Arab Parties Hold Key as Israel’s Blocs Fall Short

Protesters gathered outside Yashar chairman Gadi Eisenkot’s home in Herzliya on Thursday, October 29, urging him to form a government with Arab parties after Israel’s election left neither political bloc with a Knesset majority. “There is no change without partnership,” they chanted. They called for cooperation to prevent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from forming another government. The demand targeted politicians negotiating who gets to govern; Arab parties’ 19 seats now sit at the center of that arithmetic.

Amir Badran, deputy mayor of Tel Aviv-Jaffa, attended and voiced support for a political partnership between the opposition and Arab parties. A photograph caption identified Badran as deputy mayor of Tel Aviv Yaffo and described him as the son of a Jewish mother and a Palestinian, Muslim father.

The arithmetic of power

The completed count gave Netanyahu’s bloc 53 seats, while the four main opposition parties won 48. Neither reached the 61 seats needed for a parliamentary majority. Eisenkot’s Yashar won 21 seats, making it the largest opposition party, behind Netanyahu’s Likud with 27.

The Joint List won 11 seats and Mansour Abbas’s Ra’am won eight, giving Arab parties a combined record 19 seats. Their support could open a route to an alternative government, but coalition bargaining stands in the way. To keep their campaign pledge not to join a Netanyahu-led government, Eisenkot and his opposition allies would likely need cooperation from at least some Arab parties, either in a formal coalition or through outside support for a minority government.

Ra’am, which previously participated in the Bennett-Lapid coalition, is considered a potential partner. Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Liberman, whose party won seven seats, has reportedly distanced himself from his opposition allies. He rejected both joining a coalition with Arab parties and supporting a minority government dependent on them. That position could complicate efforts to assemble a majority to replace Netanyahu, even if other opposition parties reach agreements with Arab factions.

A government under negotiation, a war still on

Political leaders began meeting to explore coalition arrangements once the count was complete. Eisenkot met on Thursday with B’Yachad chairman Naftali Bennett and Democrats chairman Yair Golan. Golan, who has publicly supported cooperation with Arab parties to form a government without Netanyahu, also met with Ra’am chairman Mansour Abbas to discuss a partnership and possible arrangements for an alternative government.

The election took place during the US-Israeli war on Iran, which began in February, and the possibility of further military action remained part of Israeli politics. Netanyahu emphasized the Iranian threat during the campaign and received public support from US President Donald Trump. Eisenkot criticized Netanyahu’s handling of security matters and warned against the political use of military decisions. Yet Iranian analysts said a change of prime minister wouldn't fundamentally change Israel’s approach to Iran’s nuclear and missile programs or its regional influence.

“From a military and security perspective, one cannot simply conclude that the mutual threats or strategic differences between Iran and Israel will disappear because a prime minister leaves office,” Masoud Asadollahi, a Middle East expert and university professor, told Nour News, an outlet close to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. He said Netanyahu’s opponents differed mainly in how they managed the war and strategic decisions, not in their fundamental approach to Iran.

The limits of changing the players

Iranian media focused on Netanyahu’s weakened position, the failure of either main bloc to win a majority, and the gains by Arab parties. Tasnim and Fars, both affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), as well as state radio and television, highlighted the possibility of prolonged political deadlock. They largely avoided discussing whether the result could change the risk of further escalation in the war with Iran. Senior Iranian officials hadn't commented on the result.

Khorasan, a conservative Iranian newspaper, argued that Netanyahu’s removal wouldn't end the Israeli threat to Iran. It said Eisenkot was neither outside Israel’s political establishment nor opposed to confrontation with the Islamic Republic. “Internal disagreements do not necessarily lead to a reduction in military threats,” it wrote, adding that political competition could sometimes produce more aggressive behavior.

Morteza Makki, an international affairs analyst, told the Iranian Labor News Agency that delays in forming Israel’s next government could benefit Netanyahu by giving him a potential window to attack Iran and could affect coordination with the United States. “Overall, the likelihood of war is high, and one cannot judge whether war will or will not occur solely on the basis of which political camp wins the election, because both camps are inclined toward war,” foreign policy analyst Alireza Komeili told Nameh News.

The immediate contest is over who can gather enough seats to govern. The protesters’ call for partnership meets a system in which parties bargain over a majority while analysts on both sides describe continuity in military policy. A new coalition may change who holds office; the numbers and statements in this election offer no assurance that the threats will disappear.