Could Trump's allies push Netanyahu into unity gov't without his far-right partners? - analysis

The proposal is for a broad, moderate unity government in Israel. It would bring together a wider range of political forces while removing Ben-Gvir and Smotrich from the governing coalition. Some figures in Trump's circle believe this would give Israel more room to make diplomatic decisions and improve its international standing.

One version goes further. Netanyahu would remain prime minister during the first year, preserving continuity. A different prime minister would then lead negotiations with Saudi Arabia before Trump's term ends. This rotation idea reflects doubts among some Trump advisers about whether major diplomacy can advance with Netanyahu in charge.

The proposal remains only an idea. Gadi Eisenkot and Naftali Bennett oppose serving under Netanyahu, and American officials have not discussed the framework with them. Trump has not formally endorsed it, although Netanyahu and Ambassador Yechiel Leiter have publicly supported a broad government.

A national unity government is a coalition designed to include major political forces from different camps. Its purpose is usually to create a broader base for governing during a political or national challenge. In the proposal described here, the government would be broader and more moderate than Netanyahu's current coalition.

The key difference would be its partners. Ben-Gvir and Smotrich currently hold influential cabinet positions, but the proposed arrangement would leave them outside the government. It might instead seek support from figures such as Gadi Eisenkot or Naftali Bennett, although both oppose serving under Netanyahu. The proposal could also involve a rotating prime minister.

The idea is not yet an agreed political framework. Netanyahu has said he wants a unity government, and Yechiel Leiter said Netanyahu prefers one to the present coalition. However, American officials have not discussed the plan with Eisenkot or Bennett, and Trump has not formally backed it.

Itamar Ben-Gvir is Israel's national security minister, while Bezalel Smotrich is its finance minister. Both are important partners in Netanyahu's current coalition. The article presents them as far-right figures whose continued presence could limit the government's ability to make difficult diplomatic choices.

The concern is practical as well as political. A Saudi normalization agreement would require Israeli decisions on the Palestinian issue and other regional matters. Several Trump advisers believe a government without Ben-Gvir and Smotrich would have more flexibility to consider those decisions. They also believe excluding them could help restore Israel's international standing and expand the Abraham Accords.

Their removal would not automatically produce an agreement. Saudi Arabia has its own demands, including tangible progress for the Palestinians. Ben-Gvir's party is already reacting against the possibility, while Ben-Gvir has urged Netanyahu to form a right-wing government instead of one with Eisenkot.

The article does not state the Knesset's size or the threshold for forming a government. Under Israel's parliamentary system, the Knesset has 120 seats, and a governing coalition generally needs support from at least 61 mandates, a majority. That support can come from coalition members rather than from one party alone.

This structure gives smaller parties leverage. If a prime minister's coalition contains only a narrow majority, losing one partner can threaten its survival. Smaller parties can therefore seek cabinet positions, budget priorities, or policy commitments in exchange for continuing to support the government.

That helps explain the article's focus on Ben-Gvir and Smotrich. Even if Netanyahu personally favored a Saudi deal or other diplomatic steps, a government dependent on them could struggle to approve those choices. Replacing them could broaden his options, but a new coalition would still require stable support from its own partners.

A broader government without Ben-Gvir and Smotrich could change the political space for diplomacy. Trump allies believe their removal would make it easier for Israel to take difficult positions on the Palestinian issue and other regional matters. That could support Trump's goal of a historic normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia.

The proposed mechanism is coalition flexibility. Without those two partners, Netanyahu or another prime minister might face fewer internal obstacles when negotiating with Riyadh. Bill Ackman also argued that such a government could restore Israel's international standing, expand the Abraham Accords, and improve relations with both major US political parties.

The effects would remain uncertain. Saudi Arabia has its own demands, including tangible Palestinian progress. Netanyahu's ambassador said he wants a broad government, but potential partners Eisenkot and Bennett reject serving under him. The arrangement therefore depends on whether a workable coalition can actually be assembled.

Changing Israel's coalition would address only one side of a possible Saudi agreement. Some Trump advisers believe removing Ben-Gvir and Smotrich would make Israeli diplomacy easier, especially on the Palestinian issue. But a more flexible Israeli government would still need to negotiate terms acceptable to Riyadh.

The article identifies the central mechanism clearly. Saudi Arabia maintains its own political demands, including tangible progress on the Palestinian issue. Therefore, even a government free of Netanyahu's current far-right partners could fail to deliver what Riyadh wants. Coalition change may reduce an obstacle, but it cannot replace bilateral bargaining.

Other uncertainties also remain. Some Trump officials question whether a breakthrough is possible while Netanyahu is prime minister. That is why a rotation arrangement has been floated, with Netanyahu serving first and another leader later handling negotiations. Neither that idea nor a broader coalition has been formally agreed.

Israel's parliamentary system makes coalition support central to governing. The prime minister must maintain backing from enough Knesset members to form and sustain a government. Because parties often need partners to reach a majority, smaller parties can become essential even when they represent fewer voters.

Their leverage comes from the possibility of withdrawal. A small party can demand ministerial positions or policy commitments, and the prime minister may need to accommodate those demands to keep the coalition alive. This can affect decisions that require political backing, including positions on Gaza, Syria, Lebanon, settlements, or a Saudi agreement.

The article applies this logic to Netanyahu's partners. It says a government reliant on Ben-Gvir and Smotrich could struggle with difficult diplomatic choices, even if Netanyahu wanted to make them. A broader coalition could reduce that dependence, but it would create new negotiations with potential partners such as Eisenkot or Bennett.