The haredi parties hold much of the power to determine Israel’s next government as President Isaac Herzog prepares to begin coalition consultations on Wednesday, with Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Liberman announcing on Monday that he would recommend Gadi Eisenkot for prime minister while ruling out a minority government dependent on Arab party support.
Liberman also reiterated that he would not serve in a government with Benjamin Netanyahu. His positions have narrowed the options available to Eisenkot, leaving the central question of whether Shas and United Torah Judaism would be willing to cross political lines and join a government under his leadership.
For now, the haredi parties are careful not to commit themselves. In briefings and public statements, their representatives have repeatedly stressed that no decision has been made and that their rabbinical leadership will make the final determination.
Rabbis Dov Landau and Moshe Hillel Hirsch are expected to return from abroad around the time consultations begin at the President’s Residence. According to assessments, even after their return, United Torah Judaism may prefer not to recommend either Netanyahu or Eisenkot, preserving as much room as possible for maneuver in subsequent negotiations.
The battle over a rotation agreement
Even without recommendations from the haredi parties, the prevailing assessment in political circles is that Eisenkot will be the first candidate tasked with forming a government.
However, the number of parties recommending him does not guarantee that he can assemble a coalition, and the real struggle is expected to begin once he receives the mandate.
Political sources believe Eisenkot may offer the haredi parties generous arrangements on the military enlistment of yeshiva students, along with budget allocations and agreements on issues important to them, to bring them into the coalition.
If the haredi parties agree, the door could also open to Yisrael Beytenu joining the government.
However, according to assessments in political circles, even an agreement in principle by the haredi parties and Liberman would not necessarily conclude the negotiations.
Liberman has already served as defense minister, finance minister, and foreign minister, and political observers believe that returning to a senior ministerial position alone would not satisfy him.
Under such circumstances, he could demand a rotation agreement for the premiership with Eisenkot. If raised, such a demand could ignite another dispute within the bloc seeking to replace Netanyahu.
Potential premiership rotation deal could spark Bennett-Liberman dispute
Naftali Bennett, who has already served as prime minister and whose party won 12 Knesset seats in the election, may oppose an arrangement under which Liberman, whose party holds seven seats, would serve as prime minister in a rotation agreement while Bennett himself would have to settle for a ministerial position.
This could lead to demands for a three-way rotation agreement involving Eisenkot, Liberman, and Bennett.
It should be emphasized that, at this stage, this remains a possible scenario rather than a set of formal demands presented by either politician.
Such an arrangement would require complex negotiations over the order and length of each leader’s term, as well as the division of powers, potentially making the formation of a government even more difficult.
‘Better to keep everyone in suspense and uncertainty’
Haredi parties hold off on coalition decision
The entire scenario, however, depends on the haredi parties, which are showing no urgency to make a decision.
In closed-door conversations, haredi sources describe their political position as an exceptional opportunity: Both blocs need them, and the willingness to offer generous concessions, including on military enlistment, gives them considerable bargaining power.
“It is better for everyone to remain in suspense and uncertainty, and for each side to think that we have already reached an agreement with the other side,” one haredi source said.
Behind this ambiguity, however, lies a more sober assessment among figures in the haredi political establishment.
“The chances that the rabbis will instruct us to join a government with the Left, headed by Eisenkot, are low,” a well-informed haredi source argued.
According to haredi sources, this assessment also applies to United Torah Judaism, even though senior party officials are exploring dialogue with the bloc seeking to replace Netanyahu.
For Shas, the possibility is considered even more sensitive.
Party chairman Arye Deri has previously made clear that he does not want a return to the scenario in which the haredi parties participated in Yitzhak Rabin’s government during the Oslo Accords period. The party continues to emphasize its commitment to the Right.
If the haredi parties decide against joining an Eisenkot-led government, the possibility of forming a government dependent on the support of Arab parties will return to the center of the debate.
However, Liberman has already announced that he would not support a minority government, even if it were presented as a temporary administration ahead of another election.
Without Yisrael Beytenu or the haredi parties, Eisenkot would struggle to assemble a stable majority that would allow him to swear in a government and govern effectively.
Netanyahu could receive mandate if Eisenkot fails to form coalition
If Eisenkot fails, the mandate to form a government could pass to Netanyahu.
Some in Netanyahu’s circle believe that another election would not necessarily be a bad outcome for him.
They assume the high voter turnout among Arab Israelis would not be repeated, and that voters who traveled to Israel from abroad specifically to support the bloc seeking to replace Netanyahu might not do so again.
On the other hand, Netanyahu also faces a risk.
If attempts to form a government fail and the process reaches the 21-day period in which the Knesset can nominate a candidate, a majority of 61 MKs could emerge to request that the task of forming a government be assigned to an agreed-upon candidate.
Those close to Netanyahu fear that, at this stage, the bloc seeking to replace him could reach agreements that had previously proved elusive.
Against this backdrop, sources within the Likud bloc believe Netanyahu would agree to pursue a unity government with Eisenkot, even if that was not his initial preference.
But here, too, the decision would not be his alone.
Eisenkot would have to decide whether he was prepared to serve in a government alongside Netanyahu or whether he would prefer another election, despite the political risks involved.
As consultations at the President’s Residence approach, the haredi parties find themselves in a particularly advantageous bargaining position.
They can refrain from recommending a candidate, examine proposals from both sides, and keep the question of the next governing coalition open.
The question is whether they will ultimately be content to use their leverage in negotiations or be prepared to pay the political price of joining a government led by Eisenkot.
