The IDF only punishes secular women
By Amnon Rubinstein
Haaretz, March 23, 2004
Four women who refused to serve in the IDF - some for reasons of pacifism and others who contend that it is an army of occupation and that serving in it goes against their conscience - have recently been sentenced to prison terms by a military disciplinary tribunal. Are these verdicts just and lawful?
In its judicial rulings, the Supreme Court has refused to recognize the right to a selective refusal to serve, and rejected appeals filed by soldiers who refused to serve in the territories. Indeed, selective refusal to serve poses a danger to Israel, but just as the refusal to serve should be opposed, we should also be opposed to unlawful decisions and discrimination.
The Defense Service Law created a series of significant distinctions between men and women, during both compulsory service and reserve duty. The law also distinguishes between the sexes for the purposes of exemption from military service: for women, there is an unequivocal directive: "A woman who proves that reasons of conscience or religious family lifestyle prevent her from serving in the defense forces, is exempt from compulsory service."
As for men, no such directive exists. Instead, the defense minister has the authority to exempt them from service for specific reasons and "other reasons." The other reasons have been interpreted to include pacifist opposition to any type of military service. To that end, a special committee was formed for the granting of exemptions to pacifists, and to which all of the requests are referred - from men and women alike.
Nevertheless, the practice of referring women to this committee is a mistake. Every pacifist acts out of reasons of conscience, but not all reasons of conscience are necessarily pacifistic. A person can object to military service for reasons of conscience under unique circumstances, but not to military service in general. Women have the right, provided by law, not to serve - if they prove that a religious lifestyle or reasons of conscience, and not necessarily pacifistic viewpoint, prevent them from doing so.
The army, defense ministry and military courts are making a mistake when they disregard the law and the obligation to exempt women who refuse to serve for reasons of conscience. Not only is this act unlawful, it is also unacceptable discrimination. The law granted equal status to a woman seeking an exemption for reasons of religion or conscience, but the army refers only secular women to the special committee and, of course, it is only secular women that the army tries and imprisons.
Why does the lawmaker differentiate between military service of men and that of women? There are two explanations. One, the compulsory draft of women into a conscript army is atypical. In essence, Israel is the only such state that does so. Even when Britain and the Soviet Union were fighting for their lives in the World War, they did not enlist women in a compulsory draft. In modern European states that believe in equality between the sexes, only men are subject to the draft in those states that still have or had a compulsory draft. The Knesset understood, as well, that a shorter period of service should be instituted for women, and was therefore also willing to grant a more expansive exemption to women.
The second explanation is that only for women does the law offer national service as a substitute for enlistment - for both religious women and those whom for reasons of conscience are prevented from serving. A man who exempts himself from service for pacifistic reasons is not obligated to perform national service. A woman is. True, the National Service Law for Women is not implemented due to objections of the religious parties, but in actual fact a more comprehensive and significant national service exists for religious women, through voluntary frameworks.
The IDF releases religious women on a wholesale basis, enables some of them not to perform any national service, whereas secular women that are deserving of the same protection, and who are willing to enlist in national service, are sent to prison. This discrimination is infuriating. This practice must come to an end; the women should be released from prison, and should be allowed to enlist in a substitute national service, as is available to religious women. In the future, it would be proper to consider allowing pacifistic men, as well, to perform a substitute national service.
