New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman warns that a Netanyahu victory in the coming Israeli election is a threat to democracy as it will continue the anti-Palestinian policies of the extreme rightwing led by Itamar Ben-Gvir. However, Friedman points to the long-term threat coming from the Haredi community:
[Economist] Dan Ben-David … explained the demographic basis for the threat to Israeli democracy. Fertility among most Israeli population groups is about two children per woman, but among Netanyahu’s ultra-Orthodox Haredi allies it is about seven children per woman, Ben-David said. These parents “intentionally deprive their children — primarily the boys — of a basic education enabling future economic independence and an understanding of the underlying foundations of modern democratic principles,” he said. “A quarter of Israel’s first graders are ultra-Orthodox and their share of the population is doubling every 25 years.”
Before going into how grossly inaccurate some of these claims are, notice how this perspective mirrors those of the European anti-immigrant parties: fertility rates that will explode its share of the population, every-expanding social spending, and an unwillingness to embrace Western values. Of course, liberals like Friedman deplore the racism of these anti-immigrant views but somehow it is acceptable when discussing the Israeli Haredi community.
It is also gratuitous since the focus of Friedman’s article is the upcoming Israeli election so why include issues that are, at best, decades away. Most amazing, Friedman offers no proposal to deal with the alleged Haredi threat. At least, the German anti-immigrant party, AfD, has a set of policies: remigration of a substantial share of asylum seekers and closing off future migration from non-European countries. Thus, Friedman’s bigotry is gratuitous, having nothing to do with the current election or corrective policies.
Just as important, recent data is much more encouraging than Friedman claims. It finds a drop in Haredi fertility rate to 6.2% and the share of Haredi marriages to 18-24 year olds declining from 46% to 36% in the last decade. As a result, it projects that the Haredi share of the Israeli population would not reach 21% until 2065. This is a 50 percent increase in forty years from its current 14% share; not a doubling in twenty-five years.
In another recent report, the Israel Democratic Institute documents the educational and occupation gains:
Over the past decade, the growing numbers of ultra-Orthodox Israelis in higher education and the growing numbers of women who are employed, are generating greater disposable income, awareness of consumer and leisure culture, and a modern discourse among the growing middle class in ultra-Orthodox society.
When discussing Muslim immigrants, Friedman focuses on the differences of values and contends that we should be focused on supporting the more modern against the less fundamentalist Muslims. However, he is quite willing to lump all ultra-Orthodox together even though there are important differences between the Mizrachi Jews associated with Shas and the Ashkenazi Jews associated with the UTJ.
The UTJ is anti-Zionist and anti-Arab. Its youth group, Garin Torani, is overwhelming associated with the harassment of Arab citizens in the mixed cities and Christians religious personnel in the Old City. The UTF views military service as an existential threat and fiercely opposes any compromise on the issue.
By contrast, Shas position on military service is that it is up to the individual. Shas recently produced an election video that featured a family gathered for a Shabbat dinner before a son was seen returning home from his army base and embracing his family members. The video then noted that each son is “contributing to the people of Israel in his own way.” Moreover, Shas candidate list includes IDF Major Dror David Amos in a position guaranteeing he will be in the next Knesset.
In the current Knesset, Shas has been very sympathetic to Arab citizen interests. When during the war, the extreme right-wing tried to withhold already legislative funds for Arab communities, Interior Minister Moshe Arbel sent a letter to the finance chair Bezalel Smotrich, urging him to release the funds. Arbel is a member of Shas, a party that has in the past worked with Arab parties to promote targeted funding for disadvantaged communities. After a stalemate, Arbel helped overrode Smotrich’s decision, sending the frozen funds, as well as substantial additional emergency funds, to Arab municipalities.
In July 2025, right-wing protesters assaulted Arab Israeli lawmaker Ayman Odeh as he was traveling to an anti-war rally. A mob surrounded his vehicle, smashed his windows with stones and sticks, and shouted racist slogans. While opposition leaders strongly criticized the assault, Arbel was the sole voice from the governing coalition to officially denounce the incident.
Given Shas’ attitude toward military service and social funding, it is not surprising that it is in negotiations with Gadi Eisenkot to explore under what conditions it could join the opposition. While this union is unlikely, it suggests that we should have a more nuanced understanding of the Haredi community. It certainly has its extreme elements that cause problems in Israel’s multicultural society but it also has elements that are evolving in ways that make them more compatible with a more modern society.
This is the hopeful vision we should embrace, not the racist one Friedman’s article promoted.
Robert Cherry is an American Enterprise Institute fellow and author of Arab Citizens of Israel: How Far Have They Come? (Wicked Son, 2026).
