Eisenkot’s Best Option: Form a Government With Arab Parties

Israel stands at a historic crossroads. Gadi Eisenkot, having received President Isaac Herzog’s mandate to form the next government, has an opportunity to end Benjamin Netanyahu’s prolonged tenure, strengthen Israeli democracy, and chart a more promising course for the country. But achieving these goals will require political courage and a willingness to challenge longstanding prejudices and taboos.

Eisenkot’s best option is to form a government with the support of Arab parties. Although this approach will encounter substantial opposition, it offers a democratic and practical path toward a new government that can address Israel’s urgent domestic, security, and diplomatic challenges. Rejecting Arab cooperation simply because it is politically controversial could squander this historic opportunity.

The numbers make cooperation essential

The October 27 election left no political bloc with a majority in the 120-member Knesset. Netanyahu’s bloc won 53 seats, while the principal Zionist opposition parties supporting Eisenkot hold 48. Arab-led parties won the remaining 19 seats. A government needs the support of at least 61 lawmakers to secure a majority.

During consultations with Herzog, factions representing 67 lawmakers recommended Eisenkot as the next prime minister. This demonstrates the breadth of opposition to Netanyahu, but it does not guarantee a functioning coalition.

Eisenkot cannot govern with the Zionist opposition alone. He must either secure Arab-party support, reach a difficult agreement with ultra-Orthodox parties over military and national service, or consider a unity arrangement that could compromise his political objectives.

Arab-party cooperation offers the clearest opportunity to establish a government committed to meaningful change. Eisenkot should therefore negotiate seriously with Ra’am and the Joint List, seeking a written agreement that provides dependable parliamentary support.

A fundamental democratic principle is also at stake. Arab citizens of Israel are citizens of the country, entitled to equal political representation and participation in its institutions.

Their elected representatives should not be treated as inherently illegitimate partners in government. In a democracy, the legitimacy of a political party should be judged by its conduct, policies, and willingness to abide by democratic rules—not simply by the ethnic or religious identity of its constituents.

Israel’s Declaration of Independence promises complete equality of social and political rights to all inhabitants, irrespective of religion, race, or sex. Cooperation between Jewish and Arab lawmakers would put that commitment into practice.

In 2021, Ra’am participated in the coalition that helped bring Netanyahu’s government to an end. That precedent demonstrated that Arab-party participation in national politics is possible, even amid profound disagreements over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The current opportunity should be judged on its merits, not rejected because it challenges established political conventions.

A government that addresses the needs of all citizens

Arab-party participation could also help address serious domestic problems that have received insufficient attention.

Arab communities face pressing challenges involving violent crime, organized criminal networks, inadequate infrastructure, housing shortages, employment opportunities, and disparities in public services. A government that depends on Arab representatives would have a stronger incentive to address these problems through effective budgets, policing, education, and economic development.

These are not merely Arab concerns. Reducing crime and strengthening economic opportunity benefit Israeli society as a whole.

Cooperation could also help improve relations between Jewish and Arab citizens. Political leaders have a responsibility to demonstrate that shared citizenship can provide a basis for practical cooperation, even when communities disagree over national identity, security, and the future of the occupied territories.

Such a partnership would not eliminate these disagreements. It would demonstrate that they need not prevent progress on matters of common concern.

Cooperation need not compromise Israel’s security. Critics will argue that Eisenkot, a former Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, should not rely on Arab parties because of disagreements over Hamas, military operations, and Israel’s national identity.

These concerns must be addressed seriously. Israel faces genuine security threats, and any government must protect its citizens and maintain a capable military. Arab-party participation should not require Eisenkot to compromise essential security responsibilities.

But disagreement with Israeli government policies does not automatically make Arab lawmakers unsuitable parliamentary partners. A democratic coalition can establish clear, mutually agreed principles: protecting Israeli citizens, opposing terrorism, respecting the law, and conducting national-security policy through responsible government institutions.

Eisenkot should also insist on a constructive commitment to Israel’s existence as a Jewish and democratic state, while recognizing the equal civil and political rights of its Arab citizens.

Negotiations should focus on practical commitments and areas of agreement, not demands that either side abandon its identity or every deeply held position.

A chance to improve Israel’s international standing

Israel’s future depends not only on military strength but also on the quality of its democracy, its international relationships, and its ability to pursue a credible diplomatic strategy.

A government supported by Jewish and Arab lawmakers could show that Israel can cooperate politically across communal divisions. It could also strengthen efforts to reduce discrimination, combat extremist violence against Palestinians, and restore confidence in democratic institutions.

Such a government should pursue a realistic diplomatic approach that protects Israel’s security while working toward a negotiated two-state resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

This would not guarantee peace or end international criticism of Israel. But it could help establish a more constructive direction, improve relations with potential regional partners, and demonstrate that Israel is prepared to confront difficult political realities rather than perpetuate an unsustainable status quo.

The obstacles are formidable. Some potential coalition partners oppose relying on Arab parties, while Arab lawmakers will demand meaningful commitments, not symbolic gestures. Eisenkot will have to negotiate carefully, establish clear rules for parliamentary cooperation, and ensure that the government can function effectively.

One possible arrangement would involve Arab parties supporting the government from outside the cabinet under a formal agreement covering budgets, legislation, and confidence votes. This could provide a practical compromise for lawmakers unwilling to serve in a coalition with Arab parties.

Israel’s Arab citizens, who constitute roughly one-fifth of its population, have repeatedly demonstrated that they support the State of Israel despite their support for the Palestinian cause.

They didn’t rise up against Israel during the 1956 Sinai Campaign, the June 1967 Six-Day War, or 1973’s Yom Kippur War. In fact, in 1973, when massive numbers of IDF reservists were called to the front, many Israeli Arabs volunteered to help keep Israel’s civilian economy going.

There also was no widespread uprising among them following Israel’s response to October 7th. As a 2024 report issued by Tel Aviv University’s Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies bluntly stated, “Israeli Arab political leaders unanimously condemned Hamas’ actions on October 7.”

Eisenkot should explore every viable arrangement, but he must not allow political prejudice or inflexible coalition red lines to determine the country’s future.

The choice is ultimately between perpetuating political deadlock and building a government capable of addressing Israel’s most urgent challenges.

Eisenkot should seize this opportunity to unite Jewish and Arab lawmakers around democratic principles, shared civic responsibilities, national security, and a more hopeful future. Forming a government with Arab-party support would be more than a way to replace Netanyahu. It would be a significant step toward an Israel that lives up to its founding promise of equality, strengthens its democracy, and seeks peace while safeguarding its security.

The time for political courage is now.