President Isaac Herzog is set to begin coalition consultations on Wednesday, with Israel's haredi parties holding much of the power to determine the country's next government. Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Liberman announced on Monday that he would recommend Gadi Eisenkot for prime minister, while ruling out a minority government dependent on Arab party support and reiterating that he would not serve in a government with Benjamin Netanyahu.
Liberman's positions have narrowed the options available to Eisenkot, leaving the central question of whether Shas and United Torah Judaism would be willing to cross political lines and join a government under his leadership. For now, the haredi parties are careful not to commit themselves, stressing in briefings and public statements that no decision has been made and that their rabbinical leadership will make the final determination.
Rabbis Dov Landau and Moshe Hillel Hirsch are expected to return from abroad around the time consultations begin at the President's Residence. Even after their return, assessments suggest United Torah Judaism may prefer not to recommend either Netanyahu or Eisenkot, preserving as much room as possible for maneuver in subsequent negotiations.
Even without recommendations from the haredi parties, the prevailing assessment in political circles is that Eisenkot will be the first candidate tasked with forming a government. However, the number of parties recommending him does not guarantee he can assemble a coalition, and the real struggle is expected to begin once he receives the mandate. Political sources believe Eisenkot may offer the haredi parties generous arrangements on the military enlistment of yeshiva students, along with budget allocations and agreements on issues important to them. If they agree, the door could also open to Yisrael Beytenu joining the government.
Even an agreement in principle by the haredi parties and Liberman would not necessarily conclude the negotiations, according to assessments in political circles. Liberman has already served as defense minister, finance minister, and foreign minister, and political observers believe that returning to a senior ministerial position alone would not satisfy him. Under such circumstances, he could demand a rotation agreement for the premiership with Eisenkot, a move that could ignite another dispute within the bloc seeking to replace Netanyahu.
Naftali Bennett, who has already served as prime minister and whose party won 12 Knesset seats in the election, may oppose an arrangement under which Liberman, whose party holds seven seats, would serve as prime minister in a rotation while Bennett settles for a ministerial position. This could lead to demands for a three-way rotation involving Eisenkot, Liberman, and Bennett. At this stage, that remains a possible scenario rather than a set of formal demands, and such an arrangement would require complex negotiations over the order and length of each leader's term and the division of powers, potentially making the formation of a government even more difficult.
The entire scenario depends on the haredi parties, which are showing no urgency to make a decision. In closed-door conversations, haredi sources describe their political position as an exceptional opportunity, since both blocs need them and the willingness to offer generous concessions, including on military enlistment, gives them considerable bargaining power. "It is better for everyone to remain in suspense and uncertainty, and for each side to think that we have already reached an agreement with the other side," one haredi source said.
Behind this ambiguity lies a more sober assessment among figures in the haredi political establishment. "The chances that the rabbis will instruct us to join a government with the Left, headed by Eisenkot, are low," a well-informed haredi source argued. Haredi sources say this assessment also applies to United Torah Judaism, even though senior party officials are exploring dialogue with the bloc seeking to replace Netanyahu. For Shas, the possibility is considered even more sensitive: party chairman Arye Deri has previously made clear he does not want a return to the scenario in which the haredi parties participated in Yitzhak Rabin's government during the Oslo Accords period, and the party continues to emphasize its commitment to the Right.
If the haredi parties decide against joining an Eisenkot-led government, the possibility of a government dependent on the support of Arab parties will return to the center of the debate. Liberman, however, has already announced he would not support a minority government, even if presented as a temporary administration ahead of another election. Without Yisrael Beytenu or the haredi parties, Eisenkot would struggle to assemble a stable majority that would allow him to swear in a government and govern effectively.
If Eisenkot fails, the mandate could pass to Netanyahu. Some in Netanyahu's circle believe another election would not necessarily be a bad outcome for him, assuming the high voter turnout among Arab Israelis would not be repeated and that voters who traveled to Israel from abroad specifically to support the bloc seeking to replace him might not do so again. But Netanyahu also faces a risk: if attempts to form a government fail and the process reaches the 21-day period in which the Knesset can nominate a candidate, a majority of 61 MKs could emerge to request that the task be assigned to an agreed-upon candidate, and those close to Netanyahu fear the bloc seeking to replace him could reach agreements that had previously proved elusive.
Against this backdrop, sources within the Likud bloc believe Netanyahu would agree to pursue a unity government with Eisenkot, even if that was not his initial preference. But the decision would not be his alone: Eisenkot would have to decide whether he is prepared to serve alongside Netanyahu or would prefer another election, despite the political risks. As consultations at the President's Residence approach, the haredi parties find themselves in a particularly advantageous bargaining position, able to refrain from recommending a candidate, examine proposals from both sides, and keep the question of the next governing coalition open. The question is whether they will ultimately be content to use their leverage in negotiations or be prepared to pay the political price of joining a government led by Eisenkot.
