The Economist explains
The evolution of Israeli politics

Fractious coalitions and divided factions have a long history

Explaining the world, daily
The Economist explains

GOLDA MEIR, the former Israeli prime minister, once told the American president, Richard Nixon: “You are the president of 150 million Americans; I am the prime minister of six million prime ministers.” Israel’s politics have long been a kaleidoscope of parties split along ideological, ethnic and religious lines. The latest parliamentary election on March 23rd has resulted in the most fractured Knesset (Israel’s parliament) in nearly two decades. Thirteen parties have won seats. Neither the prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, nor any of his rivals seem likely to secure a majority. How did Israeli politics become so tangled?

Parties have splintered, merged and changed names since the birth of the Jewish state. The fragmentation has become more acute in recent decades. Take Labour. A socialist-inspired party formed of various mergers of Labour Zionist movements, it was the main force behind the creation of the state under David Ben-Gurion and dominated the early decades of its politics. But it is in the throes of a long decline. Its great rival, Likud, traces its origins to the territorial maximalists led by Zeev Jabotinsky, known as revisionists. They dominated the Herut and later the Gahal parties even as they gained allies. Under Menachem Begin Likud ended Labour’s hegemony in 1977 but it, too, is now a much-reduced force.

Israeli political parties often revolve around charismatic figures. Ben-Gurion was a serial splitter. He fell out with Mapai in 1965 and led a breakaway party called Rafi. When it reconciled with the renamed Labour party in 1968, he led another splinter faction called the National List which, after his retirement in 1970, soon joined and then merged with Likud. Apart from Labour and Likud, there are eight other broad groupings. To the left of Labour lie the Zionist leftists (more willing to compromise on land), the communists (who emphasise equality among Arabs and Jews) and a spectrum of smaller Arab parties (nationalists and Islamists). To the right of Likud sits a varied and constantly changing mix of groups, often demanding harsher treatment of Arabs, be they Israeli citizens or Palestinians in the occupied territories.

Israeli politics has long nurtured centrist movements (currently, Yesh Atid and Blue and White), which tend to capitalise on resentment of the big parties and focus on social change: cleaner government, for instance, or a reduction in the influence of religious parties. Indeed, the religious parties are the traditional kingmakers. Their main concern has been to maintain the dominance of orthodox Judaism in personal law (in marriage and divorce, for example), and to secure state funds for religious schools and institutions. But the religious parties are themselves split between the ultra-orthodox sects that in the past resisted Zionism, and more modern nationalists (like the National Religious Party) who regard the state as a reflection of God’s will. Shas is a religious party appealing to Mizrahi Jews, who came mostly from Muslim countries. One obvious explanation for the awful fragmentation of Israeli politics is the ideological, religious and ethnic diversity of a country made up of Jews from many corners of the world.

Another group, which has come into being in the past two years, is made up of right-wing parties that try to portray themselves as more moderate versions of Likud, which has become a party of fanatical devotees of Mr Netanyahu. They are all led by former ministers and aides who once served under him.

This is aggravated by the electoral system. From the outset Israel adopted a pure form of proportional representation. Over time the threshold for entry to the Knesset has been raised; parties must now win at least four seats. Israel experimented with the direct election of the prime minister in 1996 but soon abandoned the reform. By allowing citizens to split the ticket—ie, to cast votes for two separate parties—the measure made the factiousness of the political system even worse. Neither has ideological turmoil over the territories occupied in 1967 made matters easier. The National Religious Party (which was renamed and then split into new parties) was once a reliable Labour partner. After 1967 it embraced the religious settlement movement that encouraged Jews to live in the occupied territories, especially the West Bank, as a divinely-ordained duty. In 1976 it broke ranks with Labour, and joined the first Likud-led government in 1977.

Until recently the greatest cause of cleavage and counter-cleavage is disillusionment with the failed peacemaking process with Palestinians and the violence that has accompanied it. Israel has moved to the right as it has lost faith in Labour’s message that a negotiated land-for-peace agreement with Palestinians can bring a lasting end to conflict.

That said, some rightists have moved leftward, embracing the idea that Israel cannot forever hold on to a growing and restive Palestinian population. The Likud prime minister, Ariel Sharon, withdrew unilaterally from Gaza in 2005. He left his Likud party and led a centrist breakaway faction called Kadima. After suffering a stroke, he was succeeded by Ehud Olmert, who won the 2006 election, reducing Likud to a rump party with just 12 seats. But Kadima itself lost its way and disbanded. And as the conflict with the Palestinians, who are split among themselves and tired of violence, became less of a pressing issue, the left-wing “peace camp” failed to come up with a new narrative with which to motivate its erstwhile voters.

Over the last few years, as Mr Netanyahu’s style of governance became increasingly autocratic and corruption charges were brought against him, the new great divide in Israeli politics is between parties which continue to support him and those which are committed to removing him from office. In the last three elections, the opposition to Mr Netanyahu has actually held a majority in the Knesset, but its diversity, ranging from Jewish nationalists to Arab communists, makes it all but impossible for an alternative coalition to be formed. This deadlock caused Benny Gantz, the centrist leader of Blue and White, which for a short while rivaled Likud as the largest party in the Knesset, to finally join Mr Netanyahu in the short-lived government of 2020.

After yet another election, and another shake of the kaleidoscope, the deadlock has only deepened, with an even larger number of parties, seemingly incapable of working together.

Reuse this contentThe Trust Project
The Economist Today

Hand-picked stories, in your inbox

A daily email with the best of our journalism