Ben Caspit: Sara Netanyahu Was Convinced That Eisenkot's Victory Would Lead to... Her Death

Journalist Ben Kaspi, writing in the newspaper Ma’ariv, examined the repercussions of the Israeli elections, allegations of foreign interference, and divisions within the change camp, as well as what he describes as a state of panic that gripped Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office and family on election day, alongside scenarios for forming the next government.

Kaspi argues that the campaign casting doubt on the election results, particularly Arab voting, was pre-planned by Likud with the aim of undermining the legitimacy of the results if they did not serve Netanyahu’s interests.

Kaspi initially supports involving Arab parties in the government, describing Mansour Abbas as one of the most important Arab leaders in Israeli history, and considers the Bennett-Lapid government’s experience with the participation of the United Arab List to have been historically successful.

However, he believes that forming a new government reliant on Arab parties is “currently unrealistic,” especially given the likelihood of renewed war with Iran and escalation in the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, and Syria.

He warns that such a government could collapse quickly and, in his view, lead to Netanyahu’s return with a larger majority in the next elections.

He calls on Gadi Eisenkot to adopt the same political tactics Netanyahu used against his opponents and to avoid repeating Benny Gantz’s mistakes in dealing with him.

According to the article, Bennett pushed for the formation of a joint list and agreed to take the second position, in exchange for assuming the Ministry of Finance and responsibility for the artificial intelligence file.

Polls for the United Arab List had indicated the possibility of securing 31 or 32 seats, whereas the two parties running separately obtained 33 seats.

Kaspi considers Bennett’s alliance with Lapid to be a major political error, as it helped Tsachi Hanegbi surpass the electoral threshold and deprived Bennett of the ability to attack Netanyahu from the right.

Kaspi cites sources close to Netanyahu’s circle stating that election day was marked by unprecedented chaos, shouting, and panic.

According to one insider who spoke to Kaspi, Sara Netanyahu was convinced that Eisenkot’s victory would lead to the withdrawal of her security protection, leaving her vulnerable to being killed or burned alive.

The source described that day as extremely difficult within Netanyahu’s immediate circle.

As for Netanyahu himself, he received optimistic predictions from pollster Shlomo “Momo” Vilbrun during the campaign, which started at 67 seats for his camp, then gradually declined to 58 seats on election day, before the final results settled at 53 seats.

Kaspi notes that Netanyahu shifted to a campaign casting doubt on Arab voting after realizing that the change camp might attempt to keep him out of power by relying on Arab lawmakers.

Kaspi points out that Netanyahu’s camp dropped from 68 seats in the outgoing Knesset to 53 seats, while the change camp gained approximately 250,000 additional votes compared to the previous elections, after excluding the effect of population growth, according to his calculations.

Although the change camp did not reach 61 seats, the writer believes Netanyahu did not achieve a victory that would allow him to form a government easily.

However, he doubts Netanyahu’s willingness to agree to a genuine unity government and warns of the possibility that he might use negotiations to deceive his partners, as he did previously with Gantz.

The writer warns that continuing a right-wing government including Ben Gvir and Smotrich could, in his view, lead to international sanctions, brain and capital drain, and a deterioration of the Israeli economy.

He recounts an incident relayed to him by an Israeli who claimed he and his family were endangered during disturbances in Barcelona, using it to warn of rising antisemitism outside Israel.

He asserts that Israel, despite its political and security crises, remains in his view the only place where Jews can protect themselves, and that leaving it because of Netanyahu means abandoning the Zionist project.

- Eisenkot faces a decisive test: He must unify the change camp and leverage his parliamentary strength, rather than hastily forming a government that relies on Arab parties.

- Netanyahu fears losing power: The author recounts stories of panic within his family and office on election day, particularly Sarah Netanyahu’s fears of Eisenkot coming to power.

- A unity government is the author’s preferred exit strategy: Yet he questions Netanyahu’s intentions and believes US pressure could be a decisive factor in forcing a political settlement.

Notably, Kissipit disagrees with the argument for forming a minority government with Arab support; while he supports in principle the inclusion of Arabs in governance, he considers the current security and political circumstances unsuitable, and prefers exploiting the available parliamentary majority to pass laws that limit Netanyahu’s ability to return to power.

The allegations and narratives concerning Netanyahu and his family, as well as the political expectations, are attributed to Ben Kissipit and his sources in the article, and are not independently verified facts.