Netanyahu or Eisenkot? Israel's election leaves Herzog with an impossible choice - comment

President Isaac Herzog must decide which political leader receives the first opportunity to assemble Israel’s next government. Under Israeli law, he must consult the Knesset factions before making that decision. The choice matters because the election projections show no side reaching the 61 seats needed for a majority.

Benjamin Netanyahu can point to Likud’s lead as the largest individual party. Gadi Eisenkot can point to his opposition bloc’s larger total and its potentially stronger path to a coalition. The projections put Likud at 25 seats and Eisenkot’s Yashar party at 23, but the opposition bloc at 53 seats against Netanyahu’s 50.

The figures remain provisional because they come from exit polls. Smaller parties are close to the electoral threshold, so the final results could change. Herzog therefore faces competing claims and likely criticism from millions of Israelis, whichever leader he chooses.

The Knesset is Israel’s parliament, made up of 120 seats. A government needs at least 61 seats, more than half the chamber, to command a majority. That support helps it pass legislation and survive parliamentary votes. The threshold is why election results must be judged by blocs, not only by the largest party.

For example, Likud is projected to win 25 seats, while Eisenkot’s Yashar party is projected to win 23. Neither figure is close to 61. Even the projected blocs fall short: Netanyahu’s side has 50 seats and the opposition bloc has 53. Each side would need partners to govern.

The 61-seat figure also explains Herzog’s dilemma. He must consider not just which party came first, but which leader has the better chance of building a stable coalition. That assessment remains uncertain while smaller parties hover near the electoral threshold and final totals may change.

The exit polls offered two different pictures of the election. Likud was projected to be the largest individual party, with 25 seats. Eisenkot’s Yashar party followed with 23. Yet party size did not match bloc size, which is more important for forming a government.

The opposition bloc was projected to hold 53 seats overall. Netanyahu’s bloc was projected to hold 50. These totals show that both sides remained below the 61 seats required for a Knesset majority. They would therefore need support from additional parties or factions.

The numbers were only initial projections from Kan and Channel 13. Several smaller parties were near the electoral threshold, so the final results could shift. That uncertainty makes the seat totals important but not conclusive. Herzog must wait for the political picture to become clearer before deciding whom to task with forming a government.

The competing claims reflect two ways of interpreting an election result. One focuses on the largest party. The other focuses on the largest group of parties that could cooperate in parliament. Herzog must weigh both because Israeli law requires him to consult the Knesset factions before assigning the task.

Netanyahu will point to Likud’s projected 25 seats, the highest total for any single party. Eisenkot’s Yashar party is projected to have 23, but his opposition bloc totals 53 seats. Netanyahu’s bloc totals 50. Eisenkot can therefore argue that his side starts closer to the 61 seats needed for a majority.

Neither argument guarantees success. Eisenkot’s larger bloc still lacks eight seats, while Netanyahu’s bloc lacks eleven. The opposition also faces uncertainty over coalition partners, especially the Arab parties. Herzog’s decision could draw criticism because supporters of either leader may believe the other had the stronger claim.

The leader Herzog selects receives the first opportunity, not an automatic mandate to govern. That leader must bring enough parties together to reach at least 61 Knesset seats. If negotiations fail, the proposed government cannot command a majority and the first attempt ends without a governing coalition.

The projected numbers show why failure is possible. Netanyahu’s bloc has 50 seats, while Eisenkot’s has 53. Each needs additional support. Eisenkot may have a numerical advantage, but the article says few parties have declared willingness to sit with Arab parties. That makes his coalition path uncertain despite the bloc’s larger size.

If the first candidate cannot assemble a coalition, Israel’s parliamentary process allows another candidate to receive an opportunity. The article does not identify the exact next step or timetable. Final results could also change, since smaller parties are near the electoral threshold. Herzog’s initial choice therefore may not settle who ultimately governs.

Both leaders would need to build alliances beyond their projected blocs. Netanyahu would likely seek support from parties already counted in or close to his political camp. Eisenkot would need to unite opposition parties and find additional partners. The aim for either side would be the same: reach the 61-seat majority.

The Arab parties are projected to win a record-high 18 mandates. That makes them potentially decisive in coalition arithmetic. Eisenkot’s bloc has 53 seats, so support from even part of that group could close the gap. Yet the article says few parties have declared a willingness to sit with Arab parties. Yair Golan’s Democrats are the exception identified.

This creates a sharp tension between numbers and political compatibility. Arab-party support could make a coalition mathematically possible, but resistance could prevent an agreement. The article leaves Eisenkot’s coalition plan unanswered. Final results may alter the balance, especially for smaller parties near the threshold.

In a proportional electoral system, parties receive parliamentary seats broadly according to their share of the vote. This usually produces several parties rather than one party holding most or all seats. Israel’s Knesset has 120 seats, so a government needs 61 seats to control a majority. A single party therefore often falls short.

The projections illustrate the mechanism. Likud is the largest party at 25 seats, but that is far below 61. Eisenkot’s Yashar party has 23. Even the larger blocs are short, with 53 opposition seats and 50 for Netanyahu’s bloc. Parties must combine their seats through a coalition to govern.

Coalition-building can be difficult because parties may disagree over policy or over which partners are acceptable. The article highlights uncertainty over cooperation with Arab parties, projected to win 18 mandates. As a result, election outcomes depend not only on who wins seats, but also on who can form a workable alliance.