Israel is strong enough to handle increased emigration - opinion

"Abandonment," "brain drain," "departure of young people from the middle class."

Dramatic headlines have recently filled the newspapers, reporting an increase in emigration from the country. 

As always, I approached the data with healthy skepticism. It turns out, for example, that a significant portion of emigrants are immigrants from Russia and Ukraine who came here to "take a spin" and leave, now equipped with Israeli passports and having received absorption benefits.

 I hope they carry pleasant memories from their short stay here. In any case, this is no drama.

Beyond the need to put the data into perspective, we must also view the matter in its broader and deeper context.

Waves of Immigration Alongside Emigration

Migration from one country to another is natural. People seek their fortunes and migrate in masses, usually from Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America to the West. 

Academics, scientists, and technology experts migrate, as do young people seeking their path. In today's global era, barriers are lower, and population movements are commonplace. 

In Israel, the emotional approach to migration is understandable, but ultimately, Israelis are human too, and migration – a universal and human phenomenon – affects them as well.

Moreover, emigration has existed alongside immigration since the beginning of the new Zionist settlement in Israel 150 years ago. The main motives for emigration were economic and personal, as well as career and comfort considerations. 

At certain points in their lives, emigrants found better opportunities elsewhere. Some were also disillusioned with the Zionist dream.

This already began during the First and Second Aliyah, when over 80% of immigrants did not remain in Israel. 

It continued in subsequent waves of immigration. For example, about a quarter of immigrants during the Fourth Aliyah (1924-1931) left the country. Emigration persisted even in sovereign Israel. 

In the 1960s, before the Six-Day War, during a period of disheartening recession ("the last one out will turn off the lights at the airport"), the country experienced a wave of emigration. 

This also happened after the Yom Kippur War due to war trauma, loss of trust in leadership, and economic crisis. In the 1980s, high inflation led many to seek economic stability abroad, and the First Lebanon War pushed people into exile, particularly from the social and cultural elite. 

In the 1990s, alongside the mass immigration from the former Soviet Union, many of those immigrants later emigrated to Canada and elsewhere. Emigration also increased in 2002 and 2003, likely influenced by the Second Intifada.

In short, emigration is an integral part of Zionist history. As of the end of 2024, Israel's population was approximately 10.027 million, with 76.9% Jews, 21% Arabs, and 2.1% classified as "others."

In our unique reality, there will always be ups and downs in immigration and emigration volumes. What we see today is not unusual. 

Overall, Israel’s population is consistently growing more than that of any other Western country. Both the natural growth rate and immigration volume—even accounting for emigrants—are among the highest in the world.

Threats are a pitiful weapon

Having said all this, one thing is bothersome: the use of emigration as a threat. Doctors, tech workers, and others have been heard saying, "Hold me back, or I'll leave the country." This intensified during the judicial reform period, escalating from subtle to explicit threats.

Emigrants-to-be should be told: Don’t threaten. We regret every emigrant, but Israel is stronger than the sum of its parts and can withstand any wave of departures. 

If we endured past emigration waves when we were fewer and weaker, we can certainly handle them now that we are larger and stronger. 

People may emigrate for economic, social, or other reasons, but let's not turn it into a tool for threats and pressure.

Moreover, high-tech and healthcare belong not just to doctors and tech workers. The state has invested enormous resources in developing these sectors, making Israel one of the world's leaders. 

Military training, venture capital infrastructure, and academic nurturing laid the foundations for Israeli high-tech. 

The same applies to healthcare. Hence, claims that high-tech or healthcare belongs to those who work in them are somewhat hypocritical—these sectors belong to the entire nation.

If you detect a critical tone in my words, you are right. It reminds me of threats from intelligence officers who said they would leave the army if forced to move to the Negev following the relocation of IDF intelligence bases. 

Despite the threats, the intelligence corps is moving south, and I am confident it will benefit the state, the army, and the officers themselves.

People dissatisfied with certain policies or government decisions should not threaten to leave the country. Enough. Threats are a pitiful weapon.

The economic argument doesn't hold

Another issue that may frustrate any rational person is the use of economic arguments as an excuse for leaving the country. 

This was common during the social protests ("Milky in Berlin is cheaper") and remains relevant today due to the high cost of living. 

I understand that people want to improve their quality of life, and to be honest, we cannot compete with the salaries and laboratory equipment offered to doctors and scientists in the US However, we must look at the data before blaming the Israeli economy for emigration—and numbers don't lie.

Surprisingly or not, Israel's economy currently stands several levels above Western economies, which suffer from a lack of growth engines, innovation shortages, inflation, and immigration that creates unemployment. 

Over the past three decades, Israel has positioned itself among the top Western countries, and in the last decade, it continues to lead in technological innovation and growth. 

Even in the past year—a year of war and global delegitimization—Israel's situation is far better than that of leading Western countries across all economic indicators: GDP, GDP per capita, growth, deficit, and debt-to-GDP ratio.

A recent summary from The Economist indicates that by 2024, Israel's total GDP surpassed the half-trillion mark, standing at $550.91 billion. 

Projections suggest it will reach $700 billion within three to four years and surpass the trillion-dollar mark within a decade. As of the end of 2024, Israel's GDP per capita stands at $56,190—slightly lower than that of an industrial powerhouse like Germany ($56,820) but higher than that of the UK ($54,490) and France ($54,490), and far above countries like Spain and Italy.

Israel's debt-to-GDP ratio, despite the war that necessitated additional debt, stands at 65.5%—significantly lower than Japan (263%), the US (124.35%), and France (100%). In addition to a low debt-to-GDP ratio, Israel holds massive foreign exchange reserves, reflecting its future ability to raise debt and meet interest repayments. 

Israel's securities are immense, not including the wealth fund from gas royalties, which is intended for future generations. 

Israeli defense exports have reached new sales records, and Israel continues to lead in critical fields such as water and energy management—essential for countries in the region. 

This ensures ongoing cooperation with neighboring countries and those in the broader circle. 

In the foreseeable future, Israel will expand its relations with other significant Middle Eastern countries in need of strategic agreements on security, food, desertification, and environmental issues.

Today, Israel is not only a regional security power but also an economic one. Hence, discussions of emigration due to economic reasons are, at the very least, puzzling. 

High inflation and widespread layoffs in the West limit employment opportunities, while in Israel, employment remains full. 

In general, considering emigration at a time when global antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment are rampant seems inconceivable.

Learning lessons from social divide

Nevertheless, I believe a pragmatic approach to emigrants is necessary. Rabin's comment that emigrants are "a pack of weaklings," while morally justified, was not practically beneficial.

Since emigration is a drastic step involving separation from family, friends, and surroundings, I believe that in at least some cases, there is a way back. 

Therefore, the government and the Jewish Agency would do well to maintain contact with emigrants and occasionally try to entice them to return, offering job opportunities. 

Similarly, resources should be invested in bringing the younger generation of emigrants to Israel through programs like "Taglit," "Masa," and similar initiatives.

Since emigration is also rooted in educational and value-based shortcomings, the solution lies in strengthening Jewish identity and connection to the land. 

Many Israelis will not easily give up their homeland or the language and culture in which they were raised.

As a society, we must also learn from the social rifts that have deepened in recent years. 

Reforms on fundamental issues such as justice and constitution must be implemented with the broadest possible social consensus and gradually. 

Simultaneously, efforts should be made to reduce divisive and inflammatory discourse from both sides. 

Manipulative forces must not be allowed to drag Israeli society into dangerous internal conflicts. 

I trust the Israeli mainstream to move in this direction and pave the Zionist path, which encompasses both the public interest and the common good. In this regard, the general public is better than its leaders.

In conclusion, I do not believe that emigration from Israel signifies a failure of Zionism. 

This is a global phenomenon occurring in every society, even in ideologically driven nations like Israel. 

Above all, the State of Israel is greater than the sum of its parts, and despite emigration—which stands at a reasonable level—its strength only continues to grow over the years, including in the demographic aspect.