Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked stunned the political establishment in December with her decision to quit Bayit Yehudi and establish the religious-secular New Right party with former Bayit Yehudi chairman Naftali Bennett. Shaked and Bennett aim to position themselves to the right of Netanyahu’s Likud and attract secular voters who don’t identify with the religious Bayit Yehudi. At the moment, their gambit hasn’t paid off. While Bayit Yehudi has maintained its popularity and standing, and the Likud has remained the largest right-wing party, the New Right has so far failed to capture the imaginations of the masses. True, they’re polling at five to seven seats on average, but that’s certainly not what they had in mind when they broke away from Bayit Yehudi.

It looks like you’re stuck between a rock (Likud) and a hard place (Kachol Lavan). What exactly does the New Right stand for and whom does it serve?

Your mistake is in the question. We’re not stuck between; we founded the party with the clear aim of enlarging the right-wing bloc and guarding Netanyahu from the right. Economically, we’re right wing; politically, we’re a mix of religious and secular, with room also for the working chareidi sector. We aim to serve anyone who believes in our values. Even now, it’s clear that Netanyahu will be the next prime minister. The question is whether he’ll establish a government with Gantz, in which case it will be a left-wing coalition that will destroy all that we’ve built over the last four years, or if he’ll build a right-wing government with the New Right. That’s exactly what the New Right stands for.

Your slogan, “Vote Right and Get Right,” implies that the party intends to implement a right-wing agenda after it enters the coalition. But previously, you and Bennett were part of the right-wing bloc as part of Bayit Yehudi, so what difference does the new party make?

People who vote for us are voting for the right wing, and that’s exactly what they’ll be getting. In the 40 years that the Likud has been in power, no justice minister, not even from the right, bothered to make a change in the Justice Ministry until I arrived. Furthermore, my work in the Justice Ministry, Bennett’s work in the Education Ministry and with the defense establishment, and the fact that Bennett halted the fourth stage of freeing terrorists [in 2014] — all that proves that since we’ve been in politics, anyone who votes for us gets the right.

In 2015, after the polls indicated you’d win 12 seats, Netanyahu launched what came to be called the “Gevalt campaign,” following which you lost four seats, so that you ended up with only eight. Are you worried about a similar scenario, with Netanyahu calling on voters a week before elections to leave the right-wing parties and vote Likud — a scenario that could end up with you not passing the election threshold?

Netanyahu needs the right wing in order to stay in power. The story won’t be about which party is the biggest but rather, which bloc. The goal is for the right-wing bloc to number 61 Knesset members, so right-wing voters need to weigh which party best matches their worldview and will also pass the electoral threshold [3.25% of the vote]. I’m not afraid of the “gevalt.” The public is mature enough to understand that what matters isn’t how many seats the Likud gets, but rather the size of the bloc.

Your positions on the economy, the judiciary, and defense are very clear, but on issues of religion and state you’re ambiguous, saying you’ll establish a committee after the elections. Why? Don’t secular and religious voters deserve to know exactly what your platform is?

Our positions are possibly the clearest of all the other parties. I don’t see that Kachol Lavan has a clear stance. Our position complies with the Gavison-Medan covenant on matters of religion and state, and on conversion with the Nissim committee. We don’t believe in coercion, either religious or secular, but in reaching agreement through understanding.

Lapid tried to provide instant solutions on matters of religion and state, and only stirred things up without solving anything. For this reason, our goal after the elections is to establish a public committee in the spirit of the Gavison-Medan covenant that will deal with all these questions and achieve the widest possible consensus between the secular and religious. Only in this way can we hope to arrive at a solution, as opposed to just making headlines.

Bennett and I are the only ones fighting for the working chareidi sector to receive a core curriculum in their schools, as well as for separate tracks in higher education. We fought against academia and the judiciary to allow the chareidi sector to engage in academic study on its own terms.

You expressed last week a desire to appoint a chareidi judge to the High Court. Why is that important?

It’s very important. I wanted it during this term, but it wasn’t possible due to a lack of candidates. The court must represent all the state’s citizens, and it’s inconceivable for such a large sector to be unrepresented.

If you serve again as justice minister, which reforms would you like to institute?

I’d like to make reforms in the criminal court system, as I did in the civil courts. I’d like to complete drafting the Basic Laws. Those are the two biggest things. Additionally, I plan on continuing to make the justice system more heterogenous. When I took my position, I saw there weren’t any chareidi judges in the entire system, and I immediately began to seek suitable candidates. I appointed a woman judge and a chareidi judge, and I intend to continue this trend in my next term.

You have said you are concerned about the Trump peace plan, which will reportedly call for a Palestinian state with a capital in East Jerusalem. Why do you think Trump, whom you have called the most pro-Israel president ever, would propose that?

Trump is a great friend of Israel, there’s no doubt about that. But he wants to advance a peace plan, and we know that giving away East Jerusalem to the Palestinians is part of that. Notwithstanding his friendship, from what we know of the plan we will oppose ceding land for the establishment of a Palestinian state. Certainly, anyone who opposes a Palestinian state should give us the power and ability to stop this and strengthen Netanyahu. I think Netanyahu will be under tremendous pressure. In some ways, it was easier for him to withstand pressure from Barack Obama than from Trump.

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 752)