Reading the Aftermath of the Israeli Elections
Netanyahu faces pressure from Trump, and Arabs hold the key to forming the government.
Translated by Qiyas from الجريدة — Original source
In order to understand the implications of the Israeli election results on the region, and the reasons behind the participation of Arab citizens, who cast their votes with full weight despite their certainty that both competing camps base their electoral campaigns on racist and religious grounds and refuse to recognize the legitimacy of a Palestinian state, we write this article.
It is evident that these elections witnessed an unprecedented high turnout across all political segments, including Arabs, who secured nineteen seats. This reflects widespread public dissatisfaction with the performance of current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his handling of domestic and foreign issues.
The religious right camp, led by Netanyahu, comprising Likud, Religious Zionism, Jewish Home, Shas, and United Torah Judaism, won 53 seats, making it theoretically closest to forming a government if it succeeds in attracting one of the parties under the Change camp. This scenario is difficult but not entirely excluded, especially given the pressure exerted by President Trump.
The other camp, which raised the banner of Change and stands against Netanyahu, consists of Yesh Atid, Meretz, the Democrats, and Yisrael Beiteinu, securing 48 seats. This makes forming a government without Arab parties unfeasible, not to mention the reluctance of most parties within the Change bloc to accept the idea of negotiating with the Arab bloc.
This time, the Arabs held the key to the deadlock. In the world of politics, constants are absent and interests prevail. The Change camp recognizes that returning to the polls would enable the religious right camp to win the required majority. Moreover, US President Donald Trump will exert pressure on both camps to reach a consensus government that includes both sides. Therefore, the Change camp has no choice but to quickly reach an agreement with Arab parties to secure enough seats to form a government if it wishes to punish Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Despite points of agreement between the two camps—such as their security stance toward Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran, opposition to establishing a Palestinian state, and the normalization file with Arab countries—the points of disagreement are far greater. The Change camp demands accountability and an official investigation into the October 7 attack, as well as the trial of Benjamin Netanyahu for his failures, and the opening of files concerning conflicts of interest, judicial independence, the conscription of Haredim, public debt, budgets, and settlement policies.
The Change camp has opportunities that may not recur when considering the nature of Israeli elections, which are based on ethnic (Western and Eastern) and religious lines. It has never been recorded in Israeli history that anyone of non-European origin has headed the government. Will Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the Yesh Atid party, miss this opportunity? Can he convince the other parties within the Change camp to accept the idea of sitting and negotiating with the Arab lists, or will he stick to his previous position of refusing to sit with them and lose the opportunity?
Regardless of the Israeli election results, its democracy is a sham facade. Its dictionary does not contain the concepts of left and right; rather, it is based on racist and religious exclusion, with far-right parties at varying degrees.
