Israel’s politicians must put national unity before personal ambition - opinion

Israelis have spoken. Unfortunately, too many politicians, commentators, and media personalities seem unwilling to listen.

The election produced no decisive winner, but it delivered an unmistakable message: Israel cannot afford another narrow coalition, endless political warfare, or a government held hostage by its ideological extremes.

We need a broad national unity government capable of confronting the challenges our political leaders have spent years avoiding.

Benjamin Netanyahu's bloc won 53 seats, eight short of a majority. Likud remains Israel's largest party with 27 seats, and its voters have made clear whom they want as their leader. Those insisting Netanyahu has been politically defeated are ignoring reality. His opponents may wish him gone, but Likud has shown no indication it intends to replace him.

Nevertheless, Netanyahu, while declaring his willingness for a broad-based Zionist government, must recognize that such a government will require genuine compromise, particularly on the haredi (ultra-Orthodox) draft issue and the establishment of a serious commission of inquiry.

The change bloc, with a mere 48 seats, has no credible basis for declaring victory. Gadi Eisenkot and Yair Lapid’s attempts to spin these results into an electoral triumph are not merely disingenuous; they are an insult to the intelligence of Israeli voters.

Rather than confront the political reality delivered at the ballot box, they appear to remain captive to an echo chamber of Netanyahu-obsessed advisers and sympathetic media personalities who have convinced themselves that Israel was somehow stolen from them and that they are now on a righteous mission to take it back.

Israel does not belong to Netanyahu, Eisenkot, Lapid, or any political camp; it belongs to its citizens. An election is not won by declaring victory loudly enough, and a democracy cannot function when politicians refuse to accept a result simply because it does not fit their preferred narrative.

One thing that election did confirm is that the extremes are not the mainstream. Despite their inflammatory, bombastic rhetoric and disproportionate media attention, Itamar Ben Gvir and Yair Golan secured just seven and eight seats, respectively.

Majority of Israeli's want unity

Much of our political discourse suggests Israel is divided between these two extremes. It is not. Neither the Kaplanists nor the Kahanists speak for the majority of Zionist Israelis. Each such group is a fringe, despite what the media tries to have us believe.

The under-reported, but clear majority of Israelis want unity. They want security, economic opportunity, affordable housing, quality education, and competent government. They might disagree about policies and personalities but share far more than our politicians acknowledge.

With voter turnout reaching an extraordinary 77.9%, Israelis reaffirmed their commitment to democracy. The election's extraordinary turnout, including significant participation by Arab citizens, debunks the claims that Israel is an apartheid state that denies Arab citizens political representation.

But democratic participation carries responsibilities. Arab citizens deserve to have safe streets free of gun violence, equality, and meaningful representation, but their elected representatives must also unequivocally reject terrorism and respect democratic institutions.

Criticizing government policy is a fundamental democratic right. Justifying or glorifying the murder of Israeli civilians by our enemies is not. Political leaders who provide cover for terrorism betray their constituents and undermine Jewish-Arab coexistence. Democracy protects the right to dissent; however, it cannot become a vehicle for destroying the state from within.

Responsibility does not rest solely with the Arab parties. The change bloc must also be held accountable. Relying on anti-Zionist Arab parties that refuse to condemn Hamas, whether as coalition partners or through external parliamentary support, is an affront to the bereaved families who have lost loved ones and to the hundreds of thousands of reservists who dropped everything to defend their country.

By making itself dependent on these factions, the change bloc may secure a short-term political advantage, but it risks deepening the very divisions Israel so desperately needs to overcome. At this critical moment in our nation's history, political expediency must not come at the expense of national unity.

The Opportunity is at hand for a 79-seat unity government comprising Likud's 27 seats, Yashar's 21, B'Yachad's 12, Yisrael Beytenu's seven, Religious Zionist Party's six, and Shas's six. Such a coalition would include nearly two-thirds of the Knesset, bringing together major constituencies while leaving out the extremes.

Such a coalition would require difficult compromises from the party leaders, particularly over Netanyahu's leadership. But surely Israel's future matters more than personal rivalries.

For years, politicians have excused their failures by blaming fragile coalitions, hostile opposition parties, and uncompromising coalition partners.

A 79-seat government would strip away those excuses. No small faction could dictate national policy or threaten the government's survival whenever its demands were rejected. More importantly, neither bloc would be able to unilaterally force policy on the other bloc.

Most importantly, such a coalition could finally address key issues threatening Israel's future.

With Shas participating, a unity government can negotiate a realistic, enforceable framework for haredi military and national service that respects legitimate religious concerns while ensuring a fairer sharing of the national burden.

Instead of unilateral judicial reform legislation and mass protests, a unity government can pursue meaningful reform through broad consensus, safeguarding judicial independence while clarifying the proper balance between the courts, Knesset, and government.

Israel needs a comprehensive program to create affordable housing. Such a program needs to address land availability, planning delays, infrastructure, construction costs, and housing supply. Young families should not have to choose between financial security and owning a home.

The country needs a coherent national policy regarding Judea and Samaria, balancing historical and security interests with demographic and diplomatic realities. Decisions of such consequence cannot depend on the survival needs of a narrow coalition.

Israel must rebuild and modernize its education system, strengthening mathematics, science, technology, engineering, English, and civic education. Every Israeli child, regardless of background, deserves the skills necessary to participate in a modern economy.

These challenges require long-term thinking, difficult decisions, and the parliamentary strength to withstand pressure from special interests.

A broad unity government offers that foundation.

The "just not Bibi" obsession of the change bloc has contributed to political paralysis and divided the nation. Israel has endured two successive governments that left approximately half the population feeling excluded. The Bennett-Lapid government alienated much of the Right, while the most recent Netanyahu government alienated much of the opposition.

Israelis with opposing political views fought together in Gaza and Lebanon, suffered tragedies together, and demanded unity following the October 7 massacre. On October 8, we promised ourselves that Israel would never return to business as usual. We understood that political division, institutional complacency, and failures of leadership had exacted an unbearable price.

Netanyahu, Eisenkot, Bennett, Lapid, Liberman, Smotrich, and Deri must decide whether their personal ambitions and grievances matter more than the country's future. They do not need to agree on everything. They must agree that Israel's security, prosperity, and social cohesion transcend their disagreements.

A unity government will require painful compromises, but compromise is not weakness. It is the essence of responsible democratic leadership.

The arithmetic is there: 79 seats. The national challenges are undeniable. What remains to be seen is whether our political leaders have the courage to put the country and national responsibility before personal ambition and ego.

Israel has voted. It is time to stop campaigning and start governing.

As Kalman Liebskind remarked in Makor Rishon, Israel faces a historic opportunity to end its internal political warfare. Failure to seize it now might have consequences for generations.

The writer is the managing partner of Dekel Capital Management, a resident of Beit Shemesh, a proud oleh who made aliya 28 years ago and prides himself on always feeling like a new oleh (immigrant). He is an avid Zionist who cares deeply about the future of the State of Israel and the Jewish people.