Israel: President Isaac Herzog seeks prime minister, Arab party supports Eisenkot

Israel’s president has begun consultations because the election created a political stalemate. No party or bloc controls the 61 seats needed for a parliamentary majority. Herzog must therefore assess which candidate can assemble enough support to govern. He has invited representatives of all parties to his Jerusalem residence and promised open, frank, and critical discussions.

The process gives Herzog information before he assigns the government-forming task. Netanyahu’s Likud is the largest party with 27 seats, but his right-religious bloc has only 53. Eisenkot’s alliance has 48, while the Arab parties hold 19 seats together. Their recommendations could change which candidate appears most capable of winning support.

Media reports expect Herzog may first choose Eisenkot because he could receive more recommendations. Herzog has said he wants creativity, courage, and goodwill so Israel can emerge as the winner. He also wants to avoid a new election if possible.

The Knesset is Israel’s parliament. The article describes it as having 120 seats and identifies it as the institution where a government must secure parliamentary support. This makes the Knesset central to government formation after an election. Winning the most seats does not automatically guarantee control of the government.

The election illustrates the mechanism. Likud won 27 seats, while Eisenkot’s Jaschar won 21. Netanyahu’s right-religious bloc reached 53 seats, and Eisenkot’s opposition alliance reached 48. The Arab parties won 19 seats together. These figures show why parties must negotiate with smaller partners and potentially with rival blocs.

A government needs at least 61 of the 120 seats to hold a majority. The president therefore considers which candidate has the best chance of reaching that threshold. Herzog’s consultations collect each party’s recommendation before he decides whom to ask to form a government. The Knesset’s final balance will determine whether that attempt succeeds.

The election left the 120-seat Knesset divided. Netanyahu’s right-religious bloc won 53 seats. Eisenkot’s opposition alliance won 48. Raam and the United List, the two Israeli-Arab parties, won 19 seats together. These figures describe the broad political balance, although the two Arab parties are not automatically part of either main bloc.

The key mechanism is the majority threshold. A government needs 61 seats, which is more than half of the Knesset’s 120 mandates. Netanyahu’s bloc is eight seats short. Eisenkot’s alliance is 13 seats short. Neither can form a government alone, so each side needs partners, outside support, or a broader agreement.

The numbers also explain why party recommendations matter. If Eisenkot can win support from both Arab parties, his potential total would reach 67 seats. That is six above the majority line. However, the opposition parties disagree about whether Arab parties should participate in a governing coalition, so the arithmetic does not guarantee political agreement.

In Israel’s system, the largest party does not automatically receive the task of forming a government. The president traditionally appoints the candidate who appears most likely to secure a parliamentary majority. This rule matters when an election produces a fragmented Knesset and competing blocs lack enough seats on their own.

Likud, led by Benjamin Netanyahu, won 27 seats and became the strongest single party. Yet Netanyahu’s right-religious bloc has only 53 seats. Eisenkot’s Jaschar won 21, but his opposition alliance has a possible route to a larger majority. Raam has already decided to recommend Eisenkot, and the other Arab party could also support him.

Media reports therefore expect Herzog may give Eisenkot the first mandate because he could receive more recommendations from parties. With both Arab parties, his alliance could theoretically reach 67 seats. That would exceed the 61-seat threshold, although disagreements over Arab participation could still prevent a workable coalition.

Eisenkot’s opposition alliance has 48 seats, which is below the 61 needed for a Knesset majority. The Arab parties Raam and the United List have 19 seats together. If both support Eisenkot, the combined total would be 67. This is the clearest numerical route to a government after the election.

Raam has already announced that it will recommend Eisenkot for forming the next government. It plans to present that recommendation during consultations with President Herzog. Adding the two Arab parties’ 19 seats to Eisenkot’s 48 produces 67, giving the potential alliance six more seats than the majority threshold.

That arithmetic could make it possible for Eisenkot to form a government and pass measures with majority support. It does not, however, guarantee a stable coalition. The opposition parties disagree about whether Israeli-Arab parties should participate in government, and Arab-party representatives were absent from an opposition-bloc meeting. Political consent must therefore match the numbers.

Participation by Israeli-Arab parties is controversial because opposition parties do not agree on whether those parties should be part of a governing coalition. The article presents this disagreement as a major obstacle to turning parliamentary arithmetic into a political agreement. It does not explain the deeper historical or ideological reasons behind the dispute.

The practical stakes are clear. Raam and the United List hold 19 seats together. Eisenkot’s opposition alliance has 48. If both Arab parties support him, the potential total reaches 67, above the 61 seats needed for a majority. Raam has already announced its recommendation for Eisenkot.

Yet the opposition’s meeting on Tuesday included no representatives from the Israeli-Arab parties. That absence shows the gap between possible support and formal coalition participation. Eisenkot may have enough numbers on paper, but he still needs agreement about the government’s composition. Herzog’s consultations will test whether that agreement can be reached.

Under proportional representation, parties receive parliamentary seats broadly in line with their election support. This allows several parties to win representation. It can reflect a wider range of political views, but it also makes a single-party majority less common. Governments must often combine parties that together control enough seats.

The election shows this pattern. Likud won 27 seats, Jaschar won 21, and smaller partners helped form two larger blocs. Netanyahu’s bloc reached 53 seats, while Eisenkot’s alliance reached 48. Neither crossed the 61-seat majority line. The Arab parties won 19 seats separately, making them potentially important coalition partners.

Because the Knesset has 120 seats, 61 is the minimum majority. Parties therefore negotiate after voting ends, seeking coalition agreements or outside support. In this case, Raam’s recommendation could help Eisenkot’s side reach 67 with both Arab parties. But numerical strength still requires political agreement on who will join the government.