Internal Arab voices confuse Netanyahu...a key that may determine the government

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

The votes of the internal Arabs may have the opportunity to remove Benjamin Netanyahu from power, but the path to an alternative government collides with the opposition forces’ refusal to ally with their parties. Before the Israeli elections, this paradox advances to the heart of the battle: Arab seats that Netanyahu’s opponents may need to gain power, and a partnership that they are wary of before the ballot boxes open.

Between these two positions, Arab leaders are seeking to mobilize voters, driven by fears that a new term will give the far-right coalition an opportunity to advance its policies.

However, the bet on changing the government is accompanied by the realization that Netanyahu's departure, if it happens, will not necessarily mean a radical change in the positions of those who succeed him, according to the Guardian newspaper.

In Kafr Qasem, these calculations were embodied in an election meeting during which voters gathered around plates of kunafa and cups of coffee with cardamom, to listen to calls urging them to participate. For those calling for voting, turnout in funds has become a means to reduce the risks of remaining outside the influence equation.

Palestinian citizens constitute about 20 percent of Israel's population, which gives their participation weight in elections in which the majority of polls predict that Netanyahu's coalition and the Jewish opposition, individually, will be unable to reach a majority of 61 seats in the 120-seat Knesset.

On the other hand, polls suggest that the two Arab lists, “Unified” and “Joint,” will obtain between 12 and 15 seats, which may make them an influential party in determining the chances of forming the next government.

Hence, Ahmed Tibi, head of the Arab Movement for Change party and member of the Knesset for more than two decades, linked the intensity of voting to the possibility of bringing about change. He said: "We are determined to do everything in our power to bring down this government, and the broad participation of the Arab community is one of the important tools to achieve this."

But these calculations also reveal the difference between depriving Netanyahu of a majority and providing an alternative to him. Competing forces may succeed in obstructing his return, and then be unable to agree on a government if the refusal to cooperate with Arab representatives continues.

This obstacle appears clear in the positions of most Jewish opposition forces, which rule out forming a coalition with the Arab parties, while Netanyahu and his allies seek to make any rapprochement with them an electoral burden on their opponents.

In this context, posters appeared bearing the slogan “Either the right or Palestine,” while others in the right-wing camp promoted the slogan “Bibi or Tibi,” in reference to Netanyahu’s nickname, despite the slim chances of Tibi assuming even a limited ministerial portfolio.

Thus, the Arab voter finds himself facing another paradox: calls for participation to change the balance of governance, matched by a speech that narrows the space for accepting his representatives as partners in it.

However, some voters are counting on the results to impose understandings that electoral campaigns exclude.

The bet on changing positions is based on previous experience. In 2021, the United Arab List, led by Mansour Abbas, joined a government coalition headed by Naftali Bennett, who today has become part of the opposition camp. Netanyahu himself had also previously conducted coalition negotiations with Abbas.

While this precedent reveals that refusal to cooperate during campaigns may give way to the necessities of forming a government. But it does not guarantee that the experience will be repeated, nor does it determine the amount of influence that Arab parties can obtain in exchange for supporting a new coalition.

Participation in determining the prime minister remains different from the ability to direct his policies, especially when disparate parties agree to remove Netanyahu, and then disagree on governance priorities after his departure.

The dilemma becomes more complicated because, from the point of view of the Arab leaders, the opposition does not offer an alternative that meets their aspirations on basic issues. According to the Guardian report, the parties concerned do not call for a two-state solution, while most of them oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state and most of them support settlement in the occupied West Bank.

Tibi summarizes this dilemma by saying: “We are choosing between bad and worse. No new government will be perfect for me, but the choice is between Netanyahu, Bezalel Smotrich, and Itamar Ben Gvir, and the opposition.”

Thus, the desire to reduce damage takes precedence over the hope for a comprehensive political transformation. The scale of killing and destruction in Gaza, the violence and displacement in the West Bank, and the escalation of racism and discrimination within Israel are all factors that fuel fears that far-right ministers will continue to be in power.