None of the secular politicians from the leadership of the parties that make up the center-left bloc have been willing to answer questions about what role secularism will play in the next Israeli election. There are plenty of issues to be addressed: the energetic increase of religiosity of the public sphere over the past three years; the additional powers that have been granted to the rabbinical courts; the increase of religious content in the state-run education system; efforts to expand gender segregation in public spaces; and massive budgets to religious and ultra-Orthodox institutions, to name but a few. Judging solely on conversations with members of these parties, one could be forgiven for thinking that none of this happened during the tenure of the current government and that there’s no good reason to even address the issue. And there’s absolutely no point in dredging up aspirations from the almost-forgotten past – such as public transportation on Shabbat, which exists in a limited manner now thanks to municipal initiatives – or civil marriages.

The leaders of the liberal camp appear to have invoked their right to remain silent, as if it were not their job to safeguard the rights of Israel’s secular citizens. Yair Lapid, the chairman of Yesh Atid and the nominal leader of the opposition, told us to contact his spokesperson – who did not bother to respond. The media advisor for Yair Golan, chairman of the Democrats, responded that he is in the United States and that “his schedule is very tight.” The spokesperson for Benny Gantz (National Unity Party) said that “he doesn’t speak to journalists,” while the spokeswomen for his party colleague, Gadi Eisenkot, said that “his days are very busy.” Even the office of Avigdor Lieberman – who, while far from being on the left of the political map, has boasted about fighting for secular rights – replied that “it isn’t helping.”

The strategic advisor to one of the parties in this bloc was not surprised by the refusals. “Secular Israelis do not consider themselves a group. In-depth studies have shown that dealing with issues of secular rights not only does not attract voters – it actually drives them away.”

Do you mean to say that the same people who took to the streets to protest against infringements of their basic rights are put off by being called secular?

“The secular people who took the streets were not saying ‘We want a secular state.’ They were saying ‘We want a democratic and liberal state.’ It’s the same process that the concept of ‘leftist’ underwent. You’re not a leftist, you’re center-left. The secular camp has also taken on a similarly apologetic approach. It seems that this is the kind of political awareness that is shaped in young people who grew up under a regime that sees leftists as traitors. They will not fight for the secular character of the state. They will say that they are secular – but there’s no need to put it front and center, so they call themselves proud liberals.”

Isn’t that just a question of semantics?

“Absolutely not. Think about the percentage of people in that camp – even in kibbutzim – who are considering voting for Naftali Bennett, an unashamedly religious politician who has no interest in promoting a secular agenda. Can you imagine if someone had told you five years ago that secular Tel Avivians would be planning to vote for the former head of the Yesha Council of West Bank Settlements? It would sound absurd, but now you wouldn’t even raise an eyebrow. The model of Israeliness in 2025 is the Israeli with the knitted kippa. It’s no longer the kibbutznik from the Paratroop Regiment, who ruled the roost here until the 1980s – and definitely not the condescending Tel Avivians.”

Is that the result of the ongoing war?

“It started long before the war broke out. Since 2009, powerful forces on the right have been investing a lot of money and a lot of effort trying to alter the DNA of Israeliness. That manifests itself through ‘I Belong Israel’ and other NGOs which have been allowed into schools and through Channel 14, which denigrates people who do not have faith as ‘disconnected from the state.’ There has also been an increase in the popularity of faith-based pop music and the traditional lifestyle is becoming increasingly common. We can see in the polls that people do not have the same pride in their secularism that others do in their religious faith. Even for people who define themselves as Meretz voters, secularism is no longer an identity.”

So activist Naor Narkis, who set up the Hozrim Betvuna association to encourage the secularization of haredi society, has basically become a taboo subject?

“His campaign is discussed by left-leaning parties and organizations. What he’s doing is not very intuitive to members of our camp and it makes many of them very uncomfortable. Our studies over the past few years consistently show that even people who define themselves as completely secular are put off by this idea. They say that all they want is for the government not to take money for religious purposes and that the ultra-Orthodox serve in the army like everyone else – but they say that it’s clear that Haredi recruits must be allowed to end their military service as Haredim. On the flip side, there’s no debate over efforts to make people more religious; that is very patently on the table.”

Police dismantle "Hozrim Betvuna" stand in Jerusalem

So secularism is a dead issue as far as you are concerned?

“Secularism still exists, it is simply not defined as such. The struggle over the ultra-Orthodox draft is not a secular struggle – not only because there are kippa-wearing people involved, but also because it is defined as a security issue. Even people who are absolutely furious over haredi draft dodging tell us – half apologetically – that they don’t hate the ultra-Orthodox, they just support the IDF and believe we need more soldiers.”

What about civil marriage and public transportation on Shabbat? Were they not once the causes most vocally espoused by the left?

“We are not living in times where we have the luxury of waving those flags – not when there’s a war and hostages and not when the state is in such a dire position. There are no parties that are not connected to that. If I were to promote those issues, people would say to me: ‘Bro, what’s up with you? You’re totally disconnected’.”

The Trauma of the Finkelstein Equation

Two people who have come out in defense of the Knesset members, explaining that refusing to be drawn on the issue serves a sophisticated political strategy on their part, are two media advisors: Nissim Douek, who previously worked with Meretz and is now a consultant to left-leaning civil society organizations; and Lior Horev, a former advisor to prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert, who now works with the Hostages and Missing Families Forum. They both believe that waving the banner of secularism would be “a huge mistake” that would only serve the interests of the coalition, since Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu still operates in accordance with the indices determined for him by his primary strategic advisor in the 1990s, the late Arthur Finkelstein, who notices something that now appears obvious: people who see themselves as more Jewish than Israeli will vote for right-wing parties, while those who see themselves first and foremost as Israeli will vote for the left. This assessment is shared by several strategists working with left-wing parties, one of whom told Shomrim that “the best indicator of which party you will vote for in an election is how close you are to religion. The less connected you are to Judaism, the more likely it is that you’re a leftist.”

Horev goes on to explain that “the dichotomous scales that Finkelstein used included the secular-religious dichotomy alongside the Jewish-Israeli and left-right dichotomies. These parameters create a very clear division, with very little mobility between the blocs – and Netanyahu will strive to put them in that position again at the next election. If the leftist, secular camp is stupid, it will fall into the trap, rather than taking the conversation in the direction of liberal versus conservative.”

Is that a more promising struggle?

“A lot more so, because it’s a battle for votes on the right of center, on voters who are disappointed with the current government. Polls that I have conducted since the start of the judicial overhaul show that between 18 and 21 percent of people who voted for parties in the coalition at the last election define themselves as liberal and say that they will not vote the same way next time. That’s a lot of people and it smashes the old paradigms, because floating voters usually make up between 8 and 12 percent of the electorate.”

Do they not end up going back to their “home party'? In most cases, at least?

“That intersection of that 18 percent still exists, even when they were asked about their support for a state commission of inquiry [into October 7], ending the war and releasing the hostages – and, of course, mandatory military service. These are core issues that are not predicted by the secular-religious axis but by the liberal-conservative axis. Converting these voters – in other words, moving them from one side to the other – will only succeed thanks to the connection to religion index. The language, culture and style of the center-left must be such that they do not engender hostility, and thus, the secular ticket is harmful while the liberal ticket is extraordinarily beneficial.”

Are there so many liberal religious people that they can be relied on as an electoral force? 

“When it comes to the discourse on human rights – there are a lot of them. I’m not talking about the religious left, which is really a small grouping. I’m talking about people who will be put off by talk about a Palestinian state, because they have families in Kedumim and Ofra – and are opposed in principle to a Palestinian state. But on issues like the supremacy of the rule of law or LGBTQ rights, they are 100 percent with us. It doesn’t make sense that the only defining issue, according to which Israeli politics is organized, is the Palestinian issue. Certainly not in the aftermath of October 7.

“There is a rift within the national religious camp that is reminiscent of the historic rift that split the kibbutz movement in the 1950s. It is tearing apart families, communities and educational streams. These people are going through a moment of self-definition, between a Haredi-style national religious movement and a liberal national religious movement – and secularism is a reductive concept that will drive away people who otherwise might stop supporting [Finance Minister Bezalel] Smotrich.”

Douek agrees that “it is absolutely wrong to talking in terms of Israeli versus Jewish, because that plays into the hands of the Finkelstein equation and would be a surefire recipe for defeat in the next election – especially given that the opposition parties go into the election with a 10-seat deficit because none of them [apart from Yair Golan] are willing to say that they see the Arab parties as full partners.”

So, what are you actually proposing?

“Completely dropping the secular line and talking to them about values; just find them some Jewish rationale. Who says that the right and the religious have a monopoly on Judaism? Secular Israelis must tell their religious compatriots that they are no less Jewish than them. Tell them: You’re the ones who forgot what it means to be Jewish during this war. It’s a change in approach that the left-wing bloc must go through. It has to leave its blind spot, which insists that the camp of the ‘Israeli Universalist’ can assume political power and which fails to understand how important the Jewish aspect is.”

What happened to the secular struggle? Was the battle against the judicial overhaul not supposed to bring it to the fore?

“Each period has its own characteristics. I am not claiming that secularism does not have voters. I understand why politicians are afraid to address the issue. Maybe a party that is in any case close to the electoral threshold would go for it. The secular line has become highly niche.”

"Secular Israelis must tell their religious compatriots that they are no less Jewish than them. Tell them: You’re the ones who forgot what it means to be Jewish during this war. It’s a change in approach that the left-wing bloc must go through."

‘Floating voters never arrive’

Douek and Horev believe that the center-left parties will not even try to differentiate between themselves by competing over which is more secular. “If we talk in terms of yes or no on the issue of public transport on Shabbat, we’ll be playing right into Netanyahu’s hands. It won’t contribute anything to the bloc’s efforts and will harm the camp’s interests,” says Horev. “The next election will be an existential battle and anyone who puts ego ahead of the interests of the bloc will be roundly defeated. They would be better off proposing that decisions on Shabbat transport be left in the hands of the municipalities, in a democratic manner and in accordance with the character of the community.”

So, secular Israelis will have to limit themselves to what happens in their own communities – assume that they are the majority there – and will have to stop looking at the big picture?

“Secular Israelis understand that the only way to win the election is to forge new alliances.”

And it’s not like they have much choice. They are a captive audience in any case.

“I agree that anyone who is interested in an outcome that is closer to separation of church and state will in any case vote for our bloc. They are not floating voters.”

One person who is not pleased with this trend is Ram Vromen, director of the Secular Forum. “This self-effacement is nothing new,” he says. “It’s always justified by the hope that floating votes will come our way — but they never do. These voters aren’t part of our base, and they see the world differently.”

Vromen believes that this approach — softening the message and downplaying secular identity — will ultimately prevent secular Israelis from fully realizing their rights.

But this time we have the judicial overhaul and Haredi draft dodging in the background. Could this perhaps lead to movement that was not possible before?

“The liberal-religious camp is tiny and has barely any electoral power – but they are affable and vocal. They won’t change anything and they certainly shouldn’t be able to force secular Israelis into concessions. Secular Israelis have to forget about their fantasy of running the country and understand that they belong to a sector that has to fight for its rights, instead of pursuing such a nonpartisan line. In any case, that won’t put them back into power.”

Challenging Finkelstein’s thesis by reclaiming Judaism to the center-left is an interesting idea.

“Finkelstein was right about the dichotomy between Israeliness and Judaism, but Israeliness is not weaker than Judaism. The problem is that ‘the Israelis’ are trembling with fear. It’s not a luxury to deal with secularism at times like this. Religion is one of the many factors that contributed to the current situation. If they had fought back, things would look very different.”

So, the secular leadership isn’t fighting back?

“They permit themselves to treat secular voters like a captive audience. The Haredim are also Moshe Gafni’s captive audience, yet he doesn’t try to appeal to other sectors. As long as secular Israelis do not produce their own versions of Gafni and Smotrich, they won’t get anything. When they put their support behind spinless politicians, nothing ever changes.”

"It’s not a luxury to deal with secularism at times like this. Religion is one of the many factors that contributed to the current situation. If they had fought back, things would look very different.”

‘Not everything needs to be front and center’

Earlier this month, Yisrael Beiteinu published its manifesto ahead of the next elections, as drafted by the chairman of the party’s Knesset faction, MK Oded Forer. On the issue of religion and state, the manifesto includes calls for: the unification of the position of Chief Rabbi; public transport and allowing businesses to open, in accordance with the position of the local council; and the abolition of Religious Councils, which are to be replaced with religious services departments.

On the one hand, this is a lot more than any of the other parties felt comfortable publishing and suggests that the party may be trying to carve out a niche for itself among the right-wing parties. On the other hand, even Forer admits that “state and religion will not be anywhere near the top of the public agenda in the next election. Before that are the ultra-Orthodox draft bill, a state commission on inquiry into October 7 and a constitution. We believe religious and Jewish traditions have an important place in a Jewish state – the problem is that there is no one to manage them properly.”

MK Meirav Cohen (Yesh Atid) offers an even more moderate approach. She says that “religion is our soundtrack. It has a spiritual place in our lives and we have to respect it, but it is not a working plan. When there’s an economic crisis, we shouldn’t just say ‘Please God, everything will be fine’ – we should solve it using our economic expertise. It’s all well and good studying Jewish texts in school, but we cannot make decisions based on religious edicts issued by rabbis; we need Knesset legislation and court rulings. We do not want to be a Halakha state.”

How will you promote a secular agenda?

“Through a constitution. The demand for a formal constitution will be central to our election campaign.”

People have been arguing over a constitution for decades and nothing’s budged an inch.

“They’ve been talking about the ultra-Orthodox draft bill for years, too, and nothing happened – but then there was an incident that caused a tectonic shift and changed the rules of the game. We will insist on a draft bill and the core curriculum. Under today’s conditions, the Haredi autonomy cannot continue to exist.”

What about advancing the rights of the secular sector?

“Even during the struggle against the judicial overhaul, the emphasis was not on secularism. It’s not that we lost focus on the issue because of the war. We have a very large common denominator with the national religious camp, which is the ultra-Orthodox draft issue. This did not happen for many years because of disagreements over the territories and the diplomatic process. There is a possibility now for a Zionist alliance between secular and religious Israelis.”

And that’s why you do not want to anger them?

“Obviously, there are some compromises in coalitions, but I do not believe that anyone in our party is afraid to talk about secularism. It’s just that not everything needs to be front and center.”