey to the swifter English ships. Napoleonic era field tactics were still being employed during the American Civil War, with mass charges mowed down by the Gatling barrel machine gun. Trench warfare was only later embraced during WWI. With the cheap manufacture of drones and the advances in AI a new chapter has opened in how war is waged in our own time. The conflicts in Ukraine and Iran have demonstrated how asymmetric warfare has become as much an economic calculation as a game of cat and mouse. Drones (and relatively cheaply manufactured ballistic missiles by Iran) are being shot down at great expense. AI which has been extensively deployed for target identification in Gaza is also proving to be a vital tool in hunting incoming drones. But as in the delayed development of military countermeasures historically, drones are ahead of AI in the battlefield. This is reflected in the enormity of Russian military casualties that have fallen victim to Ukrainian drones. AI is able to cut through the 'background noise' of distracting projectiles, birds and other debris to home in efforts to eliminate the actual drone target. The magic formula is speed and precision. Humans can detect and assess a threat, but AI can process radar, cameras and other sensors almost instantly, and with increasing accuracy predict where a drone intends to strike. When swamped with a wave drone attack, AI acts to identify and track the multiple threats. AI can also help decide how to respond. Depending on the system, the response could involve electronic warfare, an interceptor drone, a missile or a gun-based system. Ukraine has installed automated machine gun turrets instructed by AI to protect Kiev. In some cases, humans still make the final decision to engage, while AI handles the calculations and tracking required to make that decision quickly. More broadly, drone warfare is becoming a contest between autonomous systems. The challenge is no longer simply building a better missile or a better drone. It is building a system that can see the threat first, understand it quickly and respond before the drone reaches its target. In that sense, AI is becoming a critical part of air defence. The advantage may increasingly belong to whoever can make the fastest and most accurate decisions—not necessarily whoever manufactures the most expensive weapons. AI's pace of progress is exponential. It is beyond comprehension what capacity could be realized in even the next 2-3 years. The combination of drones, robotics and AI may render the traditional military hardware of tanks, frigates and fighter jets almost functionally obsolete. The development of AI's course of military application will be largely directed by the conflicts where it is deployed. In the pre-AI world of 1987, the black Friday market crash during the Reagan Administration saw a dangerous drop in the Dow, where computer analysis issued sell orders against a background of Reagan's massive budget deficits. Amidst Reagan's budget deficits this created an environment where social security was looted to fund defence spending. A supposed conservative President ran a fiscal policy with simultaneous increases in the Pentagon budget, coupled with tax cuts. The computer generated sell off was beyond the functional control of brokers and market makers, while the Soviets attempted to engineer market irregularities affecting the American economy which had further global ramifications due to massive American trade deficits with Japan under Reagan. The current Securities exchange environment is at best no less complex now. Given the spectre of what transpired in 1987 with computerised over control of stock exchange trading, and a shadow hanging over the bond market we are left to ponder could another such scenario be triggered in the age of AI? And even more illuminous prospect over shadows us now with the question can AI gain a decision-making operational capacity over command-and-control decisions. Certainly, for tactical weapons systems or even a doomsday scenario with Russia, China, India or Pakistan placing nuclear launch control in the hands of AI that could result in an exchange that either the US, Britain, France or Israel would be forced to react to. Without scaremongering it is necessary for strategic planners to prevent the nuclear powers that be from arriving at the precipice of such an abyss.
September 21, 2026
The interlinked nature of third-party involvement in the ongoing conflicts in Iran and Ukraine has increasingly come to the fore in recent weeks. It emerged that China has not only been providing Iran with radar systems, navigation tools, and electronic warfare technology, but also high-resolution satellite imagery and geospatial data to direct its rockets. The same great-power relationships that are shaping the Middle East are affecting the conduct and constraints of the war in Ukraine. It is apparent that a reciprocation in kind is dictating Russia's conduct towards the US in Iran. Intelligence and targeting support mirror similar U.S. assistance to Ukraine. But this picture becomes murkier when considering the backroom accommodations Trump is willing to give Putin. Recently, Trump pressured Zelensky to stop targeting Russian diesel infrastructure, saying the attacks were causing a shortage of the fuel that is "hurting the world." The U.S. national average price for diesel, which is used by trucks, trains, ships, and farm equipment, rose above six dollars a gallon for the first time last Thursday. Such interventions demonstrate how developments on the battlefield in Ukraine can no longer be considered independently of wider economic and geopolitical calculations. China has been using tankers that are already at sea, when that runs out the American blockade will create shortage problems for the Chinese economy, as China no longer gets Venezuelan oil and is reliant on Iran and international spot market prices. The war with Iran is now spreading to Yemen, with the Houthis attempting to replicate the Iranian chokehold model perfected in the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic importance of controlling or threatening critical maritime chokepoints is central to the wider contest. What happens in the Gulf can therefore have consequences for shipping, energy markets, and military calculations far beyond the immediate theatre. So far, the US has declined Saudi requests to slow the Houthi advance. Neither Turkey nor Egypt seems inclined to come to Saudi Arabia's aid. This is despite the signing of a very recent mutual defence pact between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan. More developments can happen in these conflicts on an average day than can be afforded mention, but they should be increasingly understood as interconnected parts of a wider geopolitical confrontation. Assistance in one theatre triggers reciprocal action in another. Consequently, these cease to be discrete, containable conflicts and are extending into prolonged multinational conflicts. There is a distinct possibility that these may become frozen conflicts over time. A more terrifying eventuality is something more akin to the Thirty Years' War, which was fought in the first half of the 17th century in Europe. It is important to remember that this calamity, which ravaged Europe, began as a localized rebellion that gradually drew in more and more powers. The initial religious nature of the fighting gave way to political struggles. The mechanism by which a localized conflict becomes a multinational struggle offers a historical warning worth considering. The danger today is that a collection of individually distinct conflicts could become sufficiently interconnected that containing any one of them becomes increasingly difficult. Iran, Ukraine, Russia, China, the United States, and the conflict involving the Houthis are already linked by military assistance, intelligence, energy, trade, and strategic competition. The question, therefore, is no longer simply how any one of these conflicts ends. It is whether they can remain separate conflicts at all.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).
By David Passmore • September 12, 2026
Moriel & Jacob Prasch request prayer for our sister in Jesus - Wendy Blomkamp, widow of Brother Fred Blomkamp (now with The Lord), the founder of Moriel South Africa Branch (not to be confused with Moriel's Ebyown Aids Children's Mission in South Africa founded by David Royle). Wendy, (an equestrian rider of all things) is originally from West Yorkshire, England but has lived most of her life in South Africa and is currently in retirement in the USA. Unfortunately, Wendy is diagnosed with inoperable pre terminal cancer with cardio pullmonary complications. The Lord will either intervene supernaturally or call her home. We request prayer for Wendy and her beloved family and wisdom for her physicians. In Christ, All at Moriel
By David Passmore • September 7, 2026
The US midterm elections are around the corner and the results could have profound effects on US foreign policy concerning Israel. Much has been said about this vote being a referendum on Trump's unpopular war with Iran. But it can equally be said to be about Trump's other foreign policy engagements that are viewed rather more favourably like the overthrow of Maduro in Venezuela and his replacement with a pro-American regime. With Israel the picture is less clear. It used to be a given that Israel enjoyed bipartisan support on the Hill. You could count on the fingers of one hand the number of politicians opposed to supporting Israel - the occasional fringe Democrat representing a singular Michigan constituency with a high Arab origin demographic, or a rare odd ball Republican preaching strict isolationism. This dynamic has shifted quickly in the last decade. The Democrats have all but abandoned any inclination of a pro-Israel position. Even establishment figures like Chuck Schumer have been pressured to side with the Party's radical left wing. With 60-80% of Democrats now anti-Israel, Israel can no longer rely on Jewish Democrats to oppose anti-Zionism or antisemitism. The most outspoken Democratic member of the Senate advocating a pro-Israel position, Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania is being pressured to resign and leave the party even by Pennsylvania's Jewish Governor Shapiro and Soros sponsored Philadelphia Prosecutor Krasner. This is happening concurrently with mass endorsement from 170 leading Hollywood Jewish actors writing a letter of support for Mark Ruffallo - despite his antisemitic comments naming Jewish investors supporting a Hollywood studio mega merger as being associated with apartheid genocide. However most shocking, were the comments by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel who stood before an audience of Jewish Democrats last weekend telling them they may need to sacrifice the safety, and even the future, of their own people in exchange for saving the rest of humanity. Such rhetoric is contrary to basic human instincts of survival and self-preservation. If any other nation were suggested this course of action, I wonder what their response would be? On the Republican side the foreboding sense of an altering course towards Israel no longer seems so distant. The anti-Israel faction in the Republican party led by Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens and Nick Fuentes are now being supported by Vice President Vance. Jewish kingpins in the Trump Administration such as Witkoff and Kushner have been tied to business dealings in N.Y. with the Muslim Brotherhood controlled Qatari government through its business holdings. Should Republicans lose control of the Senate while Democrats take the House, Israel could find itself having to drastically re-access its relationship with Washington. We wouldn't see an immediate break in ties. American military, intelligence, technological and strategic cooperation with Israel is too integrated into the core of US institutions and corporations that would take a protracted period to dismantle. However, the power of Congress is in no way feeble. Congress controls funding, foreign-assistance legislation, sanctions, arms-related legislation and, perhaps most importantly, the political milieu in which an administration operates. A Democratic House combined with a Senate no longer controlled by Republicans could place enormous pressure on Trump to alter his attitude towards Israel. Practically this could entail demanding further accountability from Israel over military operations in Gaza, and the West Bank Settlers causing civilian casualties and property damage. Military aid could face more conditions or restrictions, but an immediate cutoff is unlikely. Israel has historically depended upon the presumption that regardless of who was President, there would be a robust enough bipartisan coalition in Congress to prevent a major deterioration in the relationship. Now the opposite appears true. Israel is taking the gamble of solely relying on a friendly President like Trump getting elected to maintain cordial relations. With the erosion of even much of Jewish American support for Israel and the hijacking of the Democratic party by a pro Islamist socialist left seen in Mamdani and others, Israel is forced to confront the inescapable reality that the last strong bastion of support for it is the Republican Party's evangelical base. But even younger voters in this key demographic are beginning to question support for Israel. The hostility displayed by the Haredim in Jerusalem and elsewhere against Christians including evangelicals, is to say the least counter-productive to the national interest. To attack the one friend Israel has left with a proven track record of loyalty and is vital to pro-Zionism internationally, is particularly detrimental to the national interest. It is Iran with its Mahdiist interpretations of jihad and sharia as a religious ideology that drives its hatred of Israel and the USA, and The West, to the detriment of the interests of the majority of the Iranian populace who want non hostile co-existence.  Such religious fanaticism and ideologically fuelled hatred ought not be given place in Israeli Judaism. It too, will generate adverse consequences for the majority of Israelis, including religious moderates, who desire an ongoing friendship with Evangelical Christians whose theology is not one of anti Semitism, but of proven Philo-Semitism and pro Zionism.
By David Passmore • August 21, 2026
Don't bite the hand that feeds you - Irish hypocrisy towards Israel Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM Amongst European nations, Ireland in recent years has gained the reputation as being the leading anti-Zionist country. The Irish Republic has never been favourably inclined to Israel. It only established an Embassy in Tel Aviv in 1996. In poll after poll the vast majority of the Irish public have indicated hostility towards Zionism and strong support for Palestinian Statehood. The curious aberration to this is that in British Ruled Northern Ireland support is demarcated along sectarian lines. Catholic Republican areas predictably tend to ardently support the Palestinian cause, while Protestant Unionist communities are overwhelmingly pro-Israel. Perhaps some credence can be given to sentiments of traditional Catholic antisemitism hardwired into the Irish psyche as contributing towards this disposition. It was certainly odd that the Irish government promptly sent a delegation to the Nazi German Ambassador in Dublin to convey condolences after news of Hitler's suicide broke at the end of WW2. But more concretely if you were to ask the average Irish protester on a pro-Palestine march the basis of their empathy for the Palestinian cause, they would point to the ostensible parallels between the Irish experience of fighting for independence from British colonial oppression to the plight of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. Further remonstrations on a diplomatic level concern the actions of the IDF interreacting with Irish Peace Keepers in Southern Lebanon that have caused the deaths of several Irish Peace Keepers over the decades in friendly fire incidents. Ireland has contributed the most peace keepers to this mission per capita and the government has condemned Israel for these deaths that they view as avoidable. This animosity towards Israel is unbalanced. There are reasons to consider that Ireland and Israel have a shared experience of national liberation. Both countries fought the British in the pursuit of independence. Both countries made great efforts to resurrect their ancient languages for modern wide scale use. Both the Irish and Jews form major diaspora communities in New York. Despite all this Ireland ranks as Israel's second largest export market after the US. The preponderance of Israeli exports to Ireland comprises electronic integrated circuits, micro-assemblies, and tech manufacturing components. American multinational colossal tech corporations like Intel are substantially engrossed in this trade through the chain of supply. Ireland and Israel are hubs for design and manufacture of high-tech hardware components for US corporations. So, due to the nature of the most prosperous and competitive sectors of their respective economies, Israel and Ireland are inextricably bound in bilateral trade ties. Resolutions from the Irish government to impose sanctions on West Bank originating produce is merely perfunctory rhetoric. Such actions amount to a drop in the bucket in terms of impact to overall trade. The stark reliance of Ireland on advanced Israeli aviation equipment recently caused a spectacle when Ireland's new government jet struggled to land in heavy fog due to it being ordered without an advanced Israeli made navigation system. This was directly due to a short-sighted government decision not to buy Israeli military technology. There is a marked disparity between the official position of the Irish government designed for domestic public consumption and the economic policies that it actually pursues towards Israel. The government is acutely aware that the US is massively invested in the Irish economy and they don't want to do anything to jeopardise this. Washington demands that their enterprises in Dublin are intertwined with operations in Israel. The Irish government dare not even prevent US military supply flights refuelling at Shannon Airport on their way to Tel Aviv. The Irish government knows that times change and now the gripping social issue is the anti-immigrant/anti-Islam popular street protests. Soon the anti-Israel protests could become a mere side show only really promoted by Sinn Fein given the pressing ramifications of mass migration. So, in the meantime certain politicians will rile against the occupation, purported genocide and pass paltry sanctions against insignificant produce from the West Bank. All the while making hand over fist in money with the Israelis where it really matters in tech.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).
By David Passmore • July 31, 2026
The Tide Has Changed Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The America that Netanyahu touched down on is a changed America. The death of Lindsey Graham represents a changing of the guard. Graham was a staunch Israeli ally who will most probably become an increasingly rare breed in Washington. Sixty percent of Americans now hold a unfavourable view of Israel which politicians are finding difficult to ignore. It was once unthinkable to believe that New York City with such a strong Jewish electoral base and influence on all sectors of economic and cultural life would have a mayor that is so hostile to Israel to such an extent that he is calling for the arrest of its Prime Minister. From all accounts Netanyahu was cordially welcomed at the White House. The official press release stated that the talks were constructive. What is more telling is what was left unsaid particularly concerning the proposed sale of F35's to Israel's new regional adversary -Turkey. Trump is keen to find a swift resolution to the Iran War, while Netanyahu is opposed to a premature departure. When the US and Israel initiated their attacks on Iran over five months ago, Trump and Netanyahu appeared united in the War's goals and purpose. But as the protracted conflict has staggered to topple the Iranian regime fractures have emerged. Much has been said about the imminent political realities both leaders face. The Republicans could take a big hit in the November midterm elections should the war continue and global energy markets be negatively impacted. Netanyahu is anxious to demonstrate a big win to the Israeli public with the upcoming October election. In Israel, the Iran War is not viewed in isolation, but rather as an extension of the response to the colossal disaster of the October 7th massacre. Netanyahu must rehabilitate his reputation as a competent steward of national security having had the greatest loss of civilian life in an attack happening under his watch. Aside from the Iran issue, Trump is being pressured by Erdogan to insist upon Israeli withdrawal from Syrian territory pre-emptively seized by Israel following the toppling of Assad. Trump has also indicated disapproval of the extent of continuing Israeli measures against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, questioning the proportionality employed. Netanyahu is not in an envious position. Throughout his tenure and political career, he lauded his ability to engage successfully with the American public by zealously advocating Israel's position. Yet under his government Israel's reputation has plummeted in the US. Trump may be the last US President to extend such overwhelming bilateral support to Israel. The days of politicians like Lindsey Graham are fast ending. While John Fetteman and Marco Rubio appear to be remaining more solid, even some of the most warmly inclined leading Republican and Democrat voices like Donald Trump and Rahm Emanuel have nuanced their support for Israel. The tide has shifted and will at best level off if not continuing to shift further.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).
By David Passmore • July 24, 2026
The Saudi Nuclear Deal: An attempt to alter the Regional Balance of Power Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The initiative to develop a civilian nuclear program in Saudi Arabia with US assistance isn't new. There were concrete plans discussed towards these ends during the first Trump Administration. The recent announcement to actualize this deal follows the geo-political regional tumult in the wake of the Iran War. Several dimensions of motivation underlie the US decision. An overarching US strategic agenda is to keep the Saudis firmly in the American sphere of influence. Washington knows all too well that the Chinese and Russians are eager to offer their nuclear technical assistance to the Saudis in order to draw them closer to their camp. On a personal note, the nuclear agreement is a significant achievement for Bin Salaman. The Saudis have long had designs to diversify their energy supplies. Having a civilian nuclear program also adds prestige to Saudi Arabia as an emerging market economy. For the US, a monopoly on contracting companies for the requisite construction offers lucrative economic opportunities. Although the Civilian Nuclear deal does not allow the enrichment of Uranium, the Saudis will be in a position to do so if Washington gives the green light. This will act as a counterbalanced threat hanging over the Iranians. After the recent flare up of renewed fighting with Iran due to their lack of adherence to the moratorium of understanding, something had to budge in Trump's estimation. A reconfiguration of the power balance in the Gulf by introducing the potential of Saudi Arabia to be able to acquire nuclear weapons shifts the dynamic and places further pressure on Iran to strictly abstain from nuclear proliferation. Despite Israeli concerns about the agreement, Trump sought to assuage their alarm by making it contingent upon Saudi Arabia normalizing relations with them. Given the inherently unstable nature of an autocratic Saudi regime Israel views a diplomatic relationship with the Saudis as being on precarious footing in the long term. Israel is already forced to contend with the implications of one nuclear armed Muslim state - Pakistan and it will further weaken its own deterrent capability if another similarly capable hostile neighbour were to emerge in the future. The roles of Turkey and Qatar in all this foray are a wild card. Officially Turkey is served under the NATO nuclear umbrella for defence that is subject to US control. However, its civilian nuclear program remains in its infancy. Now with the Saudi deal, Erdogan may be inclined to exert pressure on the US to help accelerate his own nuclear program. Just as Erdogan's efforts to acquire F35 fighter jets from the US greatly disturbed Israeli military planners, a heightened Turkish nuclear ability will intensify this fear. Qatar views itself as pursuing its own independent foreign policy that has managed to remain rather neutral during the current war, thereby escaping the ire of Iran's strikes on US regional assets. Overall, the Qatari government has grown closer to the Turkish vision for the region and so likely isn't particularly amiable to the Saudi agreement. Ultimately the Saudi deal is a gamble. Many will see it as throwing more fuel on the fire which will further imperil the tinder box region and heighten tensions. But Trump finds himself at a continuing impasse with a stubborn regime in Tehran that is leveraging their geographic hold on the straits of Hormuz to inflict damage on the global energy markets. Iranian strikes upon US Arab regional allies have underscored the de facto alliance between Israel and the Arabs against Iran and its Shia proxies. The US hopes to use the Saudi nuclear deal as a means of making this alliance official by having Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords as a pre-condition.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).
By David Passmore • July 14, 2026
Circling the wagons Ruben Rothler LLB, LLM Israel is a society riddled with tension and division. It is sociologically, if not politically miraculous that a country drawing Jews from all over the world is able to exist at all. The army affords a degree of integration as a melting pot. But this is only a marginal source of national unity in the overall scheme of things. More so are the myriads of external threats that face this small country. In the former generation the Ashkenazi (Jews of European descent) - Sephardic (Jews of Oriental descent) divide was far more pronounced. The dominant Ashkenazi establishment held the reins of political and economic power which was resented by the Sephardim. However, due to a combination of inter-marriage and political accommodation much of the chasm that separated these distinct groups was forged. Menachem Begin (an Ashkenazi politician) in 1970 successfully ran on the Likud Party ticket with a campaign that brought Sephardic Jews under his conservative political umbrella. Later the immigration of Russian Jews following the end of Communism would add a whole new dimension to the Israeli demographic milieu. The younger generation of these immigrants tended to adapt well to Israeli society and contributed much to the economy. The wider division in Israeli society that crosses ethnic lines concerns that between religious and secular Jews. This can be further bifurcated to the clash between the secular and specifically ultra-orthodox Jews (Haredim) as distinguished from the national religious Jews (Dati Leumi). The Secular and the Religious generally part on what they envisage a Jewish State to entail. Religious Jews desire the State to strictly adhere to the stipulations of Jewish Law (Halacha), while at present Halakhic influence is largely limited to certain areas of Family Law concerning Jewish citizens. Wider considerations of promoting a socially conservative political agenda would also be forefront amongst the religious mindset broadly. Secular Jews view the imposition of such proposed measures as a serious infringement of their civil rights. With regard to the Haredim, the bone of contention looms larger, in that this group is fundamentally opposed to participating in society at large. This is acutely manifested in diminished contribution to the work force and a refusal to be conscripted into the army. The 2023 judicial reform protests posed a significant threat to social civil order. The nation appeared to be bitterly divided into two opposing camps. This split reflected broader divisions concerning visions of how the country should be governed. The judicial reforms would have weakened the Supreme Court's ability to render the Executive branch accountable. However, the Supreme Court was also accused of using its considerable powers to promote a socially liberal agenda. Left wing secular Israelis tended to oppose the proposed reforms while those on the right (which included the majority of Religious Jews) supported the reforms. Every weekend droves of protesters were brought onto the streets causing major disturbances to traffic. The polarising nature of this impasse threatened the future of Israeli democracy. It was the October 7th attack that brought a swift end to this public debate and civil strife. The nation instinctually united in response to this common existential threat. The judicial reforms were shelved for a future point when the urgent security threats subsided. However, as the war dragged on the enduring issue of Haredi refusal to conscript into the army became more pronounced. Mounting casualties combined with ever increasing manpower demands to field troops on the multiple theatres of action on which the IDF is engaged has depleted the ranks, and the army is now in much need of fresh conscripts. Haredi belligerent refusal to participate in the pressing national defence has escalated from being a political debate to a matter of very practical vital importance. Overall we can observe that the challenges to national unity in successive generations since the establishment of Israel has recurrently been ameliorated by the common necessity of defence towards outside threats. Most recently we can see this happening with regard to the global anti Semitism and anti-Zionism that has been raging since the October 7th atrocities. These hostile attitudes have paradoxically acted as a force which promotes nationalism and a sense of national cohesion in Israel that otherwise might not functionally exist.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).
By David Passmore • July 8, 2026
A Divided Nation Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The Haredi community has had a complicated, paradoxical relationship with the State since its founding. Rooted in a Talmudic precept that the Jews are forbidden to resettle the land of Israel en masse by force before the coming of the Messiah, the secular democratic State of Israel presents itself as blasphemous by its mere existence. Yet due to practical considerations such as the need to obtain funding for its religious academies the Haredi leadership reached a settlement with the State's founders that exempted Haredi men from being conscripted for military service. This was at a time when the Haredi population in Israel was relatively small. Over the past decades this demographic ballooned until the point that soon the majority of Jewish children in Israel will be born into Haredi families. Such a situation is clearly unsustainable. Recently the Knesset's (Parliament's) Haredi parties have pressured their coalition partners in government to codify Torah Study as part of the Country's Basic Laws. This was purposefully done to elevate the status of their institutions to be on parity with service in the IDF. Israel is yet to promulgate a written Constitution, so legislation classed as a Basic Law holds Constitutional status for all intents and purposes. These moves by the religious parties represent a back door power grab to enshrine in law very significant hurdles to prevent the enlistment of Haredi men. The burden of Israel's defence is comparatively massive for a country its size and it is vastly disproportionately shouldered by the secular population. Until now there have been political initiatives to conscript the Haredim. But given the huge manpower shortages emerging in the wake of near continual conflict on multiple fronts since the events of October 7th this matter has become urgent and not merely a theoretical discussion of what is fair and equitable. It is important to draw a distinction between the Haredim and national religious Jews (Dati Leumi). The Haredim adhere to a lifestyle entirely committed to observance of Jewish Law and Talmudic study. This is embraced to the exclusion of gainful employment and participation in wider society. They are either outrightly opposed to Zionism or consider themselves non-Zionist. Conversely, followers of the national religious movement in Israel although being observant of Jewish law and learning would alongside this pursue secular professions. Furthermore, they are ardently Zionist and disproportionately serve in IDF combat units. This is often done within the framework of a program called Hesder Yeshiva that combines religious learning with military service. Efforts to cater a similar model for accommodating Haredi participation in the IDF have so far failed to make substantial gains. Such measures designed to override Haredi objections to service based upon modesty concerns by strict segregation of the sexes in these specially formed units have failed to appease the Haredi leadership. For them, any form of military service is considered a dereliction of their duty to fully devote themselves to a Torah lifestyle. They argue that their Talmudic learning and prayers are in itself a form of national service and act to protect the Jewish people spiritually from enemy attack. It is as if two parallel societies exist within Israel. And the trajectory of separation between the two is only growing. The Haredim are cloistered away in their Yeshivas, immersed in lives devoted to adhering to the stipulations of Jewish law. While the particulars of actually running the State is left to the Secular. The Haredim desire all the benefits of subsidizing their lifestyle without contributing to society. What we really have going on here at source is two profoundly different and opposing ideological visions of what is important in life and what is the purpose of a Jewish State. At the State's founding these divergent perspectives were more manageable. Ben Gurion only had to contend with one religious party –the National Religious Party. Later in 1970 Begin aligned with the NRP to form a coalition government that also brought Sephardic Jews under the Likud umbrella which had the effect of bringing unity to the country by bridging the Ashkenazi-Sephardi divide. However, over time Israeli politics has seen a proliferation of religious parties, gaining further leverage as king brokers in forming governments due to the proportionate representation voting system which secular Israelis not uncommonly view as political blackmail. (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).