Editorial illustration : Eisenkot warns that Israel is nearing a point of no return. How long will his potential partners wait for him to act?
Israel’s former military chief has a viable path to a government. His hesitation risks losing the partners who could help him build it.
By : Ya Libnan Editor, Opinion
When President Isaac Herzog gave Gadi Eisenkot the mandate to form Israel’s next government on Sunday, the former military chief said the country was in a “state of emergency” and approaching a “point of no return.” Eisenkot now has 28 days to form a government, with a possible 14-day extension. If he believes his own warning, he should show the same urgency in deciding whom he is prepared to govern with.
The numbers explain both his opportunity and his predicament. Sixty-seven lawmakers recommended Eisenkot to Herzog, while 46 recommended Benjamin Netanyahu. Eisenkot’s own bloc holds 48 seats. Ra’am and the Joint List hold 19 between them. Together they could command 67 seats in the 120-member Knesset, six more than the 61 needed for an outright majority. That arithmetic depends on Eisenkot keeping his own bloc together and reaching an agreement with both Arab-led parties.
Eisenkot’s instinct is to consult and seek consensus. In a country as divided as Israel, that can be a strength. His bloc has already moved in the Knesset to seek an official inquiry into the October 7 attacks and reverse changes that curtailed judicial powers. The harder test is whether he can ask his allies to accept a political choice they would rather avoid. Avigdor Liberman’s Yisrael Beytenu has said it will refuse to join a coalition with Arab-led parties. Eisenkot also campaigned against bringing those parties into government. Reconsidering that pledge will take an honest explanation to voters and a direct conversation with his own partners
Sources I spoke with say there is growing unease among the Arab blocs about backing Eisenkot through the formation of a government. They had hoped he would be willing to bring Jewish and Arab citizens into a common political project and put Israel on a path toward two states, with Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in peace and security. The longer he hesitates, the more some may see another election as preferable to giving him open-ended support.
Eisenkot has other avenues to explore. A deal with ultra-Orthodox parties would force him to confront the dispute over military draft exemptions. A unity government with Netanyahu would require him to reverse his pledge against governing with the man he sought to replace. In my view, the most practical course is to negotiate openly with the Arab-led parties. Ra’am has already served in an Israeli governing coalition, and the Joint List has offered to support Eisenkot from outside. Those are concrete openings. He should invite Ra’am into the coalition and negotiate a written agreement with the Joint List on the terms of its parliamentary support.
That agreement should address what cooperation would deliver. An official October 7 inquiry is a place to start. So are a commitment to tackle violent crime in Arab communities and a credible political path toward two states. Eisenkot should tell Israelis where he stands on each of those issues and ask his potential partners to do the same.
He has warned Israel that time is running out. He should use the time Herzog gave him to put a governing agreement on the table and ask his partners to stand behind it. If he is unwilling to make that choice, he should step aside for someone prepared to lead.
