Netanyahu is going nowhere until Israel's Palestinians are taken seriously

“Lost but was not defeated” means Netanyahu suffered electoral losses without being removed from power. His coalition appeared to fall by eight to 10 seats and missed the majority needed to govern. Yet his opponents also remained short of a majority. The election therefore weakened him without clearly replacing him.

Netanyahu framed the 7 October 2023 Hamas-led attack as a failure of military leadership, not his own responsibility. He presented himself as the leader who restored Israel’s safety afterward. The article argues that this message resonated with Jewish voters, especially alongside his calls to continue the wars and maintain a state of emergency.

The result leaves Netanyahu with routes to power, including a possible unity government with Gadi Eisenkot. It also gives Palestinian parties unusual leverage. Their support could help the liberal secular opposition form a government, while excluding Jewish supremacists from a coalition. Netanyahu remains politically central because neither side has enough support alone.

Israel’s Palestinian citizens are the country’s Palestinian minority, making up about 20 percent of the population. They hold Israeli citizenship and participate in parliamentary elections through Palestinian parties. Their votes can influence which Jewish-led bloc has enough support to govern. The article presents them as a political community with agency, not merely as observers of Israeli politics.

Their position differs from Palestinians in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and elsewhere. Palestinian citizens of Israel can vote in Israel’s elections and seek influence inside the state. Palestinians in those other areas are described as suffering under occupation or in Gaza, rather than as participants in Israel’s Knesset politics. The article gives no fuller legal comparison.

This difference creates a political tension. Ra’am prioritises working with Israel’s state and establishment parties to win rights, education, development and security. The Joint List retains a stronger moral responsibility toward Palestinians under occupation and in the diaspora. Both approaches now have greater influence inside Israel.

The Palestinian political bloc could secure as many as 19 seats in Israel’s 120-seat Knesset. That equals nearly one-sixth of parliament. The figure comes from combining the Joint List alliance of Palestinian parties with Mansour Abbas’s Ra’am party. Their combined result would be a record for Arab participation, according to the article.

The two groups are not identical, but both represent Palestinian citizens inside Israel. The Joint List reportedly received about twice Ra’am’s votes. Ra’am has pursued cooperation with Jewish Zionist parties to obtain material gains for the Palestinian community. The Joint List has kept a stronger connection to Palestinians under occupation and in the diaspora.

Nineteen seats do not form a majority by themselves. However, they can decide which larger bloc reaches the 61 seats needed in a 120-seat parliament. Their size therefore matters less as an independent governing force than as a potential coalition-maker. Their gains place Palestinian citizens at the centre of Israel’s political calculations.

Israel’s electoral system can leave rival Jewish-led camps short of a majority. In this election, Netanyahu’s coalition lost seats, but the opposition’s “change campaign” also remained a minority. Palestinian parties therefore hold the balance. Their seats can determine whether Netanyahu stays in power or his opponents assemble a government.

The mechanism is coalition arithmetic. The Knesset has 120 seats, so a government needs a majority of 61. The Joint List and Ra’am could together win as many as 19 seats. Those lawmakers may provide crucial support to opposition parties that cannot reach 61 using Jewish secular liberal, nationalist or other partners alone.

The article says Palestinian voters turned out in large numbers, likely helping drive away Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. If turnout had been lower, Netanyahu’s coalition might have won more comfortably. The future depends on whether liberal parties cooperate with Palestinian parties or whether the right tries to prevent Arab voters from having similar influence again.

The Joint List is an alliance of Palestinian parties. Ra’am is Mansour Abbas’s separate party, which broke away from the Joint List. Together, they represent Palestinian citizens of Israel and could win as many as 19 Knesset seats. Their importance comes from both their size and their ability to affect coalition formation.

Their strategies differ. Ra’am tells voters that cooperation with the Israeli state and establishment parties can deliver rights, education, development and security. Abbas has sought alliances with Jewish Zionist parties and has achieved some gains. The Joint List, by contrast, has not abandoned what the article calls its moral responsibility toward Palestinians under occupation and in the diaspora.

This is a choice between practical integration and broader Palestinian solidarity, although the parties’ positions are not presented as identical in every respect. Ra’am’s approach may secure immediate community benefits. The Joint List’s approach keeps Palestinian political concerns beyond Israel in view. Their combined success gives both strategies greater leverage.

Israel’s secular liberal parties have two broad options. They can continue trying to govern without Palestinian parties, accepting that Netanyahu or someone similar may remain in power. Or they can reach an understanding with Arab parties and voters. The article presents this as a practical choice created by election arithmetic, not necessarily an ideological conversion.

Their previous strategy was to appeal through nationalism, opposition to the ultra-Orthodox community and association with the military. That approach did not produce a majority. Palestinian turnout helped limit Netanyahu’s success, while the Palestinian bloc became large enough to offer the missing support. Cooperation could mean coalition backing or negotiated gains for Palestinian citizens.

The future is uncertain. Liberal secular Zionists may work with Palestinian parties for political reasons while retaining their existing views about Zionism and the Palestinians. Alternatively, the right may seek measures to stop Arab voters from influencing elections so strongly. The article says either practical cooperation or renewed exclusion could follow.

Palestinian citizens of Israel have often been excluded because Jewish-led parties have treated cooperation with Palestinian parties as politically unacceptable. The article describes the minority as almost always frozen out of Israeli governments and politics, despite representing about one-fifth of the population. Their votes mattered, but their parties were rarely accepted as governing partners.

The exclusion is linked to the political identity of Israel’s secular liberal camp. These parties sought support through nationalism, opposition to the ultra-Orthodox community and association with the military. They also openly rejected alliances with Palestinian parties. That strategy assumed a Jewish-led majority could govern without Arab voters, even when election results did not provide one.

The latest results challenge that assumption. Strong Palestinian turnout helped prevent an easy Netanyahu victory, and Palestinian parties could hold up to 19 seats. Liberal parties may now cooperate for practical reasons, without changing their ideology. The right, however, may try to ensure Arab voters cannot shape elections this way again.