Israel president asks opposition leader Eisenkot to form government
Following a hung election, Israel’s president designated opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot to attempt forming a new coalition within 28 days, possibly extended by 14 days. The move signals a push toward a national emergency government to avoid another election cycle. The current landscape features potential kingmakers among Arab-led lists, but most Jewish parties have pledged not to align with them, complicating coalition options. The process will test whether a unity, right-wing, or Eisenkot-led arrangement can emerge, with precedent in 2020 offering a power-sharing model. The outcome remains uncertain as factions weigh competing promises against the need for stability.
Dive Deeper:
President Isaac Herzog consulted with all parties after the election deadlock and formally gave Eisenkot the first chance to form a government, with Netanyahu receiving fewer formal endorsements.
Eisenkot, a former military chief, will have 28 days to try to assemble a coalition, with a possible 14-day extension, highlighting the urgency to avert a new election cycle.
Two Arab-led alliances, the United Arab List and the Joint List, together secured an unprecedented number of seats, positioning them as potential kingmakers despite most Jewish parties’ reluctance to work with them.
The statement from Herzog’s office noted Eisenkot received 67 recommendations for premiership against 46 for Netanyahu, illustrating the formal support landscape as consultations proceed.
There are three main paths under consideration: a national unity government with both Netanyahu and Eisenkot, a right-wing coalition including Netanyahu and defectors from Eisenkot’s bloc, or an Eisenkot-led government backed by Arab parties, each with significant political hurdles.
Historically, unity has precedent (2020 power-sharing between Netanyahu and Benny Gantz), but today’s deep polarization and pre-election pledges complicate similar arrangements.
Herzog emphasized that in the current reality, factions must recognize that not every commitment can be fulfilled, underscoring the evolving governance dynamics as parties seek stability.