Arab parties back Eisenkot as Israel faces coalition deadlock

To “back” Eisenkot means Arab-majority parties formally recommended him to President Isaac Herzog as the lawmaker who should first try to form a government. Their recommendation strengthens his claim to receive the mandate, but it is not the same as signing a coalition agreement or promising cabinet seats.

The two Arab-majority lists together won 19 Knesset seats. Both supported Eisenkot during Herzog’s consultations, helping him secure 67 recommendations, compared with 46 for Netanyahu. Yet Israel Beiteinu, another party in Eisenkot’s camp, has said it will not join a government that relies on Arab-party support.

That makes the backing politically valuable but uncertain. Eisenkot may need Arab parties to help reach a majority, while also keeping Israel Beiteinu inside his coalition. If those conditions cannot be reconciled, his recommendation advantage may not translate into a functioning government.

The new 120-seat Knesset is divided among several blocs rather than controlled by one side. Netanyahu’s bloc holds 53 seats. Eisenkot’s bloc holds 48. The two Arab-majority parties won 19 seats, an unprecedented result that gives them unusual leverage.

These numbers do not add up to a governing majority for either main bloc. A majority requires at least 61 seats. Eisenkot’s side would therefore need additional support, potentially from the Arab parties. Netanyahu’s bloc also falls short, although United Torah Judaism did not recommend him during the consultations.

The seat totals make negotiations decisive. Arab parties may help Eisenkot cross the majority line, but Israel Beiteinu opposes a government dependent on Arab-party support. Herzog must therefore consider not only recommendation totals, but whether a lawmaker can actually assemble a stable coalition.

Arab-majority parties become kingmakers when neither major political bloc can reach a Knesset majority without them. Israel’s parliament has 120 seats, so a government normally needs at least 61 supporters. Eisenkot’s bloc has 48 seats, while Netanyahu’s bloc has 53.

The two Arab lists won 19 seats and both recommended Eisenkot. If enough of those lawmakers joined or supported an Eisenkot-led government, they could help him pass the majority threshold. Their support could therefore determine who becomes prime minister and which policies survive parliamentary votes.

Their influence remains uncertain. Israel Beiteinu, part of Eisenkot’s camp, has repeatedly said it will not sit in a government relying on Arab parties. Netanyahu has also attacked the possibility of such an alliance. Eisenkot must balance arithmetic with incompatible political demands, or risk failing to form a government.

After an election, Israel’s president consults the parliamentary parties and then chooses a lawmaker to try forming a government. The usual practice is to select the person recommended by more members of the Knesset. However, President Isaac Herzog said his legal responsibility is to determine who actually has the ability to build a government.

In this case, 67 lawmakers recommended Eisenkot, while 46 recommended Netanyahu and seven abstained. Herzog said mutual vetoes within and between the blocs made the outcome less straightforward. He planned personal talks with some party leaders before making his decision.

Once assigned, the lawmaker has 28 days to form a government. Herzog may grant a further 14 days. If the attempt fails, Herzog can task another lawmaker. The process therefore rewards recommendations, but also tests whether a workable coalition can be assembled.

A coalition must combine enough Knesset support to govern, but parties may reject one another as partners. Eisenkot’s camp faces a direct conflict: Arab-majority parties could supply crucial support, while Israel Beiteinu has said it will not join a government that relies on Arab parties.

The seat arithmetic explains the danger. Eisenkot’s bloc has 48 seats, and the Arab parties have 19. Their combined numbers could exceed the 61-seat majority threshold. But if Israel Beiteinu leaves, or Arab parties refuse to participate, Eisenkot may lack a stable governing arrangement even after receiving the most recommendations.

He could fail to form a government within 28 days, including any 14-day extension Herzog grants. Herzog would then task someone else. The result could be prolonged negotiations, a different coalition, or another failure to produce a government, depending on party decisions.

Military-service exemptions for ultra-Orthodox religious students are a major coalition obstacle because they divide parties over fairness, law, and national service. United Torah Judaism and Shas have pushed to preserve the exemption. Many other Israelis resent it while reservists serve repeated tours in wars involving Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.

Benjamin Netanyahu has preserved the exemption but has not put it into law. United Torah Judaism told Herzog it would not recommend any lawmaker, while its lawmaker Isaac Pindrus said its immediate priority in any new government was settling the status of Torah students. Eisenkot has firmly supported ending exemptions.

The issue could determine coalition membership and stability. Ultra-Orthodox parties may support a government only if it protects their position. Secular and other opposition allies may demand equal military obligations. Any leader seeking a majority must manage this conflict alongside the Arab-party and Israel Beiteinu dispute.

In a proportional parliamentary system, parties receive seats broadly according to their share of the vote rather than one party automatically taking all power. That structure commonly produces several parliamentary groups. Governments must therefore combine parties into coalitions that can command a majority.

This election shows the mechanism clearly. Netanyahu’s bloc has 53 seats and Eisenkot’s has 48, both below the 61-seat majority needed in the 120-member Knesset. The Arab-majority parties won 19 seats, while United Torah Judaism won seven. Those smaller groups can become decisive when larger blocs need additional votes.

Their influence also creates instability. Small parties can demand policy concessions, such as protecting or ending military-service exemptions. They may support a leader during consultations but refuse to join the resulting government. That is why Herzog must assess governing ability, not merely count recommendations, before assigning the mandate.