To replace this government, think coalitions, not party size

Imagine waking up on Wednesday, October 28, the day after the elections, to the surprising news that the Joint List, comprising Arab factions, has emerged as the largest in the Knesset. It won 18 seats, one more than the next two parties, Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar and Likud, headed by Benajamin Netanyahu.

Once the Central Elections Committee announces the official results, Israel’s president begins consultations with the parties on who should be called upon to form a new government. But ask many Israelis, and these consultations are pointless – they believe that the president is obliged to task the leader of the largest party with forming the next government. And so, the task goes to MK Yousef Jabareen.

Where did I get this outlandish scenario, you ask? And what on earth am I smoking? Exactly what those who insist on voting for Gadi Eisenkot so that he can form the next government are smoking. They are ignoring not only the law but also a precedent that many remember.

After the 2009 election, Kadima, led by Tzipi Livni, was the largest party in the Knesset. It had one more seat than the next-largest party, Likud, led by Netanyahu.

Did the president ask Livni, as leader of the largest party, to form a government? No. Sixty-five members of the Knesset, a majority of Israel’s parliament, recommended that the president give the task to the leader of the second-largest party. The president concluded that he had the better chance of forming a government capable of winning the Knesset’s confidence, and gave him the mandate.

What would the president do if the two leading candidates in next week’s elections each received the recommendations of 60 MKs? Good question. There is no precedent, the law gives neither candidate priority, and it even allows the president to assign the task to another member of the Knesset. But if the result is a deadlock, both sides may well try to persuade MKs to switch their allegiance, offering inducements of one kind or another.

Voters should therefore ask themselves which of the leading candidates has more experience making promises and offering tempting inducements. They should also, with due caution and without casting aspersions on anyone, consider which of the parties in the anti-government bloc includes more candidates who are relatively unknown, leaving us unable to predict how they might behave when presented with an irresistable offer. It is also worth examining which lists include candidates who have previously expressed support for the incumbent government’s positions on major issues such as the judicial overhaul, and who might therefore be more open to switching.

I would be delighted to see Gadi Eisenkot, a decent and honorable man, in the prime minister’s office. His party includes capable people who could fill key positions and help bring our sad country back on track. Nevertheless, I will vote for the Democrats rather than for Yashar. My reasons concern substantive policy differences, as well as the concerns cited above. In my assessment, those concerns do not apply to the Democrats’ top candidates, none of whom is anonymous, all of whom have impressive public records.

The same logic should apply to supporters of the other parties in the anti-government bloc. Want Avigdor Lieberman to have a significant influence in an Eisenkot-led government? Give him your vote. Want to revive the achievements of the Bennett-Lapid government and believe their party deserve greater strength? Vote for them. Think Eisenkot has recruited the best candidates? There is nothing to stop you from helping elect them to the Knesset.

But please, when you cast your ballot in the hope of replacing the current government and its leader, set aside the notion that you are obliged to strengthen the party of the leading candidate. The only relevant question is which combination of parties can together command a majority in the Knesset, not which one of them is the largest.