Why Arab Parties May Not Be the Kingmakers in Israel’s Election
srael’s electoral arithmetic has once again highlighted the potential influence of Arab political parties in determining the country’s next government. Exit poll projections suggest that if opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot’s political bloc joined forces with Arab parties, it could secure enough support to unseat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Yet, despite the apparent numbers, political observers remain sceptical that such an alliance will materialise. The reasons lie in Israel’s deeply divided political landscape, ideological differences and the longstanding controversy surrounding Arab parties’ participation in government.
At first glance, the mathematics appears straightforward. In Israel’s parliamentary system, governments depend on securing the support of at least 61 members in the 120-seat Knesset. When no political camp wins an outright majority, smaller parties can become decisive in determining who forms the government. Arab parties, which represent a significant section of Israel’s Palestinian Arab citizens, could therefore hold the balance of power if the larger blocs fall short.
However, electoral arithmetic does not automatically translate into political cooperation. The possibility of removing Netanyahu from office may unite some opposition parties, but it does not eliminate the disagreements that have historically complicated relations between Jewish opposition leaders and Arab political representatives.
The limits of opposition unity
Gadi Eisenkot, a former military chief and prominent opposition figure, represents a political camp that seeks to challenge Netanyahu’s leadership. His appeal to voters concerned about national security, governance and the direction of Israel’s political institutions could help consolidate support among sections of the Jewish electorate.
Yet forming a government requires more than a shared desire to replace the incumbent prime minister. Opposition parties differ over security policy, relations with the Palestinians, judicial reform, settlements and the future of the occupied territories. These differences become particularly sensitive when cooperation with Arab parties enters the equation.
For some Jewish opposition politicians, an alliance with Arab parties risks alienating conservative voters who consider national security and Jewish national identity central electoral issues. Even politicians who favour a change of government may hesitate to depend openly on Arab parties for parliamentary support.
This creates a political contradiction: opposition leaders may need Arab lawmakers to achieve a majority while simultaneously fearing the electoral consequences of relying on them.
Arab parties’ historic gains
The projected gains for the Arab-led Joint List and Ra’am represent a potentially significant moment in Israeli electoral politics. Exit polls published after voting on October 27, 2026, indicated that the two parties could collectively secure around 18 seats in the Knesset, although the final results may differ.
The figures reflect renewed participation among Arab voters, many of whom are dissatisfied with the government’s policies and its handling of violent crime in Arab communities. The strong turnout also signals that Arab citizens are seeking a greater role in shaping national decisions rather than remaining on the margins of Israeli politics.
The two Arab-led parties, however, do not have identical political objectives. Ra’am, led by Mansour Abbas, has demonstrated a willingness to cooperate with Jewish-led parties in exchange for progress on issues affecting Arab citizens, including public security and community development. The Joint List represents a more explicitly Palestinian nationalist political current and has indicated its willingness to help bring down Netanyahu’s government.
Both may favour a change in leadership, but their approaches to coalition negotiations could differ.
The 2021 precedent—and its limitations
Israel has already witnessed an important precedent. Following the 2021 election, Ra’am joined the coalition that brought together Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, becoming the first independent Arab-majority party to participate in an Israeli governing coalition.
The arrangement demonstrated that cooperation across political and communal divisions was possible when parliamentary arithmetic demanded compromise. However, the Bennett-Lapid government was short-lived, and its experience did not remove the ideological resistance to Arab parties within significant sections of Israeli politics.
Today, the political environment presents additional obstacles. Opposition leaders must consider their own voters, potential coalition partners and disagreements over Israel’s security policies and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Even if Arab parties offer parliamentary support, securing agreement on a common governing programme could prove difficult.
Democracy and the question of political legitimacy
The reluctance to cooperate with Arab parties raises a broader question about democratic representation. Arab citizens constitute roughly one-fifth of Israel’s population and possess the right to vote and elect representatives to parliament. Yet the refusal of several major Jewish-led parties to rely on those representatives for government formation limits their practical influence.
Supporters of cooperation argue that parliamentary representation should carry political weight regardless of a party’s ethnic or religious constituency. Critics of an alliance, meanwhile, point to disagreements over national identity, security and the definition of a legitimate governing coalition.
The central issue is whether opposition leaders can reconcile their commitment to democratic change with their reluctance to depend on Arab lawmakers. Their position will help determine whether the election produces a new government or simply another round of political deadlock.
What happens next?
Several outcomes remain possible: an opposition government supported by Arab parties, a minority administration dependent on external parliamentary backing, a broader unity arrangement or another election. Each carries political risks, and none is guaranteed.
For Eisenkot, the challenge is particularly acute. He must decide whether removing Netanyahu is important enough to justify cooperation that some of his prospective partners have rejected. For Arab leaders, the challenge is to convert electoral gains into tangible improvements for their constituents without sacrificing their political priorities.
The Arab parties may possess the numbers to influence Israel’s next government, but they do not yet have an assured route to power. Their projected electoral success has exposed the gap between parliamentary arithmetic and political acceptance. Unless major opposition leaders reconsider their positions, the opportunity to replace Netanyahu could remain unrealised despite a potentially sufficient majority in the Knesset.
NewsHasghag operates a 24/7 news bureau that tracks the real-time, social media-driven stories from India and around the world, keeping you ahead of the day’s key talking points. Our digital-first approach transforms storytelling through the seamless integration of data, interactive charts, video, and audio into every narrative
