Rise of Palestinian parties in Knesset will redraw Israel’s political landscape

The Knesset is Israel’s parliament. Its seats are won through general elections, and the balance among parties determines who can try to form a government. Palestinian parties represent Arab citizens of Israel and have historically been sidelined in coalition politics.

This election could change that pattern. Palestinian groupings are projected to win 17 to 18 seats, up from 10 in the previous Knesset. The main groupings are the Joint List and Ra’am, also called the United Arab List. Their lawmakers could provide votes needed for a governing majority.

Their influence depends on negotiations. Opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot would likely need to discuss cooperation with them if his bloc receives the mandate to form a government. The parties could support a coalition, back it issue by issue, or refuse cooperation. Their larger presence redraws Israel’s political battle lines.

The projected increase is seven to eight seats. Palestinian parties held 10 seats in the old Knesset, while exit polls suggest they could win 17 to 18 in the new one. That is a dramatic expansion of their parliamentary presence.

The projected total combines two Palestinian groupings: Ra’am and the Joint List. Ra’am is estimated to win seven seats. The Joint List is projected to win 10 or more. Together, those figures could produce a bloc of 17 or more seats, broadly matching the overall projection.

The size matters because the election appears close. Exit polls gave Eisenkot’s opposition bloc only a narrow lead over Netanyahu’s coalition and supporters. Even if Palestinian parties do not join a government, their seats could decide whether a proposed coalition survives key votes.

Israel’s president, Isaac Herzog, must ask a candidate to try forming a government if the exit-poll lead is confirmed. The candidate has six weeks. If that attempt fails, the task passes to another option, while Netanyahu’s coalition remains in a caretaker role.

Eisenkot will argue that his opposition bloc is larger and better placed to negotiate a majority. That would probably require talks with Ra’am, the Joint List, or both. Their votes could turn a bloc that falls short into a government, or sustain a minority administration through informal agreements.

The outcome remains uncertain. Ra’am has seven projected seats, which may not be enough alone. A minority government would be unstable and could lead to another election. That could help Netanyahu rally conservative Jewish voters and claim his “Right or Palestine” message had been vindicated.

Ra’am and the Joint List are the two main Palestinian groupings described in the election results. Ra’am, an acronym for the United Arab List, is led by Mansour Abbas. The Joint List includes Hadash, the socialist party that is its biggest faction. Together, they represent the enlarged Palestinian presence in the Knesset.

Their approaches differ in political style. Abbas has shown willingness to make compromises and previously participated in Naftali Bennett’s right-leaning government. The Joint List’s Amjad Shbita rejected Eisenkot’s attempt to set conditions, saying the group would negotiate as an equal because both sides need each other.

Ra’am is projected to be smaller, with seven seats, while the Joint List could win 10 or more. Ra’am may therefore be easier to approach but less able to deliver a majority alone. The Joint List may offer more seats but tougher negotiations.

Ra’am may be easier for Eisenkot’s opposition bloc to negotiate with because Mansour Abbas has already crossed political lines. He participated in Naftali Bennett’s right-leaning government, even though Bennett is now a junior partner in Eisenkot’s bloc. That experience shows Ra’am can work across ideological divisions.

Abbas has also shown a practical approach. He has a Jewish Zionist deputy and has expressed willingness to make political compromises. On election night, he said his priority was bringing down Benjamin Netanyahu, Bezalel Smotrich, and Itamar Ben-Gvir. That goal overlaps with Eisenkot’s immediate political objective.

There is still a numerical obstacle. Ra’am was projected to win seven seats, and it may not provide enough votes by itself. Any agreement would also need acceptance from the other parties in Eisenkot’s bloc. Easier negotiations do not automatically produce a majority.

If neither major bloc can assemble a clear majority, Israel still has several possible paths. The president can ask one candidate, then another, to form a government. Each attempt involves negotiations, and the first candidate has six weeks before the challenge can pass to another option.

Eisenkot could also try a minority government. It would depend on informal, vote-by-vote agreements with Palestinian parties rather than a formal coalition. That arrangement might keep a government afloat on particular votes, but it would not provide stable support for every measure.

The article presents another election as the likely consequence of prolonged instability. During the negotiations, Netanyahu’s coalition would remain in a caretaker role. A new election could let Netanyahu campaign among conservative Israeli Jews and argue that the opposition’s refusal to make historic compromises had helped him survive.

Arab citizens’ parties can hold crucial seats without being accepted as normal coalition partners. The election frames the main contest around a “Zionist national majority,” while the Joint List says the opposition must choose between “supremacy and building democracy.” That language reveals the deeper divide behind coalition arithmetic.

Eisenkot set four conditions for Joint List talks. The party would need to recognise Israel as a Jewish and democratic state, accept the values of the declaration of independence, accept conscription for Palestinian citizens, and denounce Hamas as terrorist. Amjad Shbita replied that conditions would not work and that negotiations must be between equals.

This tension can block influence even when seats are decisive. Palestinian parties may support removing Netanyahu but resist terms that limit their political standing. Mainstream parties may fear alienating their own supporters. Without compromise, the result can be deadlock, minority government, or another election.