99% reporting
- Kadima 28
- Labor 20
- Shas 13
- Yisrael Beiteinu 12
- [sic]Â Likud 11
- Ichud Leumi / NRP 9
- Gil 7
- United Torah Judaism 6
- Meretz 4
- United Arab List 4
- Balad 3
- Hadash 3
And that’s it. The other 19 parties don’t make it.
A few hours ago, I was hoping for a Kadima-Labor-Meretz-Gil coalition without Shas, but at this point those four parties only add up to 59 seats, so unless there are adjustments tomorrow, Shas in the government is inevitable. Too bad. But I can still enjoy seeing Bibi Netanyahu fade into irrelevance and Uzi Landau (#14 on the Likud list) lose his Knesset seat.
More likely a combination at this point will be Meretz joining the list, with Gil, Yisrael Beitanu and the collective Arab parties being predominantly up for grabs (either by portfolios or by funding); Shas may join on, but it isn’t a foregone conclusion. Regardless, the potential counter-coalitions don’t look strong enough to push too much damage.
Thanks for the update BZ.
It looks like, as with the Barak administration during camp david, there will be a major arab block that could act as extra-governmental support. though they could turn if olmert takes overly unilateral steps. it will be an interesting interplay.
It seems tha Arab parties may have just reached an all-time high if they end up with 11 seats.
I am constantly amazed with how quickly israeli politics change.
I guess Ovadia’s “not voting for us is a sin” campaign really paid off.
It’s a tragedy because Bibi saved this country with his economics. I have to admit, I think he didn’t sell this point well. But the only thing I got out of this was that Israelis don’t know economics.
OTOH, Likud also overemphasized its opposition to unilateral withdrawl/national camp and positioned itself too far to the right on the security dimension, which I disagreed with. But I voted Likud only for neoliberal economics
Steves–
Yisrael Beitanu is adamantly opposed to withdrawal so its very unlikely they would join the government as Kadima doesn’t seem to have any intention of inviting a party in who won’t support their position on hamatzav. Lieberman said they won’t “compromise their values to joing the government”. Am i missing something here?
zt — politics is all about compromise. That’s what you are missing. Politics is compromise. Hence any party that can’t compromise loses in the end. It’s not selling out, it’s the basics of politics. It’s about picking and choosing what is important.
I was hoping for a Shas – NRP – UTJ coalition. But then it hit me that a lot of the “religious party” members in the Knesset aren’t even religious unless it’s convenient… “In political matters, one need not consult with the Torah sages” was said by one UTJ MK recently. And this is who represents the religious public…besides, voting for secular parties which gut funding for charedi institutions leading to starving Chassidishe children, you’re damn skippy that’s a sin…
amechad: Bibi was only a neoliberal when it came to Israelis living in Israel. He was a social democrat in the settlements, and put the country into debt, subsidizing there schools, swimming pools, segregated roads, not to mention their security. Meanwhile the elderly in the developement towns were standing in soup kitchen lines.
Charles can you explain more about this hadash? Have they been elected to the Knesset before? Was this election good or bad for them?
amechad,
you seem to like to paint pictures with superlatives.
my question wasn’t whether yisrael beiteynu would compromise, obviously under certain circumstances they will, but rather whether they would support disengagement. the extention of that question is: how do they pioritize the various positions.
lastly, picking up on dameocrats point, bibi has a complicated economic legacy and you would do well to view it as nuanced with some pieces free market oriented and other pieces dedicated to deep incentives. economic vitality is critically important but the biggest roadlblock is the occupation.
Hadash is the Israeli Communist Party, mostly Arab but with some Jews. Yes, they’ve been in the Knesset before, and their Knesset delegation is stable around 3 seats.
Hadash (çã”ù) is a far left wing, largely Arab, popular front group in Israel made up of the Communist Party of Israel and other left-leaning political groups. Hadash is an acronym for Hachazit Hademokratit leshalom uleshivyon — “äçæéú äãîå÷øèéú ìùìåà åìùååéåï”, “The Democratic Front for Peace and Equality”. In the elections of 2003 Hadash received 3 Knesset seats in a joint list with the Arab nationlist party Ta’al, out of 120. Most of Hadash’s support comes from the Arab sector, and it is generally considered an Arab party, but a significant minority of its supporters are Jewish as was its leader for many years, Meir Vilner.
The party supports evacuation of all Israeli settlements, and a complete withdrawal by Israel from all territories occupied as a result of the 1967 Six-day War and the establishment of a Palestinian state in those territories. The party is also a strong supporter of workers’ rights and social rights.
Hadash defines itself as an non-Zionist party, originally in keeping with Marxist opposion to nationalism. It advocates redefining Israel from a state with Jewish character to a bi-national state
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadash
The key thing with Israel Beitanu is that while they are opposed (nominally) to withdrawal, they’re not so opposed to “transfer” of Palestinian-majority but Israeli-held territories for Jewish-majority but Palestinian-technical territories (i.e. Gush Katif, certain border settlement blocks). In this sense, they’re more negotiable than they seem, seeing as the larger phase of withdrawal at this point stands on the border settlements. On their average politics, they’re nominal center-right, and again, given either the incentive of portfolio or funding directed towards their key constituencies, they are more likely to cave on matters of security, or at least keep quiet about it.
zt,
Lieberman, Yisrael Beitenu supports trading land: Keep Ariel in exchange for Um El Fachim, Keep Karnei Shomron, give away Taibei.
Likud was punished for supporting the disengagement, as well as being against it too. Sharon destroyed the party and Israel democracy. In 2003, people wanted big parties in order to carry out policy without the need for coalitions with little parties. 2006, people returned to the little parties after seeing that big parties can’t be trusted.
Dameocrat – actually funding of the settlements has also been cut. Also, though you don’t have to agree with this analysis, defense might serve as an adequate reason (although it may also relate to Shafir and Peled’s citizenship discourses, but that’s too much for this).
As to economics vs. the occupation, I would argue the capitalist peace theory which argues that economic liberalization leads to peace (see Erik Gartzke at Columbia). Michael Shalev has a piece about how that’s the big contradiction. I can’t say I have the perfect answer besides capitalist peace theory as that’s something I am trying to understand myself. OTOH, Bibi would happily give up Judea, Samaria and Gaza in a negotiated settlement with the Palestinians. (OK, maybe he wouldn’t be so happy, but he would do it. Remember Wye, etc.) He just disagrees with the unilateral approach and positions himself further right to get the right vote in primaries but ultimately, according to Downs, everyone goes to the center and Bibi is center-right.