Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

If voters won't get rid of Netanyahu, will the elites do it for them?

The same political system that Netanyahu thinks he has mastered could now bring about his demise.

If it was up to the Israeli public alone, Benjamin Netanyahu might well continue as prime minister when the vote on Sept. 17 is over. Polls so far show almost no change in voting patterns for the ideological party blocs from April, when the right wing parties won a majority of seats, as they have for the last decade. The opposition parties of the center, left and Arab parties continue to hold a minority.

But an outright win for Netanyahu looks increasingly unlikely. A handful of political elites, and Israel’s complex coalition-bargaining culture, might finally bring about Netanyahu’s exit.

One such leader is Yisrael Beiteinu’s Avigdor Liberman, who has been a shoe-in for Netanyahu’s coalitions in the past, and has held top ministries under his leadership. Liberman is now saying that he will recommend a unity government, rather than Likud under Netanyahu, to form the next coalition. Since none of the ideological blocs of parties have 61 seats (out of 120) to form a coalition without his party, Liberman’s demands could carry even more weight than in April, when he won five seats. Polls consistently predict he could get roughly double the seats now.

A unity government refers to the idea that Likud and Blue and White would form a coalition, possibly without the ultra-Orthodox parties, who have joined nearly all Israeli governments, with just a few exception, over Israeli history. Polls indicate that these two large parties could win a near or outright majority of seats between them. To many Jewish Israelis, unity sounds like a good idea.

Reader survey banner

The latest Peace Index from Tel Aviv University shows that 30 percent in total would prefer a unity government, broken down into those who prefer their party to lead – either Likud or Blue and White. Combined, these options top the list of options in the poll. Together with Liberman, a unity coalition could have a large, stable and secular government.

However, Blue and White, headed by Benny Gantz, has stated that it will not join a coalition led by Netanyahu. Over...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

The biggest myth about Israeli politics

It’s tempting to believe that non-politicians are the antidote to bad politicians, but it’s also wrong.

In 2011, the Israeli pop singer Roni Superstar released a song called “Adoni” — literally “my lord,” or colloquially, “sir.” For sarcastic overtones, “His highness” will also do. Here is my free translation:

His Highness will tell me what he knows/ His Highness will make sense of what I ought to think… His Highness wishes to be Prime Minister… His Highness thinks he is so smart…”

The otherwise banal song kept surfacing in my mind during the last election cycle. Something about it seemed apposite.

Just before the party lists closed, there was frenzied speculation over which generals would go where. Would former Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon merge with Benny Gantz, and would ex-Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi join them? Each man wanted to enter politics on the condition that he would serve at the top: either he would have a shot at running the country, or vault into the role of a top minister. Winning the election was practically an afterthought.

Why did the generals think starting at the top was a reasonable expectation? Probably based on two main presumptions.

One is the myth that generals enjoy mystical credibility among Israelis, a belief that comes very close to entitlement. The other is that outsider politicians are all the rage, and not only in Israel. Voters are sick and tired of the old politicians; therefore, a candidate who is not tainted by “the system” automatically scores points. Both approaches are based mainly on empty clichés.


The idea that a dues ex machina will arise to create a nation out of scattered opposition tribes needs to be retired. Even Moses had political training – he was raised in the court of kings.

It’s logical that non-politicians are the antidote to bad politicians, but it’s also wrong. A decade ago, Barak Obama was the star “outsider;” now the fresh faces among American Democratic candidates are Bernie Sanders, Beto O’Rourke, Elizabeth Warren, Kemala Harris, and Pete Buttigieg. All have political experience. They are emerging leaders, but they are already politicians.

Isn’t Donald Trump the triumph of the outsider, a great roar of defiance against politicians? Absolutely. He is also the last person the Israeli opposition, or anyone else, should emulate. Emmanuel Macron looks like...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

The Israeli opposition failed. Here's how it can redeem itself

Israel’s next coalition stands to be one of the most pro-annexationist parliaments in the history of the state. Now, it’s up to the opposition to defend democracy.

Dear Opposition —

There is really no way to say this nicely: you failed.

You failed in the campaign, and you have failed over the past decade, while Netanyahu governed with a far-right hand.

Blue and White, you failed to realize that voters who oppose Netanyahu wanted a difference in substance. By the end, I heard too many people complaining that your party didn’t have any.

Perhaps you thought that anyone who wants Netanyahu out enough will come running without any bait. Many did – that’s the bulk of your 35 seats. But Netanyahu’s natural opponents were already voting for parties on the center or left, which represent just over 40 percent of Israelis. Cannibalizing them helped no one. To be sure, it seems clear that some votes came from the right, too – Moshe Kachlon lost six seats, and overall the right-wing bloc lost two.

But you knew what you really needed were moderate right-wingers who supported Netanyahu in the past, who were considering defecting, to weaken Likud. Anyone who voted Netanyahu in 2015 clearly isn’t motivated by long-term resentment – they break with him on specific issues. Why didn’t you address any? Instead, you pilfered figures from Netanyahu’s earlier governments and posted ads with a gruesome ticker counting dead “terrorists.” Instead of offering an alternative, you offered a second-best version of him.

I hated your terrorist body-count ad, but at least the conflict was an issue. Another Blue and White ad even mentioned peace, but these spots were soon gone, and within the first weeks of campaigning, there were no more issues.


As I’ve heard it from the soft right and wavering Likud voters, they were unhappy with the erosion of democratic norms. In my B’Tselem survey, 42 percent of the moderate right hold favorable views of the Supreme Court, almost double the number of firm right-wingers (just 25 percent). The issue is splitting the right.

What if you had promised to strengthen the judiciary and other pillars of democracy, and fight back against the assault on liberal democratic norms, instead of burying the issue of “rule of law” on page 18 of your dry,...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Poll: Jews, Arabs much less divided than Israeli politics lets on

A ‘Local Call’ poll shows a broad range of areas where Jews and Arabs see the benefits of cooperation. But that doesn’t mean Jewish Israelis are ready to let Arabs hold positions of power, namely joining the government. The surprising bit: most Arabs would support their parties joining an Israeli government.

Judging from the current Israeli election cycle and the various campaigns competing, it would be easy to conclude that Arab and Jewish citizens of Israel have completely failed to build a shared life together. The campaigns are filled with insulting and racist messaging that is being disseminated every which way.

It’s a shame that Israeli leaders aren’t more attentive to the majority of the country’s citizens, who support values of cooperation, believe that relations between Jews and Arabs in the country are already good, and acknowledge the national identity of the other — the Jewish and Palestinian peoples, respectively. Those observations aren’t a lofty leftist theory, but the results of a new poll commissioned by Local Call.

The poll was written and analyzed by Dr. Dahlia Scheindlin and David Reis together with Local Call. The internet panel was conducted by New Wave Research between March 28 and April 1, and included a sample of 414 Arab and 411 Jewish Israelis (weighted to their actual proportions in society). The sample was drawn from an internet panel; the margin of error is 3.5 percent.

Despite the predominant appearance of schisms and hostility between the two populations in Israel, most of the Jewish respondents (53 percent) said that in their day-to-day lives, relations between Jews and Arabs are generally positive. Only one-third reported negative relations in their personal experience. An even smaller minority (13 percent) said that they don’t have enough contact with Arabs to answer the question. In other words, the overwhelming majority, 87 percent of the Jewish respondents, based their answers on personal experience.

Broken down along ideological lines, the results refute the common claim of right-wingers in Israel that they are the only ones who really know Arabs (both in the occupied territories and Israeli citizens) due to their geographic proximity, as opposed to ideological leftists from Tel Aviv and its suburbs. The poll shows the opposite to be true: 20 percent of Jewish right-wing respondents said they have no contact with Arabs in their day-to-day life. Among left-wing Jewish respondents, only 6 percent said they have no contact. Among...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Why these Israeli elections actually matter

Netanyahu looms so large that he has become a symbol of everything that’s right and wrong with Israel. But behind the symbol stand two very substantive visions of where Israel is headed.

Like most weeks over the last decade, this was a week of Netanyahu. It began on Saturday evening when the prime minister gave a rare, surprise live television interview on Channel 2. The interview was his first to a mainstream Israeli media outlet in four years, guaranteed to make news for that reason alone. From there he flew to Washington to receive a prize from President Trump: American recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which Netanyahu called a “Purim miracle.”

When a surprise rocket attack from Gaza sparked potential escalation, Netanyahu made the surgical calculation to stay in Washington just long enough to keep his meeting with Trump, then flew back to Israel. His challengers were left at the AIPAC conference in Washington, looking much less important. As a ceasefire took hold, Netanyahu’s supporters praised him for avoiding a war. But had there been one, they prefer Bibi to be at the helm. It’s hard to avoid the feeling of determinism: Heads he wins, tails his opponents lose.

For his supporters, everything good is due to Bibi — from the Israeli moon mission and Eurovision, to wars fought and wars averted. For the opposition, Netanyahu is the source of anti-Arab race-baiting, the normalization of corruption in politics, democratic erosion, the creeping annexation of the West Bank, and the end of the two-state solution.

Netanyahu has become the national prism for each Israeli voter, supporters and opposition alike, to credit or blame him for everything. The campaign is often described as a referendum on Netanyahu.

However, the idea that Netanyahu is the master of all things bad or good is another myth that it’s time to bust. First, it’s not true. Second, the idea that it’s all about him is dismissive and unfair to the pro- and anti-camps in Israeli society; in other words, disparaging to the general public.

As for all those seething at Netanyahu’s leadership on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and internal issues, it’s time to put his actual influence into perspective.

It was Labor, not Likud, that led Israel during the Six-Day War, and Labor built both the infrastructure of the occupation and the settlement project, until...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

In Israel's elections, only the far right is talking about democracy

A new campaign ad by Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked signals that this time around, only the far right is talking about democratic norms — and how to undo them. Does the opposition have a response?

Of all the aspects of political campaigns that voters love to hate, none is more maligned than the political advertisement. The term “30-second spot” has become synonymous with dumbing down, mudslinging, and manipulation of political campaigns ever since the Daisy Ad.

But punchy ads are great. They can help de-code the strategy each party has chosen, and short scripts packed with narrative are enormously revealing about the country’s electorate, seen through the eyes of the candidates. Political campaigns are us, the voters, reflected back to ourselves – even if we don’t like what we see.

This week, Israelis looked into the campaign mirror and saw Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, with the ad that launched a thousand memes and at least as many headlines. In just 44 seconds and with only five essential words, Shaked redefined democracy in Israel.

In a mock-up of the familiar “Obsession” perfume ads, a vixen-voiced narrator lists the minister’s policies to weaken and restrain the Israeli justice system. “Judicial revolution,” she purrs, “reducing [judicial] activism, appointing judges, governance, separation of powers, reigning in the Supreme Court.” The ad sarcastically refers to these policies as bottled “fascism.” Shaked then lifts a bottle of perfume towards her face, sprays and utters the five critical words: “Smells like democracy to me.”

The ad crystallizes a bitter divide of this election that has bubbled below the surface for years. Shaked didn’t just say “the court needs to be restrained” or “I’m against judicial activism.” She said that these positions are democracy itself.

On one side of the divide lies Israelis who believe that the Supreme Court is among the most important state institutions, an essential check on other branches of government. They view the assault on the court by right-wing governments of recent years as an attack on democracy itself.

The other camp views the court as an unelected leftist group of elites, who uphold human and civil rights of minorities – even Palestinians. This side is not necessarily against human rights – there are few complaints when the court rules against accepting evidence of Jewish suspects whose rights were violated in the process. It’s the...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

What the candidates in Israel's elections say about the conflict

For a long time, politicians perpetuated the idea that Israel sought peace and a two-state solution, even while taking contradictory steps on the ground. In these elections, that dissonance seems to be dwindling. A look at what each party is saying.

The scramble to predict who might win the Israeli elections is understandable, but it begs a towering question: Will the next government actually change anything? To hone in further: Will it change Israel’s direction on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

The left is inclined to say there’s no difference between centrist challengers Blue and White party and Netanyahu’s ruling Likud. Netanyahu’s campaign slogan “Bibi or Tibi,” referring to a prominent Arab politician, is a compact way of saying that anything to his left means the end of Jewish identity in Israel.

How is a voter to gauge the difference between the parties’ policies regarding the conflict? Maybe voters aren’t trying. A survey I did for B’Tselem in December found that just over one-fifth of respondents chose “resolving the conflict” as one of their top two national priorities — on a list of six problems Israel needs to solve, it ranked fourth.

The parties appear to be mindful of the public disinterest. On Monday night, the Geneva Initiative held an event billed as “the great debate” on policy toward the conflict, scheduled with representatives of Likud, Blue and White, Labor, The New Right (Naftali Bennett and Ayelet Shaked’s far-right party), and left-wing Meretz. Likud and Blue/White cancelled last minute. It appears that the leading parties prefer not to risk losing control over any of the few words they release on this issue.

The two most serious contenders for Israel’s premiership may not have shown up, but a look at their platforms shows what the parties claim to stand for. What do they actually propose? Do they differ from one another, and would they truly change current policies? Here at +972 Magazine we often analyze how Israeli policy plays out on the ground for real people – but what does Israel tell itself it wishes to do?

Blue and White, the centrist slate challenging Likud, has been accused of having no coherent ideology than replacing Netanyahu. Still, the party managed to release a platform last week (Hebrew). The chapter on the conflict mentions the word “Palestinian” twice and nowhere else: first, to propose “accelerating economic development in Palestinian Authority areas”; and...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

How to read election polls, explained by an expert

When should you be suspicious of poll results? Can election polls really influence voter behavior? Do people lie to pollsters? Public opinion expert Dahlia Scheindlin has the answers.

Public opinion polls get things wrong, and not only in Israel. They failed to predict the 2016 American presidential election, Brexit, the U.K. elections in 2015, and the exit polls in the 2015 Israeli election. But anger at polls — and pollsters — can sometimes feel like misplaced anger at election results themselves. It’s as if disappointed voters think that if only pollsters had predicted Trump’s victory, paradoxically, that the result might somehow have been different.

Social science is an extremely fallible endeavor. The great scholar of democracy and public opinion, V.O. Key, once called political advertising people “insecure, ulcer-ridden hucksters,” and this is a species for which I feel some kinship. We are paid on the premise that human behavior can be measured and predicted with rule-governed formulas, in the desperate belief that if we crack the code we can change voter decisions.

But human decision-making excels at not following rules. Further, both candidates and readers tend to forget that social or other scientists impose personal, methodological, and social biases on our reading of the world, even if unintentionally. All this can make it hard to understand what we can and can’t know from polls.

In general, I advise being a critical consumer of any kind of research, not only when voting but also when deciding what to eat, how much to sleep, which medicines to take, how to understand sides of a conflict, or the attitudes of our compatriots.

Therefore, what follows is an attempt to answer some common complaints I hear about polls, and tips for how to get the most out of them instead. I’ll focus on the current Israeli elections, but hopefully the ideas are applicable to polls about politics in general.

There are three points at which polls can go awry: how the survey is designed and conducted, how it is reported, and how it is interpreted (by you, the readers). All of these should be considered when deconstructing the following complaints.

‘Israeli polls are of terrible quality’

Like anything, there is high and low-quality polling. The only way to distinguish between them is transparency. Even the most perfect poll is worthless if the methodology is not made available.

Any media report or poll publication...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

What will it take for Israel's right-wing voters to say enough?

A small group of right-wing voters could tip the balance and lead to a change of government in Israel. Who are these voters, what do they care about, and would a Kahanist party in the Knesset be a step too far?

Until one week ago, it looked unlikely that Benjamin Netanyahu could lose an election. It looked even less likely that the center and left-wing parties in Israel could ever outnumber the right-wing bloc to form a government. But last week, former Chief of Staff Benny Gantz merged with Yair Lapid’s centrist party and polls showed their new Blue and White party pulling ahead. Then on Thursday, the attorney general finally announced a long-anticipated decision to indict the prime minister on corruption charges.

Now, everything depends on Israeli right-wing voters. Their choice will determine if Likud and the right shrink sufficiently in April to herald a new era of leadership, or whether “King Bibi” proves unbeatable, yet again. All votes are equal, but some could change everything.

Since a stable plurality of Israelis – and a clear majority of Jewish citizens – are right wing, it has looked unlikely that the right-wing bloc will lose the 12-seat advantage it won over the center and the left in 2015. Yet on February 9, a two-week average gave the right-wing bloc just a two-seat advantage. A new average produced on February 25, just after the creation of the Blue and White party, showed an even 60-60 split (from a total of 120 seats).

These shifts could represent just a bounce for the new center party, drawn out by the attorney general’s likely indictment of Netanyahu; a bounce that can always fall. On the other hand, it doesn’t make sense to ignore polls – especially averages and trends – entirely.

Are some right-wingers planning to turn their backs on the bloc? Given the merger between the Jewish Home party with the extremist, Kahanist-inspired Otzma Yehudit, is it possible that the right has gone too far even for many of its own?

In recent years, the right has made it all too easy to brand its entire camp as racist, nationalist, populist and fascist. Since Netanyahu became prime minister in 2009, a slew of anti-democratic and racist legislation, creeping annexationist policies in the West Bank and ongoing torment of Gaza, as well as rhetorical attacks on Arab-Palestinian citizens, the left,...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

To unseat Netanyahu, his challengers risk becoming just like him

As party lists are finalized in the lead-up to Israeli elections, the big bangs offer little substantive changes. And the challengers of the center look uncannily like the current leadership.

A visual expression of the Israeli election campaign would look a lot like a Jackson Pollock painting. All of the parties running were required to finalize their lists on Thursday, and declare whether they would merge, split or stay single-by-choice. For 24 hours before the deadline, the parties darted around in a strategic frenzy accompanied by the relentless whine of 1,000 blooming rumors.

The latest changes should be seen in the context of the earlier dramas in the political system.

Start with the center and left: When elections were called, a new party led by former Chief of Staff Benny Gantz sprung up in the center of the Israeli political map, draining votes from the existing center party, Yesh Atid, and from Labor on the center-left. The new Labor leader, Gabbay, was failing in his attempt to tack right so, naturally, he lopped off his more centrist co-leader, Tzipi Livni. This week, Livni pulled out of the race entirely, after surveys showed her party failing to cross the electoral threshold. Yair Lapid saw his support flow with centripetal force towards Gantz. As the latter consistently won more votes in surveys, Lapid finally consented to join up with Gantz and take second spot, to maximize votes. The two banded together with former generals Moshe Ya’alon and Gabi Ashkenazi to form the “Blue and White” party.

The Israeli right wing can be faulted for many things, but not for complacency. Earlier in the campaign cycle, Jewish Home, the main party to the right of Netanyahu, broke apart: Naftali Bennett and Ayelet Shaked left to form the “New Right.” The old Jewish Home party – well-stocked with extremists – was left competing for right-wing religious votes with both Bennett and a fringe party of fanatics called “Jewish Power.” Netanyahu’s reaction was a bit frenzied. In addition to indiscriminately firing off his poison arrows of “Left! Weak” at anyone in the Gantz crowd, Netanyahu cancelled a meeting with Vladimir Putin, a not-unimportant figure, to stay home and bribe the Jewish Home and the fanatics to merge as well. He promised them two ministerial positions if he wins, and they agreed to run on a joint slate — at the prime minister’s request.

What does all...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

It’s time to stop asking why the Israeli left has disappeared

For Israeli left-wing voters, nothing is more important than overthrowing Netanyahu. Yet despite their common cause, the left remains anything but united and it is polling at unprecedented lows.

There is one thing shared by nearly every Israeli who does not define her or himself as right-wing: a profound desire to oust Benjamin Netanyahu. And yet, despite all their efforts, none of the left-wing parties today look capable of doing so.

Polls show the left-wing Meretz party hovering near the four-seat minimum threshold to enter Knesset. and at least one poll had Labor down to just five seats in recent weeks. After Ahmad Tibi’s recent announcement that he would leave the Joint List and run independently, the two Arab parties reach 12-13 combined seats in most polls, the total representation of the Israeli left — notwithstanding wide variations between them — could be down to 21 seats (4, 5 and 12). Such a result would be unprecedented. These parties won 42 seats in the 2015 elections. When Labor had its lowest showing ever in 2009, the total still reached 27 seats.

Nearly 20 years after the Second Intifada precipitated the collapse of the Israeli left, it’s time to stop asking what happened. The real question is why after so many years has the left failed to resurrect itself — and whether it could do so in the future?

In the mid-2000s a fresh generation of leaders who were either young or new to politics seemed poised to put the party back on the map. Campaign billboards in 2006 showed “the team” — beaming faces including Ofir Pines, Yuli Tamir, Ami Ayalon, Avishai Braverman, Shelly Yechimovich, Eitan Cabel and the newly-elected leader Amir Peretz, who was generating a wave of excitement.

Tamir, Ayalon, Braverman and Pines have since abandoned politics altogether. Similarly, journalist Daniel Ben Simon entered Knesset during the term from 2009-2013, and then left.


If leaders flee, is it any surprise that voters do as well? This week, the Labor Party elected a young and energetic crop of leaders to its top slots, while Meretz will hold its primary on Thursday. Can the two parties most closely associated with the left avoid the same fate?

I asked some of those would-be leaders from the mid-2000 what went wrong. Their answers ranged from the personal to the political...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

Do Israelis vote for political ideology or cult of personality?

Although Israelis have historically voted for strong political frontmen, it seems that dazzling personalities are no longer sufficient to winning elections. It turns out that voters are looking at the values, worldview, and policies.

Last October, Lior Shlein, Israel’s top satirist, made a convincing case that Yair Lapid is a cult leader. Lapid was a TV celeb who entered politics in 2013 trading on his teeny-bop looks and name recognition. He had no discernible ideology other than a vague promise to represent the mostly middle classes behind the social protest of 2011. Yet despite his own tony demographic, his Yesh Atid party ended up winning 19 seats in his first run. Shlein had a good time comparing Lapid to Jonestown cult leader Jim Jones.

Lapid could be proof that when it comes to election campaigns, Israel has completely gone American: personality takes all. He might represent the end of a process that arguably began with Netanyahu himself. But a deeper look at the complex interaction of people, parties, and issues on the agenda shows that voters aren’t as cynical, shallow, or prone to manipulation as we think.

The idea that campaigns are merely a personality contest carries a deep stigma of campaigns as empty manipulation. In this view, all it takes to sell a leader is a slick adviser, the right hair, makeup, height, and some ready-mix rhetoric. Hope, change or unity will do. Or the flip side, fear.

In the 1990s, Netanyahu was considered the ultimate personality candidate. When he first entered politics, he was criticized for being too “American,” as recalled in the excellent new documentary film King Bibi. Netanyahu had clever timing for a charisma-candidate; Israel had just changed its electoral system and in 1996 held direct elections for prime minister for the first time in its history. The horserace threw a spotlight on the now-famous televised debate between Netanyahu and incumbent Shimon Peres. Like the Nixon-Kennedy debates of 1960, Netanyahu was nimble and sharp, all butterfly and bee around his older, slower opponent. He ended up winning.

Dr. Israel Waismel-Manor, director of the Department of Government and Political Thought at the University of Haifa and an expert on political campaigns, agrees that Israel is moving toward personality politics and away from a focus on either ideology or institutions, in both campaigns and the media. According to Waismel-Manor, this is a global trend. “It’s hard to cover institutions in...

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article

The future is the center: Meet the parties shaking up Israeli politics

Caught between growing extremism on the right and a battered left, Israelis are flocking to a new crop of centrist politicians who prioritize economic issues over solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Galia Ben Haim discussed her political opinions while driving back from jail. In addition to her day job, she volunteers at a women’s prison.  The inmates, she says, committed their crimes after Israel’s social institutions failed them.

In the last two elections the 48-year-old mother of four says she voted for Yesh Atid, the centrist party founded by TV icon Yair Lapid in 2013. She is considering supporting them a third time when Israel holds general elections in April. “I really care about social issues,” she explains. “We need to rehabilitate families, help social workers, welfare agencies, women who are in prison, the poor,” she says.

Over the last two electoral cycles, Israel has experienced the rise of a new kind of political center in an arena generally seen as a battle of left and right, largely due to voters like Ben Haim. There are now two main centrist parties in Knesset, Yesh Atid, and Moshe Kahlon’s Kulanu, which first competed in 2015. Together, they hold 21 of the Knesset’s 120 seats.

This is an important development, given that the Israeli electorate is weighted in favor of another right-wing victory. Only around 20 percent of adults in Israel self-define as left wing — not enough for the left to win an election. Any chance for a real change of government will have to come from the center.

By contrast, the center camp shows potential for growth. In 2015, the two parties won just over 16 percent of the vote (10 seats for Kahlon and 11 for Lapid). Yet in surveys, about one-quarter of Israelis regularly self-define as centrist. In other words, 10 percent of Israelis are potential swing voters for centrist parties. Those numbers could be augmented by moderate right-wingers who are increasingly disenchanted by Netanyahu’s longevity in power, the corruption investigations against him — or simply his rhetoric and style of governing.

Ronen Ashkenazi, 42, runs a kiosk in the heart of Tel Aviv. He considers himself to be centrist and has supported Likud in the past but voted for Yesh Atid in more recent elections. Now he’s not sure which party to vote for, but Netanyahu has to go. “Enough of Bibi already – he’s corrupt, he needs to go home....

Read More
View article: AAA
Share article