Israeli electoral politics is composed of a variety of parties representing many different interest groups. Large and small political organizations, which may be categorized into religious, ethnic origin and ideological groups, have struggled to exist in the Knesset. The struggle continues among political parties entering the Knesset who are forced to negotiate terms and policies in order to form viable coalitions. However, this sometimes turns into a political deadlock when parties insist on incompatible requirements, as was the case after the April elections. This is the weakest aspect of Israeli politics. It does not seem possible for the government to sustain consistent policies within a divided society and a divided political environment. As a result, Israeli people are going to the electoral polls again on the 17th of September because of unresolved coalition bargaining after the April elections.

Netanyahu, who was accused of corruption and abuse of office before the first elections this year, was able to gain a close share of votes against the Gantz-Lapid alliance. But he was confronted by the secular right and the reaction of former coalition partner Lieberman because of his soft attitude towards the exemption of religious Jews from compulsory military service in the country. Netenyahu’s two indispensable priorities at the end of the elections were to form a coalition and to enact an immunity law. But the concessions he made to religious Jewish parties led the country to a re-election.

As before every general election, national security discussions were at the center of campaign advertisements and discussions before both the April and September elections. As a classic Netanyahu election tactic, announcements regarding the approval of illegal settlements in the West Bank and the escalation of the conflicts in Gaza became routine. Furthermore, Iraq and Lebanon were also affected by the Israeli attacks, while attacks on Syria continued. In other words, when the situation gets hard for Netanyahu and Likud, particularly before elections, party announcements and policies tend to be even more hardline and aggressive. 

Turkey as an old but fashionable target

A tweet shared by former transport minister Yisrael Katz, who was appointed Israel’s foreign minister just two months ago, has been on the agenda for some time while campaign tensions peak just one month before the elections. This tweet, which was shared on August 26 via Arabic and Hebrew translations, clearly targeted Turkey and its international legal rights. The tweet reads “I instructed the foreign ministry to halt Turkey’s incitement and subversion in East Jerusalem.”

First of all, these statements provoked negative reactions from many Israeli twitter users and also brought reactions from the Turkish public. Many Israeli and Turkish experts believe that this statement was made to strengthen Likud’s ground within the right bloc. But actually, the situation is a bit more complicated. In the last few years, the government of Israel has become displeased with Turkey’s cultural influence both on the Arab and Jewish population of Israel. Even Turkish television serials are admired and watched by many Israelis; so much so it was recently dealt with as an issue of cultural hegemony by media organizations close to Likud.

Turkey’s activities in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem can be defined as humanitarian aid, historical restoration, education, and cultural activities. There have been many news reports and articles confirming these activities published by Israeli sources in recent years. The most important fact in relation to this issue is that Turkey’s activities are well known by the Israeli authorities. However, there are two main reasons why creating a bad perception of Turkey has been a focus of debates before the Israeli elections. The first one is the efforts of Likud cadres to prioritize security policies for reelection. The second one is the need to increase the personal political maneuverability of Yisrael Katz, who has received criticism from circles close to the United States and even by US foreign policy staff.

Diversionary election tactics by Likud

Netanyahu’s failure to form a coalition government, the renewal of elections, and the attempt to cancel the new elections once the negative results of electoral surveys became known, is proof that Likud will pursue every possibility available to them without hesitation before the elections on the 17th of September.

Furthermore, attacks on Gaza and Syria are being used as part of Likud’s election propaganda, as well as announcements increasing permits for illegal settlements in the West Bank. As the elections approach, Lebanon and Iraq have also been targeted. Furthermore, investigations into Netanyahu for corruption and bribery, which will likely result in prosecution, remains on the agenda. The trial of the Minister of Social Welfare Haim Katz for fraud and abuse of office and investigations into critical tenders during Yisrael Katz’s helm of the ministry of transport are other issues that make Likud’s election difficult. Katz has been criticized for giving Haifa’s commercial port and many rail systems to Chinese companies. This is despite the objections of the U.S whose 6th fleet is anchored in the military base section of Haifa Port. This is the most important external dynamic that has pushed Netanyahu in these elections. As Netanyahu and his party are moving towards the election with this challenges, Katz’s tweet needs to be considered in this context.

When we look at Katz’s profile, we see that beyond his long-lasting political comradeship with Netanyahu, he is a publicly criticized figure with aggressive attitudes towards Palestinians going back to his military and college life. Although he is a Likud member that Netanyahu cannot easily dismiss, he has attracted suspicion as the former transportation and intelligence minister because of the million dollars tenders he awarded to China. Furthermore, Katz is not hesitating to screen views hostile to Turkey for personal political interests. But it is a matter of curiosity how seriously this approach will continue as Israel receives two billion dollars in annual imports from Turkey and the Ben-Gurion Airport is connected to many parts of the world via Istanbul Airport both in terms of passengers and logistics.

The current frequency of interaction between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu often raises questions. In particular, analysts stress the special “chemistry” of relations between the two statesmen, also stressing that “Putin supported Netanyahu” on the eve of the parliamentary elections held in Israel on April 9. It is difficult to deny the importance of personal contacts in bilateral relations. However, the decisive factor is still the logic of bilateral interests and the existence of common interests and ideological attitudes.

It may not be well known that Israel appeared on the world map largely due to the support that it received from the Soviet Union. After the establishment of official relations in 1948, diplomatic relations between Israel and Russia were broken twice – a unique situation – to be fully restored only in 1991.

During the period of the late USSR, Israel, as the “main ally outside NATO,” was viewed in Russia as a U.S. puppet in the Middle East. At the same time, within its Middle East policy, the USSR was approaching Arab countries with noticeable bias.

The USSR’s obstruction of Jewish immigration led to the adoption of the notorious Jackson-Vanik amendment by the United States in 1974, restricting U.S.-Soviet trade. Despite the fact that free immigration from the USSR was allowed in 1985, the Amendment was canceled in 2012. Moreover, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the formation of a number of new states, including the Russian Federation, led to a mass exodus of Jewish citizens to the United States, Germany, and Israel. In order to compete for qualified Soviet expats (engineers, doctors, scientists, intellectuals and many others), the Israeli special service “Native,” specially created for the repatriation of Jews in 1951, notably enlarged its activity.

As is known, after the U.S., in some areas, Israel is the first innovative country in the world. It is difficult to deny the fact that in many respects this was made possible thanks to the successful repatriation policy of the citizens of the USSR/Russia to Israel. Nowadays, the Russian-speaking diaspora of Israel, whose number is around 1 million, has an influential force in the country. A significant proportion of the cabinet and Knesset deputies are Russian-speaking Israelis.

On the other hand, the image of Israel has undergone a marked improvement in Russia, compared to a complete rejection of the Jewish state in the Soviet period. The fact that Russia did not support the relocation of the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to the “new old capital” Jerusalem and that it did not support the recognition of the Golan Heights as Israeli territory did not prevent dialogue between Russia and Israel. In the end, the State of Israel did not recognize the independence of Ossetia, Abkhazia and the return of the Crimea peninsula to Russia.

The image of Israel has undergone a marked improvement in Russia, compared to a complete rejection of the Jewish state in the Soviet period.

There are several principal circumstances for Russia in its consistent effort to build a healthy relationship with Israel.

First of all, Israel did not join the U.S.-imposed anti-Russia sanctions, which found widespread support in the West. This allowed for both parties to have full-fledged trade and economic relations, especially in the high-tech sphere, which are not in the shadows of any reciprocal economic restrictions.

Second, Russia and Israel are on the same side of history in assessing the events of the Second World War, acting jointly against attempts by a number of countries, especially young EU members, to re-write history in order to justify or completely eliminate Nazism and the Holocaust from history.

In this regard, it suffices to note that from 2018, Israel began to celebrate Victory Day over fascist Germany on May 9. The celebration of Victory Day in the Second World War takes place in Israel on the same day as it does in Russia. Israeli soldiers not only participate in various celebrations in their country on this occasion but they are also honored guests at the annual Victory Parade on the Red Square in Moscow.

Thirdly, an agreement on visa-free entry has been in effect between Russia and Israel since 2008. For obvious reasons, in Russia Israel is perceived, without exaggeration, as the main destination of religious pilgrimage. In addition, Israel made an obvious bet on Russian patients for its medical services sector. The large influx of Russian patients led to the formation of a special segment of the healthcare industry, targeting Russian-speaking clients.

The fact that Israel did not join the U.S.-imposed anti-Russia sanctions, and the fact that Russia and Israel are on the same side of history in assessing the events of WWII as well as the visa-free entry between the two countries have allowed bilateral relations to flourish. 

Despite the fact that there are enough reasons for disagreement between Russia and Israel in the Middle East, these three listed circumstances, coupled with a large Russian-speaking diaspora in Israel, allows for the two states to build working relationships.

Russia was an active participant in the process of concluding a nuclear deal with Iran, despite the fact that from an Israeli point of view, Iran is a direct threat to the existence of the Jewish state. In addition, it is necessary to note that Iran, along with Russia and Turkey, is an important participant of the Astana process on the Syrian Civil War, with whom Russia is engaged in an active political dialogue. However, as we see, Russian diplomacy quite successfully balances its relations with Iran and Israel.

Even the incident where the Syrian air defense system shot down Russian II-20 reconnaissance aircraft in September 2018 did not lead to a deterioration of Russia-Israel relations. This was despite the fact that the Russian state’s official rhetoric was that the plane was put under fire as a result of provocation arranged by the Israeli Air Force.

Russia was an active participant in the process of concluding a nuclear deal with Iran, despite the fact that from an Israeli point of view, Iran is a direct threat to the existence of the Jewish state. 

Nevertheless, Israel is perceived in the Russian political establishment as an important partner in the Middle East, balancing relations between Russia and Arab countries. At the same time, the Russian leadership positively notes that Israel demonstrates an understanding of Russian interests in spite of its strategic relations with the U.S. and NATO. It should be repeated that the fundamental point for Russia is that Israel shares the basic ideological attitudes with Russia and in the Russian case seeks to pursue a more independent foreign policy from the U.S.

Israel is also a valuable trade and economic partner for Russia. The trade over between the two countries in 2018 amounted to around 2.7 billion dollars, where exports of goods from Russia stood at 1.95 billion dollars, and exports from Israel at 760 million dollars.

Beyond these figures, it is important to note that Israel is a partner of Russia, both potential and acting, in a number of innovative areas including defense technologies, agriculture, medicine, and computer technologies. Russia is quite serious about technological cooperation with Israel and about adopting the advanced Israeli experience in building an innovative economy.

Israel is perceived in the Russian political establishment as an important partner in the Middle East, balancing relations between Russia and Arab countries. 

This context of relations, as well as the intensity of the processes in the Middle East, primarily in Syria and around Iran, lead to incessant contact between the two countries at the highest level. Over the past 10 years, the number of meetings between President Putin and Prime Minister Netanyahu reached 14 – which is more than the number of meetings conducted in the previous history of bilateral relations.

This gave many observers reason to talk about the special relationship between the two heads of state – Putin and Netanyahu – but the truth is that whatever relations are at a personal level, they cannot have a decisive contribution to bilateral relations without a solid fundament of mutual interests.

Let us list again, the multi-million Russian-speaking diaspora in Israel and the not so numerous but influential Jewish diaspora in Russia, trade and economic relations, the same worldview regarding the Second World War and the fight against modern Nazism in the West, as well as religious and historical ties exist between Israel and Russia.

At the same time, there are many channels of communication and dialogue between the two countries: both official and unofficial, as well as the media. The Israeli point of view, in particular, on the processes occurring in the Middle East, is constantly present at the central channels of Russian media and therefore is well known among Russians.

In conclusion, it is worth noting that Russian diplomacy seeks to establish balanced, equidistance relations with all countries, including the Middle East. It can be said that despite the difficulty and sometimes impossibility of this task, Russian diplomacy has certain successes on this matter, as can be seen in the case of Israel.

After announcing the final results of the elections in Israel, it is highly expected that the new government will be even more radical in terms of its foreign policy and its relations to the Arab citizens in Israel – of which a majority boycotted the elections. The boycott was retaliation to the campaign against Arab politicians and the Netanyahu alliance with anti-Arab extremists, who have been calling for a new law to accept Israel as the homeland of Jewish people alone.

The results indicate that Israeli society is slowly moving towards the right and that religious parties are gaining more votes compared to leftist and traditional parties, which have historically been more open to a peace process with Palestinians – such as the Labour Party, which has decreased its sphere of influence in the political realm after gaining only 6 seats.

In this election, where the competition took place between two right-wing parties, the religious and ultra-orthodox parties will have the final say in forming Netanyahu’s new government, with chances of supporting any expected decisions for ‘annexing’ lands from the West Bank and for upgrading more racist slogans and treatments against Arabs.

Sources inside the White House have said that the expected “Deal of the Century” will include a state of limited sovereignty on 90% of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. 

There are also speculations that the so-called “Deal of the Century” will start its process immediately after forming the new Israeli government, as U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton said on Wednesday that the U.S. administration will roll out its long-awaited peace plan in the “very near future.” The Trump administration gave precious gifts to Netanyahu, who thanked Trump’s “tremendous support” for Israel, including the Golan recognition, and his stance against the Iranian regime, including his decision to place the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps on America’s terrorist blacklist.

Sources inside the White House have said that the expected deal with the Palestinians will include a state of limited sovereignty on 90% of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Some land occupied by Israel in 1948 can also be added to it. Further, Israeli forces will be deployed in critical zones in the West Bank. Daniella Weiss, a leader in the far-right (partners to Netanyahu), said that a plan of an additional 1.5 million Jewish citizens will be proposed to the government. The deal will also reject the right of return for Palestinian refugees and will compensate Jordan for giving them land, housing and granting them nationality, with a sum of USD40 billion.

This unlimited support from Trump’s administration to Netanyahu is combined by the reality of a divided Arab front, as Arab leaders are secretly scrambling to gain stronger relations with Israel and Trump to form a front against Iran. This paves the way for the Israeli far-right to draw the new map of Israel, on the expense of Palestinians and Muslim rights in Palestine and control over holy sites. 

An unexpected move by the new far-right Israeli government regarding the status of Al-Quds or the annexation of new Palestinian lands should be faced with a solid and viable opposition from the whole Muslim world, with a possible lead from Turkey and Iran.

The election result in Israel should alert decision makers in the Muslim world, anticipating the next Israeli move towards the Muslim holy places in Palestine, as the so-called Deal of the Century is not far from the process of making alliances in the Middle East. This is especially relevant in regards to re-drawing maps of influence and allowing Israel to gain the upper hand in coalition-making as Gulf countries are ready to make concessions for Israel and the Trump administration in return for containing Iran’s influence in the region. More, Egypt is ready for an increasing Israeli role in exchange for an extended coalition in relation to gas projects in the Eastern Mediterranean.

This soft regional pressure on Israel and the more advantageous position it gained during the last decade empowered the far-right wing in the last election, as giving concessions to the Palestinian and Israeli Arabs within the Green Line has increasingly become an unrealistic option. However, the unexpected move from the new far-right Israeli government regarding the status of Al-Quds or the annexation of new Palestinian lands should be faced with a solid and viable opposition from the whole Muslim world, with a possible lead from Turkey and Iran.

Since the beginning of Trump’s presidency, the U.S. has put enormous effort to contain Iran in both political and economic terms. During his election campaign, Trump pledged to tear the nuclear deal (JCPOA) and his anti-Iran tone was pretty harsh. After his election, he started to realize his election promises one-by-one. His attitude towards international acts and agreements was uncompromising. The U.S. withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement, Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and UNESCO in 2017. JCPOA, which was formalized in 2015 by P5+1 countries and which began to be implemented in early 2016, was a target too. JCPOA was also binding in terms of international law since it was ratified as a UN Security Council resolution.

Trump’s general policy choice reflects a radical rupture from the priorities of the Obama era, and this is not an exception in the case of the Middle East. The president’s Middle East policy centers around various crucial themes. The most significant of them is containing Iran. For Trump, Iran has expanded its regional influenced during the Obama era thanks to the “worst deal ever made,” also known as the nuclear deal. According to Trump, by giving Iran lifeline support, JCPOA has paved the way for Iran’s “terrorist activities” along the region. Therefore, this should be stopped.

With the Trump administration, the U.S. government has launched a regime change discourse against Iran. The president has employed numerous anti-Iran figures in his team such as Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, Rudy Giuliani, and others.

The U.S. President’s policy is a pillar for other policies related to the Middle East. Saudi Arabia and other anti-Iran Gulf countries desperately seek Trump’s support in their endeavor to confront Iran. In this direction, the U.S. makes billion dollar arms deals with Saudi Arabia and supports every action against Iran in the region. Saudi Arabia’s Qatar move, which was directly against Iran and Turkey, also received U.S. support. The coordinated efforts of Israel and the U.S. function to undermine Iran’s political and economic power. Accordingly, I argue that Trump’s Iran policy has two dimensions – both politic and economic.

The nuclear deal and economic war against Iran

On May 8, Donald Trump announced that the United States has pulled out of the nuclear deal. He also announced that sanctions will be re-imposed by the U.S. soon. The first round of U.S. sanctions came into effect on July 7. These sanctions were primarily targeting Iran’s trade with precious metals, its import of auto parts, and commercial passenger aircrafts. But the most striking sanctions were imposed on November 5. The aim of these sanctions was to cut all oil exports from Iran and devastate the country’s economy. In addition to that, 700 individuals and companies were put on the sanctions list. In order to avoid serious backlash, the U.S. granted waivers to 8 countries, including Turkey. However, these countries will also be expected to cut their oil trade with Iran in a short period of time.

Trump was not alone in his campaign against Iran. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, also fully supported his decision of exiting the JCPOA. More, prior to Trump’s decision, he tried to persuade the international community that “Iran has lied” about its nuclear activities and that it “cheated.” Netanyahu, in his televised public performance a week before Trump’s announcement of U.S. withdrawal from the deal, claimed that Iran had lied when it said that it never chased after a nuclear weapon. He added that, “Even after the deal was made, Iran continued to preserve and expand its nuclear know-how for use at a later date.” His claim was based on an alleged secret operation conducted by MOSSAD to acquire “atomic archive documents” in a secret warehouse in Tehran. Netanyahu’s efforts were not limited to this performance. Again in September, when he stepped to address the UN General Assembly, he claimed that Israel had discovered another secret nuclear facility in Tehran and that he had proof of it. According to Netanyahu, Iran had equipment for developing a nuclear bomb in this facility.

Regime change discourse, Arab NATO, and the Warsaw Summit

With the Trump administration, the U.S. government has launched a regime change discourse against Iran. The president has employed numerous anti-Iran figures in his team, such as Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, Rudy Giuliani, and others. The State Department’s and Secretary Pompeo’s Twitter accounts work vigorously to disseminate regime change discourse among Iranians, be it diaspora or those living in the homeland. In addition to that, in 2011, the U.S. had launched its first Farsi language Twitter account in order to address Farsi-speaking Iranians directly. Pompeo and his team began to use this account to promulgate their position against Iran. All these efforts are signs of a public relation campaign to create a dominant discourse, which would produce an intended change in the Iranian government’s behavior.

Iranian women took off their hijabs and hang them on a stick during their protests in Tehran. Some Iranian diaspora, however, questioned the authenticity of these protests and the integrity of Masih Alinejad for having ties with U.S. neo-cons.

In this endeavor, the U.S. government takes any opportunity it can. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo met with Masih Alinejad, a famous Iranian-American social media activist. Alinejad runs the #whitewednesday campaign, which encourages women to take off their hijabs in Iran on Wednesdays and record it with a camera. Women share these videos on social media and Alinejad also promotes them on her own Twitter account. These videos go viral and show how Iranian women resist imposed dress codes. During the protests in January 2018, the Iranian women that took off their hijabs and hang them on a stick began to be called the “daughters of Revolution Street,” since their protests occurred on the revolution street of Tehran. However, some of the Iranian diaspora have questioned the authenticity of these protests and the integrity of Masih Alinejad for having ties with U.S. neo-cons. Pompeo’s meeting with Alinejad empowered the arguments of their critics. This move apparently shows how Alinejad’s campaign functions in a certain way in the regime change rhetoric of the U.S. administration.

Another policy that the Trump administration has adopted is trying to pull other countries on their sides against Iran. In that vein, the U.S. and Israel organized an anti-Iran summit in Warsaw on February 14. 60 countries were represented at the Summit. However, EU states sent their low-level diplomats and it disrupted the summit’s intended anti-Iran character. Robert Giuliani, former New York Mayor and one of Trump’s lawyers, said that he was representing Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) at the summit. MEK is designated as a terrorist organization by Iran. It was once listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S. in 1997, but was then de-listed in 2012. In the recent years, Trump’s team has been coordinating with MEK members and their presence was so visible in so many occasions, including during the Warsaw Summit.

Robert Giuliani, former New York Mayor and one of Trump’s lawyers, said that he was representing Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK) at the anti-Iran summit in February in Warsaw. MEK is designated as a terrorist organization by Iran.

One of the functions of the Warsaw Summit was to create a base for a new regional security alliance against Iran. This has been articulated as the “Arab NATO” by some U.S. officials. Officially known as the Middle East Strategic Alliance (MESA), this planned organization would contain Iran militarily through six Gulf countries plus Egypt and Jordan. Netanyahu especially took the chance to bolster his anti-Iran position and convince other Arab countries “to advance the common interest of the war with Iran.” According to Mike Pence, along with Netanyahu, they “broke bread with leaders from Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.” Given the diplomatic gap between Israel and other Arab countries (it only has formal diplomatic ties with Egypt and Jordan), Netanyahu’s efforts were reflecting a significant re-orientation towards Arab countries in order to confront Iran.

Turkey’s stance

Turkey’s approach to the U.S. policy on Iran has not been changed from the very beginning. President Erdogan repetitively emphasized that Turkey needs Iranian oil and gas and that there are no alternatives for Turkey. Erdogan also condemned the re-imposed sanctions on the ground that they are against international law. The president’s remarks have been reiterated by a number of senior figures in the government. Despite the fact that the U.S. and Israel will increase their pressure on Iran, Turkey is likely to preserve its position.

The elections to take place in Israel were originally scheduled for November 2019. However, Trump’s decision to withdraw from Syria shifted the sensitive domestic political balance coalition between partners and therefore snap elections became inevitable. When Netanyahu noticed that he will not be able to obtain support for the Tall Bill proposal (military service exemption for Haredi students) from the Knesset, he had to declare the decision for snap elections to be held on 9 April.

This is not an unusual incident for Israeli politics. As can be remembered, the last elections were not held on the date they were scheduled either. But this time, something is different. New parties have been formed, some alliances have split, and new alliances are being formed. The opposition is working hard to confront Netanyahu’s Likud and overthrow him from the prime ministerial position. Netanyahu and his colleagues are obviously working to maintain their tenure.

Although the previous elections in Israel were not held on time, this time things are different. New parties have been formed, alliances have split and new alliances are being formed. The opposition is working hard to confront Netanyahu’s Likud and overthrow him from the prime ministerial position. 

While there are many issues on the political agenda, the Israeli opposition are especially mobilizing on Netanyahu’s corruption scandals and the rumors surrounding possible prosecution. This issue is Netanyahu’s weakest point and therefore this pressure is making him act irrationally and disproportionately. 

Does Netanyahu have a chance?

Although most of the polls still show Netanyahu to have at least 30 seats in the next Knesset, it is possible to say that he is not comfortable because his rivals are strengthening in power day-by-day. When the seats of other coalition parties are added, Netanyahu can reach a sufficient number to form the next government, with the contribution of Kulanu, Shas, and UTC. This means around 58-61 chairs, which is enough to gain a majority if everything goes right. But especially after Avigdor Liberman, chair of Yisrael Beitenu, resigned from the Ministry of Defense and left the coalition, the political environment has begun to reverse against Netanyahu. In fact, at this time everybody thought that the Israeli PM had overcome distressed times. However, Lieberman’s resignation ignited other initiatives coming from Bennett&Shaked.

Although Bennet slammed Netanyahu for the Gaza deal that he made with Hamas in 2018, and claimed that they were going to follow closely as to whether Netanyahu is really acting in the interest of Israel, the PM was able to overthrow these charges and continue with his politics with no harm. However, on December 19, the U.S. decision to withdraw from Syria broke the last resistance and Netanyahu had to announce a snap election. Due to the fact that both coalition and opposition parties noticed Netanyahu’s policy depended on Trump, they don’t have to endure Netanyahu anymore.

While Netanyahu is still the favorite candidate for the election, his last attempt to form an alliance with Bennet’s old party, Jewish Home, which merged with Kahanist Jewish Power (Otzama Yehudit) may cause a loss of centrist votes as some former members of Jewish Power have been prosecuted and arrested in the past. More, Kach Party, which was formed before Jewish Power, was declared as an illegal terrorist organization by Israel due to its involvement in the murder of 29 Palestinians in the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron in 1994.

If these swing votes do swing to the opposition, this would be vitally crucial for Netanyahu and may even cause him to lose the election. And when the AG Mendelbilt indict him before the election, everything may change fundamentally. It may even be possible not to see Netanyahu again in Israeli politics. Just like Olmert…

Who’s in the opposition bloc?

Before the appearance of Gantz, there was just the Zionist Union and Yair Lapid’s Yesh Atid as main opposition parties. Of course, we can add Joint List and Meretz to this list too, but they don’t have a game-changing effect. It is possible to state that an election would have been too easy for Netanyahu if the Gantz factor was absent.

Unavoidably, there is a crucial question that keeps emerging: Who is Gantz and where is he obtaining this power from? When the new party was established by former Chief of Staff, Benny Gantz, nobody knew anything about him. Now, Gantz’s party is the strongest party that can challenge Netanyahu’s Likud in the race to form the next government.

Who is Israel’s new popular politician Gantz and where is he obtaining his power from? 

First, some rumors spread that Gantz’s ideology belong to the leftist political spectrum. However, we know him as Chief of Staff during the Gaza attack in 2014. Gantz was very close to Netanyahu as the highest ranking officer and has been said to have approved this conflict. While there might be some differences in their approaches about the killings, they cooperated to kill approximately 2000 Palestinians.

After Gantz retired from the army in 2015, he did not reveal his political stance. However, when the snap election decision emerged, mainstream media and elites expressed their support and hope in him. After he gathered guarantees, he clarified his political position as one in the center. Hereby, the new Resilience Party was formed. This name depicts Gantz’s optimal approach to Israel’s security and capacity. Because the original name of the party is “Hosen Leyisrael” in Hebrew, it has a dual meaning in English. The first meaning is resistance, and the second, resilience. After Gantz completed this first stage, he began to try to explain how his party differs from Netanyahu’s Likud. Now, current polls show that Resilience’s votes are close to Likud’s. It can be observed that he is about to successfully reach his first goal.

The other significant development occurred in the deadline of party registrations with the Central Elections Committee. Gantz and Lapid declared that they decided to merge a deal with the participation of two former chiefs of staff, Moshe Yaalon and Gabi Ashkenazi. The new formation was named Blue and White, referring to the colors of the Israeli flag. After merging together, some polls showed that this initiative was ahead of Likud. Their claims about Palestine is giving hope to many Israelis. However, recent events will allow for Netanyahu to shape the ultimate result. Voters will decide on whether to continue with Netanyahu and his corruption cases.

The other opposition party is the New Right, led by Naftali Bennett and Ayelet Shaked. They were the former leads of the current coalition partner, Jewish Home, but they left the party after the early election decision. The New Right is locating itself between the conservatives and centrists. In fact, they are open to all sides and may cooperate according to who will win. In spite of leaving the coalition, they have stated that they would not refuse to join the new government if Netanyahu invites them.

In addition, there were two major alliances in Israeli politics, but unfortunately both of them collapsed during the election process. One of them is the leftist Zionist Union (Labour and Hatnua) and the other is the Joint Arab List (Balad, Hadash, Ta’al and Ra’am).

After Isaac Herzog was selected as the head of the Jewish agency he had to leave from the party due to some disputes that occurred between its new leader Avi Gabbay and his partner Tzipi Livni. The Zionist Union has been losing too much power since 2015, and Gabbay was never accepted as a leader like Herzog was. Although Livni demanded to be the head of the alliance, her request was also not met. During this period some journalists also mentioned the possibility of a new future coalition between Livni and Lapid, but that Livni did not receive an official offer, and therefore retired from politics. Hereby, former minister of foreign affairs Livni, while desiring to take part in the government again, lost her own party and had to end her political career.

Is change possible in Israel after the elections?

The latest polls show that the election race will pass between two main political blocs – on the one side, current prime minister, whose tenure has not been interrupted for the last 10 years, his Likud and longtime comrades (Kulanu, Jewish Home, Shash, UTC), and on the other, Blue and White Party lead by Gantz and Lapid. It can be stated that it seems like Netanyahu’s bloc is one step ahead. However, when AG declared to indict Netanyahu due to his three corruption cases, this advantage disappeared. Now, Blue and White may take advantage of this situation and mobilize it as a chance to overthrow Netanyahu.

Whoever will become the next prime minister, the basic fundamentals of Israel’s domestic and foreign policy are not going to change fundamentally. Some negligible issues may differ if Gantz & Lapid win. If the next government decide to construct a deal with the Palestinian side, then this is when we can expect some change. While Gantz’s last statements gives us some hope in this regard, we cannot be assured without seeing these promises being fulfilled.