Israeli Rabbi's Anti-Zionist Remarks Ignite Political Storm Three Weeks Before Election

A political firestorm has erupted in Israel following the resurfacing of controversial comments made by one of the country's most prominent ultra-Orthodox rabbis, thrusting the sensitive relationship between Zionism, military service, and religious identity into the center of the national debate just weeks before a critical parliamentary election. The remarks, originally made in a closed setting, have now become a flashpoint in a campaign already defined by deep divisions over the role of the ultra-Orthodox community in Israeli society.

The controversy centers on Rabbi Dov Lando, the 96-year-old spiritual leader of the Degel HaTorah party, a key component of the United Torah Judaism (UTJ) political alliance. Footage broadcast by Channel 12 on Monday captured Lando speaking at a private gathering at his home in Bnei Brak, where he questioned the very foundation of the Israeli state and criticized soldiers who serve in the military for religious nationalist reasons. The timing of the broadcast, three weeks before the October 27 election, has amplified its impact, transforming a previously reported statement into a live political weapon.

In the footage, Lando is heard arguing that Jews might have been better off without a state of their own, suggesting that life under international or even Palestinian rule would have been preferable. "It is possible to live well with the Arabs without a state," he is quoted as saying, describing such a scenario as potentially "the best situation." He further asserted that Zionism "caused the Arabs to hate us" and brought both physical and spiritual calamity upon the Jewish people. These positions, while historically present within segments of ultra-Orthodox Judaism, are considered highly inflammatory in mainstream Israeli discourse, where they challenge the core Zionist narrative of the state as a refuge and a fulfillment of Jewish destiny.

The rabbi's comments extend beyond a rejection of Zionist ideology. He also directed sharp criticism at soldiers affiliated with "Religious Zionism," a movement that blends Orthodox observance with active military service and nationalistic fervor. According to Lando, such soldiers are killed in Israel's wars "because their rabbis teach them a distorted Torah." He characterized many military operations as being conducted "not for saving lives, but for the honour of the state." These statements strike at the heart of a growing tension within Israeli society, where the ultra-Orthodox exemption from military service has long been a source of resentment among the broader, largely secular and religious-Zionist public.

The reemergence of these remarks, which were first published in February 2025, is not accidental. It lands in the middle of an election campaign where the issue of ultra-Orthodox conscription has become perhaps the sharpest fault line. In 2024, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that there was no legal basis for exempting ultra-Orthodox seminary students from the military draft. Since then, the government has been unable to pass legislation to restore those exemptions, leading to widespread protests from both proponents and opponents of the draft. The issue has strained the governing coalition, which relies on the support of ultra-Orthodox parties like UTJ, even though their ministers resigned from the government last year. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been wary of fully enforcing the draft, fearing that the UTJ and similar parties would withdraw their support entirely, potentially collapsing the government.

Lando's Degel HaTorah is one of the two factions within the UTJ alliance, which won seven seats in the 2022 election. The rabbi's influence extends beyond his party; he is also a spiritual leader for Israel's Lithuanian ultra-Orthodox community, which constitutes roughly one-third of the country's estimated 1.45 million Haredi Jews. His views carry significant weight, and his previous calls for parliament to be dissolved in May, coupled with his declaration that he no longer trusts Netanyahu, have already signaled a deep dissatisfaction with the current political direction. The latest remarks escalate that tension, placing a prominent religious figure from within Netanyahu's electoral bloc in direct opposition to the state's foundational ideology.

The political reaction was swift and pointed. Opposition leaders seized on the footage as an opportunity to attack both Lando and, more importantly, Netanyahu. Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, one of Netanyahu's main challengers in the upcoming elections, condemned the remarks as "anti-Semitic, anti-Zionist and anti-[Israeli military]." However, he aimed his political fire not at the rabbi, but at Netanyahu and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, attempting to tie the Prime Minister to the controversial statements and highlight his reliance on ultra-Orthodox partners. As the source article notes, Bennett's statement was cut off at that point, but the strategy was clear: use Lando's words to paint the current government as beholden to forces that reject the state's Zionist identity.

The controversy has also drawn the attention of academics and analysts who study Israeli society and the broader Middle East. Ehab Jabareen, a researcher on Israeli affairs, told Al Jazeera that the essential question is not the content of Lando's statements, but why this discourse has been elevated to the center of the Israeli debate at this specific moment. "The question is not what he said, but why this discourse has been placed at the heart of the Israeli debate three weeks before the election," Jabareen said. His comment suggests that the timing is a calculated political move, designed to expose and exploit the contradictions within Netanyahu's coalition for electoral gain.

The remarks also carry deeper implications for how Israel's founding narrative is viewed, both internally and internationally. Ibrahim Khatib, a conflict studies scholar at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, explained to Al Jazeera that Lando's words draw a line between Zionism and Judaism "from inside the Jewish community itself," at a time when the official Israeli establishment "tries to bind them together." Khatib added that the comments put to the test the long-held narrative that Jewish communities in Arab societies were in danger and that the Zionist movement came to "save them" during the formation of the state of Israel in 1948. This perspective challenges a cornerstone of Israeli national identity and historical justification.

However, Khatib also offered a crucial caveat, cautioning against viewing the ultra-Orthodox community as a monolithic ally in anti-Zionist or pro-Palestinian causes. He noted that the ultra-Orthodox polity in Israel "is right-wing, its leaders hold right-wing positions, and some of them have made clearly offensive statements about Arabs and Palestinians." This nuance is important; Lando's anti-Zionism is rooted in a theological rejection of a secular Jewish state, not in a solidarity with Palestinian national aspirations. His worldview is fundamentally religious and insular, seeking to preserve a traditional way of life rather than to advocate for a binational or Palestinian-led state.

The timing of the broadcast ensures that the debate over Lando's remarks will continue to dominate the news cycle in the final stretch before the election. The controversy forces voters to confront fundamental questions about the nature of the state, the obligations of its citizens, and the price of coalition politics. It exposes the deep-seated tension between a secular, nationalist vision of Israel and a religious, non-Zionist vision that prioritizes Torah study and communal autonomy over national sovereignty. For Netanyahu, the episode presents a difficult balancing act: he must retain the support of his ultra-Orthodox allies to have any chance of forming a government, yet he must also distance himself from statements that are anathema to the majority of the Israeli electorate.

Ultimately, the row sparked by Rabbi Lando's comments is about more than the words of a nonagenarian religious leader. It is a reflection of the unresolved and increasingly volatile question of what kind of state Israel wants to be. The election on October 27 will serve as a referendum on these competing visions, with the ultra-Orthodox draft exemption and the ideological battle over Zionism itself serving as the defining issues. The footage from Bnei Brak has provided a stark and controversial framing for that choice, ensuring that the relationship between religion, state, and military service remains at the very top of the national agenda.