Middle East
GDN Online App available on
App Store / Play Store
Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News
Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News
Tuesday, July 14, 2020 ARCHIVES  |  SEARCH  |  POST ADS  |  ADVERTISE  |  SUBSCRIBE   |  LOGIN   |  CONTACT US

A murky result...

Dr James J Zogby
1 of 2

As expected, the outcome of Israel’s second national election was as murky as the first round in April. During the next few weeks, Israeli leaders will be engaged in negotiations in an effort to form a government. The double-dealings and the betrayals that will need to occur for them to form a governing coalition will make “House of Cards” look like a tea party.

The reasons for this are simple. The results of the election were close and inconclusive with no grouping, neither the one led by Prime Minister Netanyahu nor that of the main opposition led by former general Benny Gantz, in a position to easily cobble together the 61 Knesset seats needed to form a majority. In addition, there’s the fact that all of the major players have made, and continue to affirm, principled pledges which, if honoured, will make creating a governing coalition impossible. Hence, either there are betrayals of pledges or partners or there will be no new government.

What follows is the state of play and the pledges made by all of the principled actors.

Gantz’s Blue and White coalition won 33 seats. The two Left parties with whom he can align won 11 seats. This only gives Gantz a total of 44 seats.

While most analysts also incorrectly add to Gantz’s total the 13 seats held by Joint Union (made up of four parties representing the Palestinian citizens of Israel), this will not occur for two reasons. Gantz made a pledge not to form a government “dependent on the Arabs”. And the Arab parties have said that while they would not vote against a Gantz-led government, if it meant ending Netanyahu’s rule, but they would only consider joining a governing coalition on the condition that it was committed to full equality for the Arab citizens of Israel and ending the occupation. These are conditions to which Gantz is ideologically opposed.

Gantz might also seek to include the 17 seats held by the two ultra-religious parties since this would give him the 61 he needs to form a majority. But Blue and White ran on a decidedly secular platform and he would find it difficult to add the religious parties who would demand that the government continue to provide funding for their institutions and uphold a number of restrictive religious prohibitions. This would put Gantz at loggerheads with the secular nationalist voters who formed his support base.
Since many of the Blue and White leadership were originally connected to Likud, it might appear logical for Gantz to turn to Likud, which won 31 seats in this election, in order to form a national unity government of the right. But here too, there are problems.
In the lead up to negotiations, Likud’s leader, Benjamin Netanyahu secured a pledge from his partners that they would remain united and negotiate as an unbreakable union, under Netanyahu’s leadership. If this unity is upheld, it effectively rules out any partnership with Gantz who has insisted that he would not form a government on Netanyahu’s terms and certainly not with Netanyahu as the prime minister. In addition, if the Likud-led grouping maintains its unity, this would require Gantz accepting the religious parties and their demands.

Now while Gantz can claim the right to lead efforts to form the next government, since his Blue and White coalition won the most seats (33), Netanyahu, despite only winning 31 seats, is claiming that because he is entering the negotiations with a stronger hand, since his base of support is larger (a total of 55 Knesset seats – his 31, the religious parties’ 17, and Yamina’s seven), he should be the one to set the terms. This is, of course, out of the question for Gantz, since he has ruled out joining a government under Netanyahu and he will not form a government with the religious parties and their requirements.

Seventeen members of the Likud might choose to betray Netanyahu, by dumping him as their leader and joining a Gantz-led government. This might occur if negotiations continue past the October date when the Attorney General has said he will begin proceedings that, in all likelihood, will lead to Netanyahu being indicted for crimes of corruption, bribery and betrayal of the public trust.

It is of critical importance to note that in all of this haggling and betrayal, there is no mention of or concern for the rights of the Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. The fact that there is so little focus in the West on the continued denial of Palestinian rights is the ultimate betrayal. And the unwarranted liberal embrace of Gantz, as the “not Netanyahu,” is its own form of betrayal – of the values of justice, human rights and equality to which liberals claim to adhere.

You Might Like