Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has maintained his position following Israel’s recent national elections held on Tuesday, despite significant political challenges and uncertainties surrounding government formation. Although Mr. Netanyahu did not secure an outright victory, initial results showed his Likud party outperforming all others, leaving neither him nor his main rival, former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, with a clear mandate to form a government.
Mr. Netanyahu’s performance came as a surprise to many, given his fraught standing among voters after four years marked by contentious moves to shift power away from the courts and ongoing tensions over military service exemptions for ultra-Orthodox Jews. Throughout the campaign, Mr. Eisenkot and other opposition figures had led in polls, buoyed by criticisms of Mr. Netanyahu’s handling of the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, which was one of the deadliest in Israel’s history.
Despite these obstacles, Mr. Netanyahu succeeded in mobilizing voter support through a familiar strategy centered on amplifying security concerns and communal fears. Analysts note that he focused on portraying the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank as a dire threat, equating it with the terror of the recent Hamas incursion. This message resonated strongly among many right-wing voters, even though the most left-leaning opposition figures expressed skepticism about the viability of a two-state solution in the near term.
In addition, Mr. Netanyahu underscored anxieties around Arab citizens of Israel and their political representatives participating in government. He sharply criticized figures such as Mansour Abbas, leader of the Raam party, repeating narratives that depicted them as internal threats. The campaign employed vivid imagery and advertisements that linked Arab politicians with potential security risks, including scenes that symbolized a Trojan horse infiltrating Israeli governance.
Arab voter turnout was notably high in this election, a factor Mr. Netanyahu leveraged to rally his base. He portrayed the increased participation of Arab communities, particularly those aligned with parties like Raam and the Joint List, as a catalyst for right-wing Israelis to consolidate around Likud. While Raam has taken a relatively moderate stance, signaling willingness to engage with Jewish lawmakers and even naming a Jewish candidate to a high party position, the Joint List remains more adversarial toward Zionist policies. The Joint List’s leader, Youssef Jabareen, expressed readiness to cooperate in efforts to unseat Mr. Netanyahu but is unlikely to join coalition-building processes directly.
On the opposition side, differences remain pronounced. Mr. Eisenkot’s openness to working with Arab parties did not galvanize full support from allies such as Naftali Bennett and Avigdor Liberman, who maintained their own leadership ambitions, preventing a unified front against Mr. Netanyahu.
Mr. Netanyahu also benefited from endorsements and alliances beyond Israel, notably the support of former U.S. President Donald Trump, and leveraged his status as incumbent to focus public discourse on the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program. Observers suggest that by emphasizing ongoing and future threats, Mr. Netanyahu was able to shift attention away from past security lapses and reinforce his image as a seasoned defender of the country.
The election’s outcome leaves Israeli opposition leaders with a challenging choice: either seek a unity government with Mr. Netanyahu that excludes some of his more extreme partners or attempt to form a majority coalition by cooperating with Arab parties, an option fraught with political and social complexities. For now, Mr. Netanyahu remains in office, as the country navigates a complex and uncertain political landscape.