Israel’s latest election produced no clear majority for a single party or traditional “bloc” of parties to form a government. This week, President Isaac Herzog will consult with the heads of the parties that won seats in the new Knesset to determine who Herzog will tap with the best opportunity to form the next government. As the consultations will not begin until after the U.S. midterm results are mostly determined, it’s entirely possible that the new Congress will be sworn in before Israel’s next government is.
There are many variables and potential wildcards related to the formation of the next Israeli government, among which are the U.S. midterm election itself. In an enlightening conversation on the Inspiration from Zion podcast, analysts (Maj.) Elliot Chodoff and Jeff Kahn examined the winners, losers, and prospects for a workable coalition amid deep divisions, external interference, and existential threats.
Leading up to the election and since, there has been no shortage of public declarations by various political leaders of their refusal to sit in a government with ultra-Orthodox parties, Arab parties, under Netanyahu as Prime Minister, or under other conditions. Chodoff and Kahn advised these be taken with a large grain of salt. Chodoff offered that these political statements, even after the election, should be treated as a “brick of salt.” Real negotiations occur behind the scenes, where seating arrangements, timing, and leverage matter more than campaign and other public rhetoric.
Who won? Nobody clearly. But there were winners even though there’s been no conclusive outcome.
Who lost? Israel. And depending on how you look at it, some parties took a big hit.
This was the consensus of both analysts. Neither the outgoing Netanyahu-led bloc nor the opposition currently commands the minimum 61-seat majority required to form a government without external support (from Arab parties) or defections from others. One potential path to forming a government could be a minority government in which Arab parties withhold formal partnership, but supply votes to ratify a new government, to sustain confidence measures, a new parliamentary speaker, judicial appointments, etc.
Another possibility is an “interoperable” arrangement, as Kahn explained, short of a classic unity government, driven by crisis and/or self-interest in that a new election in early 2027 would not be good for most of the parties, or for Israel. Also, on the table as a potential deal-maker, Kahn noted that a kinetic confrontation with Iran, possibly involving the United States after the midterms, could override prior declarations of who any given party will refuse to sit in a government with. A war, Kahn reasons, could bring otherwise intractable positions to join an otherwise unpalatable government, rationalizing: “We’re doing this because we’re in crisis.”
Preparations for Iranian strikes and Israeli participation have already advanced. Chodoff noted that even without war, the blocs are less monolithic than they appear. Opposition leaders former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and former Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman emerged from Netanyahu’s Likud party. Their quarrel is with Netanyahu personally less than its policies.
While not agreeing with all his policies, both panelists decried the rhetoric being used against former Chief of Staff, main opposition leader, and potential Prime Minister Gadi Eisenkot, slandering him as a “Hamas agent.” Eisenkot not only sat in the post-October 7 war cabinet, but he lost a son and two nephews in the war since October 7, 2023.
The Likud party lost significant seats, raising internal questions about leadership succession. Netanyahu has left no clear heir, in contrast to corporate norms. The ultra-Orthodox party Shas suffered a loss too, because many of its traditional voters shifted to Likud on ethnic rather than purely religious grounds. Also noteworthy in the context of broad ultra-Orthodox exemptions from the military, some of Shas’ base serves in the military and it has previously joined left-leaning coalitions. These fractures open avenues for deals that macro “pro- versus anti-Netanyahu” analysis misses.
Particularly significant in the total vote count, Israel’s Arab parties secured an unprecedented 19 seats out of 120, significant given that Arab citizens constitute about 21 percent of the population. While the total Arab parties’ representation has reached a high point, the outcome also shows that even with high turnout, hundreds of thousands of Arabs voted for Jewish/Zionist parties.
The two main Arab parties are not identical: the Joint List is openly anti-Jewish-state, while Ra’am (Islamist) emphasizes practical needs of its constituency, including crime reduction, and has previously entered government arrangements. High Arab participation reflected frustration with rampant organized crime and violence in Arab towns, issues on which National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has been widely criticized for inaction.
Some Arab municipalities that once backed Likud or Labor shifted sharply. Kahn cautioned that allegations of foreign funding and influence by Qatar and Turkey may yet invalidate seats after security review, potentially dropping the total toward 14. Both panelists stressed that Arab turnout this cycle may prove a one-off. Additionally, many Israelis abroad who flew in to vote against the government are unlikely to repeat the effort, tightening future arithmetic for the opposition and Arab lists alike. And if there were outright financial incentives provided to Arabs to vote, this would also not likely be repeated.
Internationally, the results feed a broader narrative. Europe and segments of the U.S. political class signal preference for any non-Netanyahu leader, portraying him as stubborn and the obstacle to better relations. Chodoff argued this is largely an excuse: anti-Israel and antisemitic campaigns predate and transcend Netanyahu, using him as “window dressing.” Kahn framed the larger context as a civilizational contest, woke ideology plus Islamist advance, visible in Europe, the United States, and even attacks on ancient churches. For instance, Bethlehem’s Christian community has been largely driven out by Muslim Arabs; Jordan has seen church assaults.
Public diplomacy losses encourage some Israelis to hope that a leadership change will improve the country’s image, but both analysts rejected this: hatred of Israel or Jews does not pivot on who sits in the prime minister’s office. Netanyahu’s long tenure produced tangible gains, the Abraham Accords deepening and regional realignments, yet he is faulted for refusing responsibility for October 7th failures and for hollowing out succession. Experience itself is overrated, Chodoff noted, citing historical figures such as Truman and Churchill who rose to crisis without long prior tenure.
Wild cards dominate the next weeks. An Iranian miscalculation, preemption, or U.S.-led action could force temporary interoperability. Proxies (Hezbollah, Hamas remnants, Houthis, Syrian and Iraqi militias) and Palestinian Authority paramilitary forces far larger than Oslo limits add internal risk. Party lines may fracture once formal talks begin; the 28-day (extendable) clock once Herzog designates a candidate concentrates minds. Both Chodoff and Kahn expressed cautious optimism that Israelis, tested by reserve duty since October 7, have rediscovered practical unity across political and religious lines, stronger together than when divided, echoing a Talmudic observation that Ahab’s unified soldiers fared better in battle than David’s because they were unified. Kahn closed with a personal note of faith that “the big guy up in heaven” remains engaged.
The coming days will test whether pragmatism, crisis, or renewed elections prevail. Mathematical deadlock, non-monolithic blocs, elevated but potentially fragile Arab leverage, and external threats leave multiple outcomes open. What is clear is that Israel’s resilience has improved since October 6, even if the political system still struggles to convert that into stable governance.
Follow the entire conversation on Inspiration from Zion or YouTube.
Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Townhall’s conservative reporting that takes on the radical Left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.
Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the Conversation
VIP members get the ability to comment on articles.