Israeli elections are behind us and incredulously, yet unsurprisingly, the Israeli public has reverted back to the same division and electoral deadlock that preceded Oct. 7. All manner of reasons are offered as to why a unity government is impossible. Better, disunity?
In the weeks leading up to the election, I was saying to friends and neighbors that we need to learn from Israel’s Arab parties. They put aside their differences, made peace and unified four small parties into one bigger one. Lo and behold, they won 19 seats, which is proving to be a major stumbling block for building a government coalition of 61 seats. (Regardless of the pending bribery investigation, most polls were showing Arab parties winning 16-18 seats anyway.)
For the past year, there have been countless attempts at building a new approach in Israeli politics, one focused on what Israelis have in common and building unity. Personally, I’ve been rather shocked and disappointed that all of them failed. From Benny Gantz to Chili Tropper’s new party and up to Yuli Edelstein and Gilad Erdan’s resignation from the Likud, many new parties were formed only to dissolve shortly thereafter due to low polling.
Of the new parties that did run in the election, such as Yoaz Hendel and Einat Wilf’s Reservists party, Ofer Winter’s Nation of Israel party, and Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer’s Haredi Public party, none of them crossed the minimum threshold, which is enough votes to earn four seats in the Knesset.
Meanwhile, the parties that did win seats engaged in familiar tribalism tactics, swearing off joining coalitions with numerous other parties. The result is that despite approximately 80 seats won by parties that have a remarkable degree of overlap on fundamental values and beliefs, no government coalition is in sight.
To boot, while the center-left parties ensured no votes were wasted, the center-right parties splintered many times over, leading to hundreds of thousands of wasted votes and the loss of multiple seats in the Knesset. (A “wasted vote” is for a party that ends up not getting enough votes to cross the minimum threshold to enter the Knesset. Smaller parties that run independently have a much less chance of making the cut than smaller parties that join together.)
I’m not blind and I’m not naïve (OK, perhaps I do carry a certain Anglo naivete). I know that there are serious concerns regarding Netanyahu’s continued premiership. I also know there are serious fissures between the haredi community and Israeli society at-large, besides other significant issues dividing the electorate.
Yet, regardless of what happens in the race to build a governing coalition, we the people ought to take care not to slide into the either/or, black-and-white tendencies gripping Israeli politics. Instead, let us see the plurality of Israeli political parties in a positive light and be accepting of their potential inclusion — most of them, at least — in an upcoming government coalition.
First, a word about the haredi parties.
It recently emerged that as of 2023, Israel had 180,000 soldiers under age 38 who had been completely released from service, including reserve duty, due to the army’s gradual downsizing over the prior decade. Among these were 70,000 soldiers with the highest level of combat training. How many of those did the army call back to duty following Oct. 7? Zero.
Now, do I believe it remains the moral and religious duty of haredi men who are not studying full-time to enlist in the IDF? Yes. And do I believe that army frameworks respecting haredi sensitivities should continue to be set up? Yes. Do I believe that Rabbi Pfeffer’s Haredi Public party is doing all the right things to chart a better future for haredi society and Israel society at large? Yes. Even so, it is also impossible to escape the conclusion that those who have knowledge of the above statistics and nonetheless push the haredi draft issue as the sole answer to relieving the burden on the IDF’s reservists had ulterior motives of some sort of social engineering the haredi community, at least to some degree. Given that reality, plus the fact that the IDF has recently broken promises to the religious Zionist community regarding integration of women into tank units, it becomes much easier to accept continued haredi intransigence on the draft issue.
Second, a word about Netanyahu and the Likud.
Yes, he has consistently refused to groom a successor and insists he, and only he, is capable of being prime minister. Yes, he is accused of bribery and — more problematically to my mind — he refused to accept a plea deal that would see him leave politics in exchange for acquittal. Yes, he has refused any accountability for Oct. 7 and continues to block the formation of a State Commission of Inquiry. These are grave failures; the instinct to blacklist him as a coalition partner in a unity government is understandable. However, considering that he received by far the most votes yet another time, it is a case of hubris to assume that the million+ Likud voters are collectively dumb or otherwise deficient. The responsible thing is to respect the will of the people and consider a partnership with Netanyahu as the head of Likud.
Third, a word about the center-left parties.
Besides Yair Golan’s Democrats party, which I struggle to judge favorably, it is silly to treat the center-left parties as though they will bring great harm upon Israel, certainly not in the context of a unity government. First, much of what is today called center-left were center-right parties just a decade ago. Second, the advantage of a unity government is precisely that it disables the parties from catering to the extreme elements on their agenda and forces them to find common ground across the political spectrum. Third, nearly 20% of those parties’ Knesset seats will be held by newly bereaved family members of those killed on or since Oct. 7. They will not take Israel’s security lightly.
Fourth, a word about government ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir.
The international media reflexively groups them together, yet they have their differences. It is not for nothing that they refused to run together in one party. While they share ideological commitments to Jewish settlement in the West Bank, Ben-Gvir and his associates often convey tacit approval of illegal settlements and even Jewish violence against Palestinians, but Smotrich and his associates endeavor to attain legal approval for settlement building and condemn Jewish violence against Palestinians (though not clearly and frequently enough, in my humble opinion).
As well, look at their respective portfolios in this past Knesset. As Economy Minister during a period of ongoing war, Smotrich has guided Israel to improbable financial success and well being. Ben-Gvir, on the other hand, as Minister of Internal Security, has overseen a police force marred by multiple controversies.
Even for those who believe, as I do, that Ben-Gvir ought not be part of the ruling coalition, it is important to keep in mind what led to his rise. It is not so much racism as it is trauma. Radicalism begets radicalism. Among a generation that suffered through the Second Intifada (2000-2005), Ariel Sharon’s betrayal of the Likud party and fellow coalition partners with his unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, and the subsequent unending conflicts with Hamas in Gaza, it is not shocking that a politician such as Ben-Gvir would gain popularity. Ultimately, the primary matter driving people to vote for him seems to be the perception that he is best to ensure Israelis’ security.
A final word — about Ra’am, Mansour Abbas’ Arab party.
The question of whether this Arab party should be considered as a coalition partner is lot thornier after Oct. 7, though it shouldn’t be ignored that the government that the Ra’am party was part of under Naftali Bennet did a pretty good job in reducing terrorist attacks. At the very least, though, we ought to differentiate between Ra’am and the other, more extreme Arab parties. For the most part, Ra’am Knesset members condemned Oct. 7 and condemn Hamas’ military wing, while MKs from the other Arab parties celebrated it.
Is this enough to include Ra’am in a ruling coalition? No, especially since one Ra’am MK recently described Hamas as an organization to which people should donate charity.
But even if we do not support Ra’am joining a government coalition in its current iteration, if we want outsiders to be able to differentiate between Itamar Ben-Gvir and other right-wing parties, we also need to be able to differentiate — at least in our rhetoric — between Ra’am and the other Arab parties.
Most important, though, we need to learn from the Arab parties — we must focus on what unites us rather than on what divides us.
© IJN 2026
