Occupied Jerusalem- The political scene in Israel is undergoing a state of restructuring with the emergence of an alliance between former Israeli Prime Ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, and the increasing controversy over the position of the Arab parties on this alliance.
The political discourse in the Israeli arena escalated after the United Arab List and Arab figures announced their support for any alliance aimed at isolating Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as the Likud Party escalated its attack on the Bennett-Lapid alliance, accusing it of relying in the future on the support of Arab parties, in the context of a speech that was described as inflammatory towards Arab representation in the Knesset (Parliament).
Last Sunday, Bennett and Lapid – who formed a coalition government with Arab participation in 2021 – announced that they would ally in the next elections expected to be held later this year, in a joint attempt to oust Netanyahu.
In this context, Likud published – via social media platforms – an image modified with artificial intelligence techniques in which Arab Knesset member Mansour Abbas appears driving a vehicle carrying Bennett and Lapid, in a sarcastic reference, accompanied by comments accusing the coalition of links to Arab political parties, which sparked widespread reactions.
This development comes in light of the differing readings regarding the nature of the new alliances and the limits of their impact on the map of the political conflict inside Israel, and whether they reflect a fundamental change or a redistribution within essentially close camps.
Pragmatic alliance
Political analyst, Taha Agbaria, believed that the new alliance between Bennett and Lapid, and the position of some Arab movements supporting any alliance aimed at toppling Netanyahu, come within the framework of reshaping a political map that does not reflect fundamental differences between the Israeli camps as much as it reflects competition within a close ideological framework.
In his interview with Al Jazeera Net, Igbaria pointed out that Bennett and Netanyahu, despite the differences, come from a close national and religious intellectual background, while the Bennett-Lapid alliance represents a more pragmatic version of the traditional right, especially with regard to managing regional files and foreign policies.
On the other hand, he pointed out that the differences between the two camps are mainly focused on internal issues, such as the relationship with the judicial system, the file of Haredi recruitment, and the definition of the state’s identity between its Jewish and democratic character, without any deep strategic differences in major policies.
Agbaria explained that this alliance may be more likely to intersect with some of the Arab movements represented in the Knesset, given its focus on internal issues and civil demands, compared to the discourse of the extreme right led by Netanyahu and his allies.
He pointed out that the Israeli political scene essentially takes place within “one large camp” in which basic ideologies intersect, with the emergence of internal conflict and competition over the management of power and not over a radical change in the intellectual or political structure of the state.
Previous experience amid “understandings”
Also, according to analyst Igbariya, the Unified List’s announcement of support for any alliance aimed at overthrowing Netanyahu, after the Bennett-Lapid alliance, may be linked to the previous experience of cooperation with the Bennett-Lapid government, in which the Unified List, headed by Mansour Abbas, participated.
In his opinion, this position may indicate the possibility of unannounced understandings or political contacts behind the scenes, aiming to open the door to new government support if this coalition is able to form the next government.
Agbaria pointed out that this path may raise differences within the Arab parties themselves, whether within the framework of the Joint List or between its various components, such as the Democratic Front, the Arab Movement for Change, and the National Democratic Rally, which makes their position on any future government a matter of internal disagreement.
He also indicated that Israeli polls indicate the need for the Bennett-Lapid coalition to support at least one Arab list to secure a parliamentary majority, while the unified list is seen in the Israeli political narrative as a party capable of cooperation, based on the experience of previous participation in the government coalition.
Igbaria concluded that all scenarios remain open, in light of the intertwining of electoral calculations and the multiplicity of trends within the Israeli and Arab political scene alike.
“A voting bloc, not a political partner.”
For his part, Amir Makhoul, a researcher on Israeli affairs at the Taqaddam Center for Policy, believes that the political behavior of the Arab parties cannot be read from the perspective of the Israeli opposition, but rather through their own internal balances and representation equations, far from attempts to hold them responsible for the results of the elections inside Israel.
He pointed out that some Israeli opposition forces, especially after the 2022 elections, sought to blame the Arab parties for not uniting in a common list, while ignoring other internal factors related to the performance of traditional Israeli parties within the opposition itself.
He pointed out that the Israeli opposition discourse reproduces a historical guardianship approach towards the Palestinians within the Green Line, considering them a functional voting bloc linked to the election results, not an independent political partner.
In this context, Makhoul explained to Al Jazeera Net that some of the new Israeli political alliances, such as Bennett-Lapid, are moving towards exclusionary rather than competitive policies, which reflects a shift in the concept of “political legitimacy” within the Israeli party scene.
Absence of vision
Makhoul believed that focusing on the change of leadership, such as Netanyahu or others, reduces the problem, while the essence of the change – in his opinion – is linked to a deeper political structure characterized by the rise of the right within the institutions of the state, society and security.
He also warned against a simplistic reading that considers that any government change may automatically lead to an improvement in the Palestinians’ files, stressing the necessity of analyzing the implications of any future Israeli alliances on the issues of settlement, Gaza, and the regional relationship, instead of simply reading the electoral results.
He stressed that the Israeli opposition, despite its differences with the ruling coalition, does not present a fundamental alternative political project, but rather moves within the same framework based on managing the conflict, not resolving it, which deepens the political stalemate.
Makhoul concluded his reading by saying that the upcoming elections come in light of a clear political blockage and severe polarization, with the absence of any integrated vision for the solution, in contrast to the escalation of political exploitation of the conflict with the Palestinians as an electoral and ideological factor at the same time.
What is required in the Arab world?
In turn, the head of the United Arab List, MP Mansour Abbas, considered that the Israeli campaign against the Arab lists comes within a political escalation targeting this list as the elections approach, stressing – in a statement, a copy of which was received by Al Jazeera Net – that attempts at delegitimization and incitement will not dissuade his party from continuing the approach of political partnership and seeking to influence within decision-making institutions, especially in files related to combating crime and recognizing unrecognized villages.
Abbas pointed out that efforts are continuing to form a joint or technical Arab list in coordination between Arab parties, with the aim of strengthening political representation and influencing the formation of an alternative government.
In the same context, the head of the Arab Movement for Change, MP Ahmed Tibi, commented on the alliance between Bennett and Lapid, considering that it reflects “the ability of the Israeli parties to overcome their differences, at a time when the Arab parties are still in the stage of rearranging their ranks.”
In a brief statement reached by Al Jazeera Net, he called for accelerating political understandings after signing the “Sakhnin Paper” to reach a consensual formula.
