What is the NRP's response to the charges? Most rabbis identified with the NRP have so far refused to comment, and it is not clear whether Rabbis Shapira, Druckman, Aviner, and Begun gave their blessing to the party's agreement with Shinui. Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, former Chief Rabbi and considered one of the NRP's guiding rabbis, is reportedly against the NRP-Shinui agreement. His aides informed Arutz-7 today that he objects to the dismantling of the Ministry of Religious Affairs, the changing of the Tal Law, and public recognition of marriages [sic? see below] for 'psulei chitun' (those who cannot marry according to Jewish law, such as those born to a married woman from someone other than her husband). Rabbi Eliyahu was reportedly concerned also about the NRP's consent to include Sharon's Herzliya speech of this past Chanukah - in which he expressed support for a Palestinian state - in the government guidelines. NRP leaders were to meet today with ex-Chief Rabbi Avraham Shapira on this matter.
Arutz-7's Haggai Segal spoke with NRP leader Effie Eitam today, and said, "I'm not sure if you should go walking in Bnei Brak or the Bucharim areas today." Segal was alluding to the objections in these hareidi and Shas-supporting neighborhoods to the agreement the NRP forged with the secularist Shinui party. Eitam respectfully declined the advice, explaining,
"I believe that we are doing something that is good for the entire Israeli society. Part, at least, of the Shinui phenomenon is based on the deep chasm that exists between the secular and the religious... I would like to make perfectly clear that the formal 'status quo' in religious-secular relations remains as it was; no one has touched it, and no one will. There is no Shabbat transportation, there is no commerce on Shabbat, yeshiva students will not be drafted wholesale, and there is no dispensation for civil marriages. The dismantling of the Ministry of Religious Affairs has nothing to do with the status quo; it is a question of a deep reform that we, the religious, should make regarding how we offer religious services. The same is true with the local religious councils [which will be incorporated into the Interior Ministry], where changes are required, and perhaps if we would have woken up in time, we might have avoided such deep hatred for the religious establishment."
"Look, let me say this," Eitam continued. "Building a Jewish state along the lines of the NRP, Shas, and UTJ is easy; but to build a Jewish state in which Shinui is now bound by its agreement not to initiate any other changes in the status quo - this is a great achievement."
Eitam said that three things were discussed with Shinui:
"The Ministry of Religious Affairs will not be dismantled until we are sure that religious services are not only not affected, but are improved; this has nothing to do with the status quo. Secondly, the Tal Law will be revoked, but will be replaced by something that in some ways will be better. We will not allow widespread conscription of yeshiva students, and Shinui has agreed that the concept of exemptions for those "whose craft is Torah" will remain in place. Regarding the registration of 'psulei chitun,' it must be understood that this is a humanitarian problem, because there are [250,000] people who have no status; they can't go to the bank as a couple and receive a mortgage for a roof over their heads. We have an obligation as a normal state to [solve this problem.] We’re talking about a [committee that will look into making some kind of] technical arrangement…"
A fourth issue *was* discussed, however, between the NRP and the Likud, and that is the matter of allocations to religious high schools and yeshivot. The NRP appears to have been promised that although double allocations to yeshivot from two government ministries will not be allowed, the Education Ministry will pass on the full amounts to the institutions. A special law will have to be legislated to this effect.
Segal also asked Eitam how the NRP could have agreed to coalition guidelines that include a reference to the establishment of a Palestinian state, in the guise of Sharon's Herzliya speech. Eitam explained that it is clear that the NRP is against such a state, "and this was made clear in a letter that we attached to the agreement with the Likud." Asked what value such a letter has, Eitam responded,
"If the government remains in its current format, then we play a critical role; the government can’t last one day without us. Between the two alternatives of shooting ineffectual arrows from the opposition and feeling that we saved our own souls, on the one hand, and trying to save as much as possible from within the government, on the other hand, we chose the latter… When we reach the point at which [Sharon] wants to go in a certain direction to which we object, we will no longer be there. If it weren't for us, then there would be a Likud-Labor-Shinui government that could do what it wants; I don't think that that would be politically or historically smart. We have to go as far as we can to do the good things, and when we reach the point that we can go no further, we leave."
Arutz-7's Haggai Segal spoke with NRP leader Effie Eitam today, and said, "I'm not sure if you should go walking in Bnei Brak or the Bucharim areas today." Segal was alluding to the objections in these hareidi and Shas-supporting neighborhoods to the agreement the NRP forged with the secularist Shinui party. Eitam respectfully declined the advice, explaining,
"I believe that we are doing something that is good for the entire Israeli society. Part, at least, of the Shinui phenomenon is based on the deep chasm that exists between the secular and the religious... I would like to make perfectly clear that the formal 'status quo' in religious-secular relations remains as it was; no one has touched it, and no one will. There is no Shabbat transportation, there is no commerce on Shabbat, yeshiva students will not be drafted wholesale, and there is no dispensation for civil marriages. The dismantling of the Ministry of Religious Affairs has nothing to do with the status quo; it is a question of a deep reform that we, the religious, should make regarding how we offer religious services. The same is true with the local religious councils [which will be incorporated into the Interior Ministry], where changes are required, and perhaps if we would have woken up in time, we might have avoided such deep hatred for the religious establishment."
"Look, let me say this," Eitam continued. "Building a Jewish state along the lines of the NRP, Shas, and UTJ is easy; but to build a Jewish state in which Shinui is now bound by its agreement not to initiate any other changes in the status quo - this is a great achievement."
Eitam said that three things were discussed with Shinui:
"The Ministry of Religious Affairs will not be dismantled until we are sure that religious services are not only not affected, but are improved; this has nothing to do with the status quo. Secondly, the Tal Law will be revoked, but will be replaced by something that in some ways will be better. We will not allow widespread conscription of yeshiva students, and Shinui has agreed that the concept of exemptions for those "whose craft is Torah" will remain in place. Regarding the registration of 'psulei chitun,' it must be understood that this is a humanitarian problem, because there are [250,000] people who have no status; they can't go to the bank as a couple and receive a mortgage for a roof over their heads. We have an obligation as a normal state to [solve this problem.] We’re talking about a [committee that will look into making some kind of] technical arrangement…"
A fourth issue *was* discussed, however, between the NRP and the Likud, and that is the matter of allocations to religious high schools and yeshivot. The NRP appears to have been promised that although double allocations to yeshivot from two government ministries will not be allowed, the Education Ministry will pass on the full amounts to the institutions. A special law will have to be legislated to this effect.
Segal also asked Eitam how the NRP could have agreed to coalition guidelines that include a reference to the establishment of a Palestinian state, in the guise of Sharon's Herzliya speech. Eitam explained that it is clear that the NRP is against such a state, "and this was made clear in a letter that we attached to the agreement with the Likud." Asked what value such a letter has, Eitam responded,
"If the government remains in its current format, then we play a critical role; the government can’t last one day without us. Between the two alternatives of shooting ineffectual arrows from the opposition and feeling that we saved our own souls, on the one hand, and trying to save as much as possible from within the government, on the other hand, we chose the latter… When we reach the point at which [Sharon] wants to go in a certain direction to which we object, we will no longer be there. If it weren't for us, then there would be a Likud-Labor-Shinui government that could do what it wants; I don't think that that would be politically or historically smart. We have to go as far as we can to do the good things, and when we reach the point that we can go no further, we leave."