Why Excluding Arab Parties Is Neither Democratic, Nor Credible

The new campaign– led by Benny Gantz– against the possibility of forming a government with Arab parties — in particular with Ra’am, led by Mansour Abbas — seeks to persuade the Israeli public of a supposedly self-evident truth: that political partnership with an Arab party endangers Israel’s security. This claim is simply false. It is a fabricated scenario, one that has already been disproven.

How do we know? From experience.

Ra’am was a partner in the governing coalition that served in 2021–2022 — a government in which Gantz’s own party was a member. Throughout that government’s term, Israel faced severe security challenges: terrorist attacks, military operations, heightened tensions in Gaza and the West Bank, and constant engagement with national security issues. Not a single cabinet meeting was canceled, no security decision was shelved, and no military action was avoided because of Ra’am’s presence in the coalition.

That context makes the current campaign all the more troubling. During that same period, Benny Gantz was not merely a senior coalition member — he served as Israel’s Minister of Defense. No one in the government was better positioned to assess whether Arab political partnership compromised Israel’s security, restricted operational freedom, or forced dangerous concessions. The record is unambiguous: it did not. There was no dilution of security policy, no restraint imposed on the IDF, and no hesitation in responding forcefully to threats. For Gantz, of all people, to now suggest otherwise is not a matter of political judgment. It is a contradiction of his own experience.

The claim that an Arab party’s participation in government ties the hands of decision-makers or restricts Israel’s freedom of action on security matters does not withstand even minimal scrutiny. The video circulated by the National Unity camp is not merely irrelevant — it is deliberately misleading. Worse still, it incites hostility not only toward Ra’am, but toward the Arab public as a whole, portraying an entire community as a collective threat simply by virtue of its political participation.

Yet beyond the question of factual accuracy lies a much deeper problem — one that is principled and normative. A priori, blanket exclusion of all Arab parties from the possibility of governing power is fundamentally anti-democratic. This is not a critique of a specific platform, leader, or policy position; it is a categorical disqualification of political representation based solely on the national identity of an entire community — roughly one-fifth of Israel’s citizens.

In any other democracy, if a major political camp were to declare in advance that it would never sit in government with the democratically elected representatives of a particular ethnic or national group, such a stance would rightly be labeled racist. In many countries, it would be described in even harsher terms: systematic exclusion, delegitimization of citizenship, or traits associated with authoritarian or fascist politics. In Israel, disturbingly, this discourse is increasingly treated as legitimate.

This must be stated plainly: categorical opposition to Arab parties’ participation in government has long been a hallmark of Israel’s far right. It has been used to justify exclusion, incitement, and the erosion of equal citizenship. What is new — and deeply dangerous — is that these positions are now migrating into the political mainstream, adopted by those who present themselves as responsible, centrist, and “statesmanlike.”

When Blue and White, under Gantz’s leadership, adopts this rhetoric, it is not merely reacting to the far right — it is normalizing it. It sends a message that full citizenship, political partnership, and democratic legitimacy are not universal rights, but conditional privileges determined by national identity. This way of thinking corrodes the very foundations of Israeli democracy.

Excluding Arab citizens from political partnership does not only damage democracy — it also undermines security. The political marginalization of one-fifth of the population weakens trust in state institutions, erodes civic resilience, and fractures the social cohesion that is essential for long-term national stability. A society that systematically excludes a large segment of its citizens does not become stronger — it becomes more fragile. Inclusion, equality, and political recognition are not threats to Israel’s security; they are among its most important sources of strength.

Numerous civil society organizations, including the Abraham Initiatives and its partners, have warned in recent days about this dangerous discourse. Not out of support for any particular party, but out of commitment to a basic democratic principle: a democracy ceases to be a democracy when full political participation is conditioned on national identity.

Contrary to what some might assume, this campaign does not offer even short-term political gain. Even those who openly support the exclusion of Arab parties know full well that Benny Gantz already served as defense minister in a government supported by Ra’am — and that none of the apocalyptic scenarios now being invoked came to pass. This political memory has not faded, nor has it been contradicted by reality.

In that sense, the campaign is not only inciting, anti-democratic, and harmful to Israel’s security — it is also fundamentally lacking in credibility. It seeks to frighten the public with a scenario that everyone knows to be false, including those who openly harbor racist views toward Arab citizens. It is an attempt to manufacture fear based on a transparent lie. The Israeli public, across the political spectrum, deserves better.