While awaiting the opening of the double-sealed ballot envelopes, the counted votes between Benjamin Netanyahu’s camp and Gadi Eisenkot’s camp have settled into a deadlock, with neither side emerging victorious. The elections have ended with a result in which the Arab vote has played a historic decisive role, giving rise to two poles within a single political body, each with its own head.
But the difficult political birth is not over yet. Both the Likud camp and its allies, and the opposition camp and its partners, are suffering from symptoms of “political miscarriage,” as the path forward remains blocked by the absence of a clear winner with a majority capable of forming a government.
Under the complicated calculations facing both sides, the Arab lists have become the kingmakers. Likud, the largest political party, has opened fire on them, accusing them of stealing the election, supporting terrorism, and seeking to destroy the Jewish state.
Meanwhile, in his first speech, Eisenkot advised his rival Netanyahu to retire from political life, warning him against exploiting Israel’s security for his own political interests. Eisenkot also declared his intention to form a government that represents all Israelis.
The Arab lists seized on the closing remarks and expressed their readiness for a genuine Jewish-Arab partnership to oust Netanyahu.
Yousef Jabareen, head of the Joint Arab List, said: “Anyone seeking to offer a fundamental and genuine alternative to Netanyahu’s blood-soaked government must engage in dialogue with us and pave the way for the change that the Israeli public is looking for.”
Ahmad Tibi, a member of the Joint List, also expressed readiness to lend a helping hand to the camp for change if it proves capable of forming a government and demonstrates the necessary courage. He said the high Arab turnout proves that the Joint List is a decisive force and that no change is possible without it.
While Netanyahu attempts to win over one of the factions in Eisenkot’s camp to secure the required 61 seats, left-wing leader Yair Golan has urged his opposition allies to cooperate with the Arab parties to form a government of change.
“We must no longer accept the racist division Netanyahu practices between Jewish votes and Arab votes,” Golan said.
Between words and actions, the picture appears increasingly complicated, with several possible paths ahead: failure to form a government, another round of elections, or—according to The Washington Post, citing a Likud official—Netanyahu potentially compelling Eisenkot to join a national unity government if war with Iran resumes.
This may be the way out Netanyahu is counting on to reshuffle his political cards, particularly after U.S. President Donald Trump, having expressed concern about Netanyahu’s prospects, concluded that his support had made a significant difference and described Netanyahu’s position as “very good.”
Despite being preoccupied with the U.S. midterm elections, Trump told Axios that he had not yet considered intervening to help form a national unity government under Netanyahu’s leadership, but would take a look at the matter. Asked whether further strikes against Iran were possible after the congressional midterms, Trump replied that anything was possible.
Meanwhile, Tehran is studying a proposal presented by Qatari mediators as a draft of a new agreement to end the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran.
With this proposal, Qatar has placed the ball in Iran’s court, calling on Tehran to demonstrate goodwill. This aligns with the responsibility placed on Iran by the countries of the Mecca alliance during their four-way meeting, urging Tehran to seize the opportunity to encourage diplomatic solutions, reopen negotiations, prevent renewed military escalation, and support mediation efforts led by Qatar and Pakistan.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi described the four-way meeting as a valuable opportunity to advance dialogue on regional peace and security. He stressed that neighboring countries are a priority for Iran, saying: “Our neighbors are our priority.”
Will Tehran put the proverb into practice: “The neighbor comes before the home”?