Israel’s government on Sunday voted to approve the progression of a bill sponsored by the Defense Ministry to lengthen mandatory service for men in most units in the IDF from 32 to 36 months.
The bill, whose text was made public already in February, was delayed over legal and social concerns that it unequally increased the burden of military service on some groups while leaving others exempt, especially the ultra-Orthodox (haredim).
A law to exempt haredim was ruled unconstitutional in 2017 and finally expired in July 2023. Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said last week that the IDF would begin in the coming weeks to summon thousands of military-age haredi men for initial checkups. However, he clarified that in the short term, the increase in haredi draftees will not cover the IDF’s increased manpower needs for both heightened security threats and to replace the thousands of casualties sustained during the current war against Hamas. This paved the way for Sunday’s vote.
The law is temporary as it will only apply for five years, after which the mandatory service will revert back to 32 months unless it is extended. In addition, the law does not apply to all units – draftees to some units who were previously required to complete 28 months will for five years now serve for 32 months, and the bulk of the combat units, whose members served for 32 months, will for the next five years serve for 36 months.
In addition, from the 33rd month on, soldiers will receive an increased income, and those who are currently in the midst of their mandatory service and who now have to serve an extra four months will receive an extra stipend, on top of the increased income. The amounts of the income and stipend have yet to be determined.
Defense Ministry legal adviser Pazit Tidhar acknowledged in an opinion accompanying the law that it included “legal difficulties” related to inequality, and the fact that it will apply to soldiers who are currently in mandatory service, and now will need to serve an extra four months. However, Tidhar wrote that since the law is temporary and soldiers will be compensated for the extra service, that is enough to offset the increase in the burden.
The bill is now likely to be fast-tracked through the Knesset and may pass into law by the end of July.
Controversy surround the bill
Contrary to the Defense Ministry’s legal opinion, the Attorney-General’s Office said in a statement that accompanied its own legal opinion, “Increasing the burden of service for years, without taking real steps in parallel to draft yeshiva students and (equally) distribute the burden, will not be constitutional.”
Deputy A-G Gil Limon explained the opinion that in order for the bill to meet constitutional standards of equality, it needs to be based on “factual foundations” that include the IDF’s long-term plans for significant drafting of haredim. The government has failed to provide such foundations, and therefore the bill as it stands is not sufficient.
“The constitutionality of the law depends on taking immediate steps to meet the requirements of the [High Court of Justice] ruling and increasing the equality in carrying the burden vis-à-vis other population groups while decreasing the burden of service,” Limon said. “This is a [necessary] condition to complete the legislation and for it to meet constitutional standards.”
Several politicians from the opposition addressed the government’s decision.
National Unity MK Benny Gantz wrote on X that while lengthening mandatory service along with ensuring proper compensation was “a necessity,” he expected from the prime minister, defense minister, and IDF chief of staff that “the same hands that increase the burden on those who serve with pride and dedication, now act to pass a service plan in order to ensure that in a few years we can shorten the service and distribute it more equally.”
“It is expected that whoever has the courage to send soldiers to battle, also has the courage to endanger his coalition for the sake of Israeli security,” Gantz wrote.
United Right chairman MK Gideon Sa’ar directed his criticism at Limon. Sa’ar wrote that two things were missing from Limon’s legal opinion – that lengthening mandatory service had an additional advantage in that it significantly lessened the burden on reservists, and “the possible violation of the constitutional right of millions of Israelis to live” due to the “lack of a fighting force strong enough to counter the enemy’s annihilation plans.”