Follow-ups - FiMED

Israel has entered an unprecedented political phase following the latest elections, after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lost his parliamentary majority, while opposition parties managed to assemble 67 seats in the new Knesset, against 53 for Likud and its allies from the far right and the Haredi parties. Yet this shift has not put an end to Netanyahu's executive power, as he can continue to run the government and take military and security decisions, even while unable to pass legislation or guarantee the formation of a new coalition.

According to a report published by "The Times of Israel", on Wednesday, the election results have produced an exceptional political equation: a prime minister who has lost his parliamentary majority, and an opposition that holds a numerical majority but has not yet managed to agree on an alternative government. This situation gives Netanyahu a chance to remain in office for weeks or months, while the opposition forces try to turn their parliamentary superiority into actual power.

The significance of this shift is not limited to the future of the current government, but extends to highly sensitive domestic files, foremost among them the inquiry into the failures of October 7, 2023, mandatory conscription for the Haredim, the future of the plan to weaken the judiciary, as well as the prospects of military escalation with Iran.

67 seats for the opposition.. a majority without a government

The six anti-Netanyahu parties won 67 of the Knesset's 120 seats, against 53 for the prime minister's camp, which includes Likud and its allies from the far right and the Haredi parties.

Although these figures give the opposition a clear parliamentary advantage, they do not automatically mean it has the ability to form a government. The 67 seats include 48 for parties with a Jewish majority, against 19 for the Joint List and the Ra'am party, whose electoral base is Arab, reflecting the scale of political and ideological differences within the opposition camp.

These forces face the challenge of reconciling their election pledges and their differing positions on religious, national and security issues, including the nature of the Arab parties' participation in any government coalition.

The opposition has thus acquired the numerical ability to obstruct Netanyahu's agenda and influence the running of the Knesset, but it still needs a more complex political agreement to form an alternative government.

Eisenkot leads the battle to change the Knesset Speaker and investigate October 7

Opposition parties have begun coordinating among themselves to make use of their new majority, and at the forefront of their steps is the effort to change Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, a Likud leader whose position gives him wide influence over the legislative agenda and the running of parliamentary sessions.

Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the Yashar party, which came first among the parties of the anti-Netanyahu camp, is leading the moves aimed at using the new majority to pass a set of legislative and political files.

Prominent among these files is the formation of an official commission of inquiry into the failures of the October 7, 2023 attack, which was led by Hamas, and the security, intelligence and military gaps it exposed in the Israeli system.

Netanyahu's government had repeatedly refused to push toward forming an independent official commission of inquiry, amid accusations that the ruling coalition was trying to postpone political accountability for the failures that preceded and accompanied the attack.

Eisenkot's bloc seeks to amend the existing law to allow the Knesset to form an official commission of inquiry through a simple majority vote, rather than limiting itself to the current legal mechanisms that require a government decision or specific procedures from the State Control Committee.

But this path is not without obstacles; the amendment requires passage through the stages of legislation, parliamentary readings and committee deliberations, and may also face legal objections from the legal advisers to the government and the Knesset, and possibly from the Supreme Court.

This file reflects that the repercussions of October 7 are no longer confined to security and military debate, but have turned into a main axis of the power struggle inside Israel, with political and popular sectors demanding that responsibilities for the failures be determined and those responsible held accountable.

Cancelling the plan to weaken the judiciary and imposing mandatory conscription

The opposition's agenda also includes cancelling parts of the legislation approved by Netanyahu's government as part of its plan to weaken the judicial system, which ignited a broad rift within Israeli society over the past years.

Prominent in this context is the amendment concerning the composition of the Judicial Selection Committee, which was scheduled to enter into force with the convening of the new Knesset on November 10.

Assaf Shapira, a researcher at the Israel Democracy Institute, believes that cancelling some of the legislation approved by the previous government may be easier than passing new laws, especially when it comes to cancelling arrangements that have not yet entered into force.

Eisenkot also intends to push for a law imposing military or national service on all Israelis, in a direct reference to the Haredi conscription issue, one of the most sensitive files within Israeli coalitions.

This proposal faces political, economic, demographic and constitutional complications, given the refusal of wide segments of the Haredi parties to subject religious seminary students to the same conscription rules applied to the rest of Israelis.

Some opposition forces are also studying the introduction of legislation concerning the term limit of the prime minister, or barring persons facing criminal trials from holding the office; these are proposals that could directly affect Netanyahu's future, but may face judicial objections if they are deemed to be personally directed against him.

10 November.. the start of the new majority's test

The new Knesset is scheduled to convene on November 10, after Israeli President Isaac Herzog grants one of the lawmakers the mandate to form a government, most likely Gadi Eisenkot, given that his party is the largest within the opposition camp.

The designate will have 28 days to form a government coalition, with the possibility of extending the deadline by an additional 14 days; if the attempt fails, the mandate can pass to another lawmaker, which may prolong the negotiations and open the door to the possibility of new elections.

During this period, the opposition can use its majority to change the Knesset speaker and form the Arrangements Committee, a temporary body responsible for organising the parliament's business, forming its temporary and special committees, and distributing their chairmanships and memberships.

But its control over the chairmanship of this committee may be temporary; if Eisenkot fails to form a government and the mandate later passes to Netanyahu, the committee's chairmanship could pass to one of the Likud lawmakers, which may weaken the opposition's ability to pass its agenda.

Consequently, the days and weeks following the convening of the Knesset will be a real test of the six parties' ability to maintain their cohesion, and to prevent their numerical majority from turning into a mere temporary alliance to bring down Netanyahu without agreement on an alternative.

The Most Dangerous Paradox: Netanyahu Keeps War Powers Despite Losing His Majority

Despite the erosion of his parliamentary position, Netanyahu does not lose his executive powers the moment he loses his majority. The Israeli government continues to function as a caretaker government until a new government is formed and wins the Knesset's confidence, and it retains broad powers over the conduct of military operations, national security and foreign policy..

The significance of this point lies in the fact that a caretaker government is not subject, under the legal interpretation cited in The Times of Israel's report, to exceptional restrictions barring it from taking military decisions or going to war. This means Netanyahu can legally issue a decision to launch an attack on Iran even in the absence of a parliamentary majority, subject to the usual procedures..

Reports have spoken of Netanyahu's desire to resume military action against Iran, raising questions about the possibility of exploiting the domestic political crisis in managing security files, or about the impact any regional escalation might have on negotiations to form a new government..

The report noted that the Israeli opposition might support a large-scale military operation against Iran if it is coordinated with the United States, while greater objections could arise if Israel takes the decision to attack on its own..

On the other hand, the caretaker government remains subject to additional legal restrictions in certain files, particularly senior appointments and exceptional spending. It must justify the urgent necessity of appointing a new chief of staff or heads of the Mossad and Shin Bet, and large, unanticipated expenditures are subject to additional legal scrutiny unless they are tied to urgent security needs..

Will the Political Crisis End the Legacy of Netanyahu's Government?

The election results reveal a decline in Netanyahu's ability to run the Israeli political system in the manner he relied on during his recent tenure, after the opposition came to hold a majority capable of controlling the speakership of the Knesset and its committees, opening investigation and accountability files, and attempting to repeal basic laws his government enacted..

But this decline does not mean Netanyahu has lost all his cards of power. The caretaker government's continuation gives him broad executive powers, and divisions within the opposition camp may prevent the formation of a stable government or give him a chance to regain the political initiative..

The October 7 issue stands out as the most sensitive test for the prime minister's future. Approving an official commission of inquiry could open the door to broad political and security accountability over the failures that preceded the attack, while continued obstruction of the investigation may keep the file a source of internal conflict and public pressure..

At the regional level, Netanyahu's continued possession of the power to take military decisions, despite losing his majority, poses a highly sensitive equation: a prime minister facing a parliamentary legitimacy crisis and complex negotiations over his political survival, yet still able to take decisions that could push the region into a new military confrontation..

Thus, the current Israeli crisis is not merely about seats shifting between the coalition and the opposition, but about a struggle to determine responsibility for the October 7 failures, the future of the judiciary and conscription, the limits of the prime minister's authority, and the nature of the military decisions a government that has lost its majority but not its tools of governance can take.