Israel’s October 27 parliamentary election has reportedly left Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing bloc without a parliamentary majority, despite his Likud party emerging as the largest single party.
According to the reported final results, Likud secured 27 seats in the 120-member Knesset, while the wider bloc supporting Netanyahu won 53 seats, eight short of the 61 required for a majority.
The opposition grouping, led by former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, secured 48 seats, while Arab-led parties collectively won 19 seats.
The outcome leaves neither of the two main political camps with an outright majority, potentially setting the stage for difficult coalition negotiations.
For Netanyahu, the results represent a reduction in the parliamentary support available to his government. For Eisenkot, they offer an opportunity to challenge the prime minister, although forming a governing majority would require negotiations with other political groups.
President Isaac Herzog now faces an important constitutional responsibility. He must consult political parties before assigning a lawmaker the task of forming a new government.
The election has also renewed debates over national security, military service, Arab political representation, Netanyahu’s accountability for the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack and Israel’s political direction.
Netanyahu Wins Largest Party But Loses Parliamentary Majority
The reported final results from Israel’s Central Elections Committee show that Likud won 27 seats, followed by Eisenkot’s Yashar party with 21 and Naftali Bennett’s B’Yachad with 12.
The Joint List secured 11 seats, while The Democrats and Ra’am won eight seats each.
Yisrael Beytenu, United Torah Judaism and Otzma Yehudit secured seven seats apiece, while Shas and Religious Zionism won six seats each.
The reported distribution leaves Netanyahu’s bloc with 53 seats, the opposition grouping with 48 and the two Arab-led formations with 19.
Although Likud emerged as the largest party, its partners’ performance means Netanyahu cannot rely on his existing alliance to command a parliamentary majority.
The distinction between the number of seats won by an individual party and the strength of its wider political bloc is central to understanding the outcome.
Israel operates a parliamentary system in which the largest party does not automatically produce the prime minister.
Instead, a prospective head of government must assemble a coalition capable of securing the confidence of the Knesset.
The outgoing governing coalition reportedly held 68 seats in the previous parliament. Its reduction to 53 represents a loss of 15 seats.
Why 61 Seats Matter In Israel’s Political System
Israel has a unicameral parliament, meaning it operates one national legislative chamber.
The Knesset has 120 members elected through a nationwide proportional representation system.
Voters cast ballots for political parties rather than directly electing a prime minister. Parties receive parliamentary representation according to their share of the national vote, provided they cross the 3.25 per cent electoral threshold.
The system allows several political parties representing different religious, ideological and social constituencies to enter parliament.
However, it also makes coalition governments necessary because individual parties rarely secure an outright majority.
With 120 seats available, 61 represents more than half of the legislature and provides the conventional benchmark for a governing majority.
The 19 seats reportedly won by Arab-led parties could therefore become important during coalition negotiations.
However, their combined representation does not automatically mean they will support the same candidate or government.
Political parties must negotiate policy commitments and agree on the composition and direction of any proposed administration.
Israel’s System Differs From The US Electoral College
Israel’s electoral arrangement differs fundamentally from the United States’ Electoral College.
In the American system, voters participate in a presidential election, with electoral votes allocated to states determining the winner.
Israel operates a parliamentary system in which voters elect members of the Knesset through party lists.
The prime minister emerges from negotiations among political parties capable of assembling sufficient parliamentary support.
Consequently, a party can win the largest number of seats without its leader becoming prime minister.
Similarly, the leader of a smaller party can head the government if that person successfully assembles a coalition with parliamentary confidence.
This explains why Netanyahu’s reported 27 seats do not automatically guarantee his continued leadership, while Eisenkot’s 21 seats do not exclude him from government formation.
President Herzog Holds The Next Constitutional Responsibility
President Isaac Herzog will oversee the next stage of Israel’s government-formation process.
Israel’s Basic Law assigns the president responsibility for consulting parliamentary factions before asking a member of the Knesset to form a government.
The president does not have to appoint the leader of the party with the highest number of seats.
Instead, established practice considers which lawmaker appears best positioned to assemble a government capable of securing parliamentary confidence.
This distinction could prove important following the reported results.
Netanyahu leads the largest party, but his wider bloc has only 53 seats. Eisenkot’s opposition grouping has 48.
Herzog must therefore consider the recommendations and political commitments of the parliamentary parties before assigning the mandate.
The lawmaker who receives the mandate has 28 days to form a government, with a possible extension of up to 14 additional days.
If the first nominee fails, the president can assign the responsibility to another lawmaker.
Further constitutional procedures allow 61 Knesset members to recommend another candidate.
If the process fails to produce a government, Israel could return to the polls.
The reported timetable places the submission of final results to Herzog on November 4, with the new Knesset expected to be sworn in on November 10.
President And Prime Minister: Who Holds Executive Power?
Although Herzog has an important role in government formation, Netanyahu occupies the more powerful executive office.
The president serves as Israel’s head of state, while the prime minister leads the government.
Herzog’s responsibilities include representing the state, receiving foreign diplomats, signing legislation and exercising certain constitutional powers relating to appointments and pardons.
The prime minister leads the cabinet, directs government policy and oversees the executive administration.
The two offices have separate constitutional responsibilities. The president does not ordinarily direct the government or supervise the prime minister.
Herzog was elected by the Knesset in 2021 for a seven-year term. Before becoming president, he led the Labour Party and served as opposition leader.
Netanyahu, meanwhile, has led Likud and served as prime minister across several periods.
In the current situation, Herzog’s influence comes from managing the constitutional process through which a new government may emerge.
Arab Parties Secure 19 Seats: Can They Decide The Government?
The reported 19 seats won by the Joint List and Ra’am represent one of the election’s most consequential outcomes.
However, the two political formations have different identities and approaches to parliamentary cooperation.
Their combined representation gives Arab political parties a potentially influential position in the new Knesset.
Ra’am, led by Mansour Abbas, has previously demonstrated a willingness to cooperate with Jewish-led parties in exchange for commitments addressing issues affecting Arab communities.
In 2021, it became the first Arab party to formally participate in an Israeli governing coalition, joining the government led by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid.
The Joint List represents a broader range of political movements and positions concerning Arab citizenship, Palestinian national aspirations and Israel’s political system.
Its leaders have indicated a willingness to support an alternative government from outside a formal coalition, subject to commitments on issues affecting Arab communities.
However, cooperation between the opposition and Arab-led parties faces significant political obstacles.
Avigdor Liberman, leader of Yisrael Beytenu, has ruled out joining a coalition that includes Arab-led parties or relying on their support to sustain a minority government.
Other opposition leaders have also made commitments that could restrict cooperation with parties they consider outside the Zionist political camp.
Eisenkot and his potential partners therefore face a difficult political calculation.
Arab-led parties could provide the parliamentary numbers needed for an alternative government, but securing their support could conflict with commitments made by some opposition parties.
Their 19 seats are politically significant, although their holders are not automatic kingmakers.
Netanyahu And Eisenkot’s Positions On Arab Political Representation
Neither Netanyahu nor Eisenkot is generally identified as a pro-Arab political leader.
The more relevant question concerns their positions on Arab political representation and cooperation in government.
Netanyahu has rejected depending on Arab-led parties to sustain his government.
His political alliance includes right-wing and religious parties that oppose such arrangements.
Eisenkot leads a centrist opposition grouping, but his potential coalition partners do not share a single position on cooperation with Arab parties.
The issue concerns the conditions under which Arab lawmakers can participate in government, support legislation or provide parliamentary backing.
Arab citizens make up a significant part of Israel’s population and have the right to vote and contest elections.
Their parties have historically faced barriers to participation in national governments.
However, Ra’am’s role in the 2021 coalition demonstrated that formal cooperation is possible.
The current election has renewed debate over whether Arab political parties can exercise influence beyond representing their constituencies in parliament.
Why Netanyahu Faces Pressure Over Security And Accountability
Netanyahu has built much of his political identity around national security, opposition to Iran’s regional influence and protecting Israel against external threats.
His supporters point to his extensive government experience and argue that his leadership has been important during periods of war and regional instability.
However, the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack remains a defining issue in the debate over his leadership.
The attack exposed serious intelligence and security failures. Hamas fighters killed civilians and soldiers and took hostages during the assault.
Netanyahu’s critics have demanded accountability for the failures preceding the attack, including an independent inquiry into the decisions and security arrangements of the period.
For many opponents, the debate concerns whether the government adequately discharged its responsibility to protect the country.
The subsequent hostage crisis and wars have also remained contentious.
Disagreements over military service have further complicated the political environment.
The exemption of many ultra-Orthodox Jewish men from compulsory military service has become particularly controversial as other Israelis face repeated reserve deployments.
Eisenkot has called for a more equitable national-service arrangement, making the issue an important part of the opposition’s political agenda.
Netanyahu also faces a long-running corruption trial involving allegations of bribery, fraud and breach of trust, which he denies.
The proceedings remain politically divisive. His opponents argue that they raise questions about public accountability, while his supporters maintain that the prosecution is politically motivated.
Economic pressures, the cost of prolonged military operations and disagreements over judicial reform have added to the political challenges.
The election therefore reflects broader disagreements over Netanyahu’s record, security policies and accountability.
Israel’s History Of Political Deadlock
The current political uncertainty has precedents.
Between 2019 and 2022, Israel held five general elections in less than four years.
The April 2019 election failed to produce a government after Netanyahu could not reconcile disagreements among potential coalition partners, particularly over military-service legislation concerning ultra-Orthodox students.
A second election followed in September 2019, but neither Netanyahu nor his principal challenger, Benny Gantz, secured a government.
The March 2020 election eventually produced a power-sharing arrangement between Netanyahu and Gantz.
That government later collapsed amid disagreements over the national budget.
Another election followed in March 2021, producing a broad coalition led by Bennett, with Lapid as a central partner.
The government included Ra’am, marking the first time an Arab party formally joined an Israeli governing coalition.
That arrangement eventually fell apart, leading to the November 2022 election, which returned Netanyahu to power with support from right-wing and ultra-Orthodox parties.
The 2009 election also offers an important precedent.
Tzipi Livni’s Kadima party emerged with 28 seats, one more than Netanyahu’s Likud, which secured 27.
However, President Shimon Peres assigned Netanyahu the task of forming a government because he appeared better positioned to assemble a parliamentary majority.
Netanyahu eventually succeeded.
The episode demonstrated that the largest party does not necessarily produce the next prime minister.
Coalition-building remains central to Israel’s political system.
What Happens If Neither Side Forms A Government?
If Herzog’s first nominee fails to assemble a government within the prescribed period, the president can give another Knesset member an opportunity.
The Basic Law also provides a further route through which 61 lawmakers can recommend a candidate who has agreed to form a government.
If all available efforts fail, the Knesset can be dissolved and another general election called.
Until a new government takes office, the outgoing administration continues in a caretaker capacity.
Another election would prolong political uncertainty as Israel faces security challenges, regional tensions and domestic disagreements over government policy.
Netanyahu’s immediate challenge would be to preserve his political alliance and seek additional parliamentary support.
Eisenkot would need to turn the opposition’s 48 seats into a viable governing arrangement without losing partners over cooperation with Arab-led parties.
Herzog, meanwhile, would have to manage the constitutional process and assign the government-formation mandate in accordance with the law.
The reported election results have not yet determined who will lead Israel.
Instead, they have produced a parliament in which political alliances, ideological compromises and negotiations will determine the next government.
