Will Israel Act Like the Democracy It Claims to Be?

Israel’s democratic character will be tested not by its declarations, but by whether its leaders are willing to include Arab citizens in a government capable of ending political paralysis and pursuing a more secure future.

Israel faces a defining democratic test. Will its political leaders put the national interest above ideological taboos and partisan self-interest, or will they allow political deadlock to prolong Benjamin Netanyahu’s hold on power? With a combined majority, Gadi Eisenkot’s bloc and the Arab parties should immediately explore forming a government based on a negotiated program of shared priorities. Refusing even to consider this possibility would raise serious questions about whether Israel’s leaders are prepared to translate the electorate’s choices into effective government.

The stakes could hardly be higher. Another election could leave Netanyahu in office as caretaker prime minister while Israel struggles with deepening international isolation, growing concerns about antisemitism affecting Jewish communities worldwide, the departure of Israelis seeking a more promising future elsewhere, and diminishing prospects for normalization with Saudi Arabia and other Muslim-majority countries. These outcomes are not inevitable, but continued political paralysis would make addressing these challenges more difficult.

Israel cannot afford another cycle of elections without a serious effort to build an alternative government. Its leaders must show that the country’s security, democratic character, and long-term future matter more than preserving ideological red lines or personal political ambitions.

Arab citizens must be part of the democratic solution

Arab citizens make up about one-fifth of Israel’s population. Their votes are no less legitimate than those of Jewish citizens, and their elected representatives have every right to participate in shaping the country’s future.

How can Israel most convincingly demonstrate that it is a democracy? By showing that Arab citizens are equal participants in its political life, including through representation in a governing coalition. Conversely, systematically excluding their elected representatives from consideration because they represent Arab citizens risks reinforcing international perceptions that Israel’s democratic commitments have limits.

A Jewish-Arab governing partnership would not require agreement on every issue. It would require agreement on a practical program addressing shared concerns, while recognizing that genuine disagreements would remain. Israel’s security must be protected, and the government must be able to function effectively. But neither security nor political stability should be used as a blanket justification for refusing to negotiate.

There are important areas where cooperation could be possible: combating violent Jewish extremist attacks against Palestinians in Judea and Samaria; confronting crime and violence in Arab communities; establishing an independent state commission of inquiry into the failures surrounding October 7, 2023; and addressing the unequal distribution of military-service obligations and benefits, including arrangements that exempt or subsidize Haredi men who do not serve in the IDF.

These issues demand serious, sustained attention. A negotiated government program could establish priorities, define areas of agreement, and provide mechanisms for resolving disputes. Such cooperation would not eliminate Israel’s divisions, but it could demonstrate that political differences need not make responsible government impossible.

Longtime peace activist Gershon Baskin has illustrated the possibilities of thinking beyond established political boundaries. He has imagined a government bringing together leaders from different Jewish political parties alongside Arab representatives, with portfolios distributed among them.

His proposed lineup is illustrative rather than a ready-made coalition agreement. Its significance lies in the underlying challenge: why should Israel assume that familiar political alignments are the only possible ones, particularly when the country faces such consequential domestic and international challenges?

Democrats party leader Yair Golan has likewise urged opposition leaders to consider a government in partnership with Arab parties to replace Netanyahu. In a statement reported in the press, Golan argued that excluding Arab citizens’ votes would amount to surrendering to Netanyahu, emphasizing that a parliamentary majority brings both an opportunity and a responsibility to pursue political change.

These proposals deserve serious consideration, not automatic acceptance. Any prospective coalition would need to negotiate its policies, demonstrate that it could command a majority in the Knesset, and establish a workable agreement on security and governance. Arab parties, too, would need to decide whether the proposed program adequately addresses their constituents’ interests and needs.

But these are reasons to negotiate, not reasons to refuse negotiations before they begin.

A Jewish-Arab partnership could send a powerful message that Israel’s democracy includes all its citizens and that its political system can overcome entrenched divisions in the national interest. It could also create an opportunity to pursue policies that reduce internal inequalities, address extremist violence, strengthen public accountability, and advance a credible diplomatic path toward resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Israel’s leaders should begin serious negotiations now. Eisenkot, Golan, the Arab party leaders, and other opposition figures should identify common priorities, establish clear commitments to Israel’s security and equal citizenship, and determine whether they can assemble a workable parliamentary majority.

The decisive question is whether Israel’s leaders will treat Arab citizens as full participants in the democracy they profess to defend—or allow political taboos to override the legitimate choices of their voters.

Israel cannot control every international reaction, eliminate antisemitism through domestic policy alone, or resolve every regional conflict by forming a different government. But it can choose whether to strengthen democratic inclusion, confront internal failures, and pursue a credible path toward peace.

The future of Israel as a secure, democratic, and internationally respected Jewish state demands more than declarations of democratic values. It demands action. A Jewish-Arab partnership is one option that deserves a serious and immediate test. Israel’s leaders should not sacrifice that opportunity to partisan calculations or ideological rigidity.