Coalition process begins in Israel with four possible outcomes

Israeli and some U.S. media report Trump favors Netanyahu-Eisenkot unity government

Israel’s election has produced a political deadlock, and the next move belongs to the country’s president. In the coming days, the president will consult with the leaders of every party elected to parliament, and each party will recommend the leader it believes should be given the first opportunity to form a coalition. The president is not required to choose the leader of the largest party; instead, the president selects the candidate considered most likely to assemble a governing coalition. That candidate receives 28 days to secure the support of at least 61 lawmakers, with a possible extension of up to 14 days, and the president may give another candidate an opportunity if the effort fails. The process could take weeks, or months, or end without anyone assembling a majority.

Final results gave opposition parties more seats than Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc. Netanyahu’s Likud party received the most votes, but the coalition of right-wing, far-right and ultra-Orthodox parties that supported his previous government does not control the 61 seats required for a majority in Israel’s 120-seat parliament, the Knesset. Eisenkot, a center-right former military chief of staff, cannot reach a governing majority without the predominantly Arab parties that his allies repeatedly ruled out during the campaign.

Based on the results, Eisenkot appears more likely than Netanyahu to receive the largest number of recommendations from newly elected lawmakers. But Eisenkot, a relative newcomer to politics, lacks a majority without the Arab-led parties, which represent 21% of Israel’s population and generally refer to themselves as Palestinian citizens of Israel. Eisenkot has said the Arab parties’ positions on Hamas and the war in Gaza prevent him from governing with them — some have refused to endorse the military goal of eliminating Hamas, or condemning it as a terrorist organization. Other leaders in his bloc made similar statements before and after the election. Netanyahu faces a different version of the same problem: his traditional coalition partners do not have enough seats to return him to power.

One possibility is a unity government bringing together Netanyahu and Eisenkot. Israeli and some U.S. media outlets have reported that President Trump favors such an outcome, although NPR has not independently confirmed the reports. A unity government would likely include more moderate parties from Israel’s political center and right, and could make it easier for Israel to work with the Trump administration on its regional priorities, including the reconstruction of Gaza and a potential normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia. But Eisenkot has repeatedly pledged not to serve in a government led by Netanyahu, and the two leaders would also have to resolve questions about who would serve as prime minister and whether the position would rotate between them.

A second possibility is an Eisenkot government supported by Arab parties. Together, Eisenkot’s bloc and the Arab parties would command a comfortable parliamentary majority of more than 67 seats, but such a coalition remains unlikely because Eisenkot and his allies have repeatedly rejected it. Support from the Arab parties would not necessarily require them to join the government — they could back a minority government from outside the coalition — but that arrangement would still contradict the campaign promises made by Eisenkot and several of his potential partners.

A third possibility is another election. Israel’s president has urged political leaders to avoid sending the country back to the polls, particularly after an election that drew the highest turnout in decades. But if no candidate can assemble a majority, another election remains possible. Netanyahu may believe a repeat election could work in his favor: Arab turnout could decline if Arab voters conclude that the predominantly Jewish opposition parties will not allow their representatives to participate in government, and liberal Israelis who traveled from overseas to vote may be less likely to return for another vote.

A fourth possibility is that one bloc persuades lawmakers from the opposing camp to defect. That would be difficult under the current results. Netanyahu would need to attract roughly eight lawmakers from outside his bloc, while Eisenkot would need approximately 13 defectors if he continued to exclude the Arab parties — a scenario that currently appears highly unlikely.

While coalition negotiations continue, a parliamentary majority opposed to Netanyahu could begin advancing legislation before a new government is formed, with support from Arab lawmakers. Eisenkot’s bloc is considering an effort to replace the speaker of the Knesset, a powerful position that helps determine parliament’s legislative agenda, and hopes to pass legislation establishing a state commission of inquiry into the political and security failures that preceded the Hamas-led attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. His allies could also try to reverse legislation advanced by Netanyahu’s government that critics say weakened Israel’s democratic institutions and judicial independence. These steps would not by themselves establish a new government, but they would allow Netanyahu’s opponents to exercise significant power in parliament while negotiations continue.

A renewed war with Iran could disrupt the opposition’s plans. In his election night speech, Netanyahu said Israel still had to complete its mission against Iran and permanently remove what he described as an existential threat. On the same night, Eisenkot warned Netanyahu not to use “Israel’s security for your political needs.” A renewed war with Iran, particularly one involving the United States, could disrupt the opposition’s planned legislative moves and increase public and political pressure on Eisenkot to enter an emergency unity government with Netanyahu. A similar dynamic followed the Oct. 7 attack, when Eisenkot joined Netanyahu’s emergency government and war Cabinet before resigning eight months later. Eisenkot said Netanyahu was making decisions based on political considerations rather than Israel’s national interests.

Danny Citrinowicz, an Israeli analyst on Iran, said Netanyahu has a political incentive to renew the fighting while negotiations over a new government are underway. “Netanyahu definitely has an incentive to go to war,” Citrinowicz said. “He understands that returning to war against Iran while a government is being formed would serve his interests. When you have an emergency in Israel, the pressure on Eisenkot to enter some sort of unity government would obviously mount.”