
The Wheels are Falling Off Netanyahu's Government
As has been the case for more than two years, polls continue to show that Netanyahu's coalition would lose the next election, were it to be held today. And this week, his government lost two of its parties, effectively leaving it with control of just 50 of the Israeli Parliament's 120 seats. The result: Netanyahu now sits atop a de facto minority government that is no longer able to legislate, and Israel is careening toward new elections, most likely in early 2026.
The reason for this unraveling is twofold. To maintain his grip on power, despite his personal unpopularity and ongoing corruption trial, Netanyahu has relied upon two constituencies: the ultra-Orthodox religious parties (which hold 18 seats) and the far-right ultranationalist parties (which hold 14 seats). Both of these groups support policies at odds with the views of the Israeli majority, and both are now at odds with Netanyahu.
For more than a decade, the ultra-Orthodox have backed Netanyahu even as many Israelis have turned on him. In exchange, the prime minister has provided generous state subsidies to ultra-Orthodox institutions and protected the community from Israel's military draft: Whereas most Jewish Israelis serve in the Israel Defense Forces, most young ultra-Orthodox men are instead paid by the government to study religious texts. This arrangement has been profoundly unpopular even among Netanyahu's voters but was tolerated during peacetime as a necessary concession for continued right-wing governance.
Since October 7, that tolerance has collapsed. Faced with an open-ended, multifront war, Israel is in desperate need of more manpower and can no longer countenance exempting the ultra-Orthodox—the country's fastest-growing demographic—from military service. Many Israelis, including those on the right, have become incensed by what they perceive as a lack of social solidarity from the ultra-Orthodox community, whose members have largely continued to go about their daily lives even as their neighbors have been forced to leave their families and businesses to fight Israel's wars. The Israeli supreme court has also ruled that the ultra-Orthodox carve-out violates the principle of equality under the law, tasking the legislature with instituting a fairer regime.
This popular outcry, coupled with Netanyahu's political dependence on the ultra-Orthodox, has put the prime minister in a vise: He can either continue exempting the ultra-Orthodox and anger not just the public and the courts but also his own party, or revoke that exemption and lose the ultra-Orthodox—and with them, his coalition. Of late, Netanyahu has attempted to fudge the issue by pushing through legislation that would create a technical process for drafting the ultra-Orthodox but in practice make the new requirements easy to evade. This effort has met resistance in his party, however, and the bill has not passed—leading to the departure of the ultra-Orthodox parties from the government this week. For now, those parties have said that they won't vote to force new elections, giving Netanyahu time to try to appease them. But unless he can figure out a way to pass a bill that somehow satisfies the ultra-Orthodox and their critics, it's merely a matter of time before his erstwhile allies completely switch sides.
And that's not Netanyahu's only problem. He is also facing threats of secession from his far-right partners, who are fundamentally opposed to ending the war in Gaza, because they seek to ethnically cleanse the enclave and populate it with Jewish settlements. Most Israelis oppose this far-right fever dream and support a deal that would end the war in exchange for the release of hostages. But as with military exemptions for the ultra-Orthodox, Netanyahu here is beholden to a radical minority whose votes keep him in power. At the same time, the Israeli leader is under growing pressure from President Donald Trump to end the Gaza war, once again putting him in an impossible position. If Netanyahu doesn't strike a deal, he risks alienating the U.S. president; if he does, he is likely to lose one or both of the far-right parties in his government.
Given these proliferating threats to his position, Netanyahu has been doing what he does best: playing for time. The summer recess for Israel's Parliament begins on July 27 and extends through the Jewish holidays, until late October. During that time, the Parliament cannot vote to dissolve itself, and so it would be hard for lawmakers to compel new elections. Netanyahu could reach a cease-fire in Gaza, for example, and the far-right would not be able to immediately bring down the coalition. The prime minister just has to run out the clock until the end of the month, and then he will have space either to get all of his partners back on his side—an unlikely prospect—or to make moves that upset his coalition but put him in a better position for the election that would be called upon the Parliament's return.
Whenever that contest does happen—most likely around January—Netanyahu will face arguably the steepest political challenge of his career. Last election, his coalition received just 48.4 percent of the vote, attaining a parliamentary majority only because of a technicality in Israel's electoral system. That coalition has been losing in the polls since April 2023, and no amount of success against Hezbollah or Tehran has altered the trajectory. Thanks to his campaign in Iran, Netanyahu may be in his strongest position since the catastrophe of October 7. But after alienating so many of his allies and the majority of the Israeli people, that still might not be enough.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
7 minutes ago
- New York Times
Project Veritas Withdraws Lawsuit Against The New York Times
The conservative group Project Veritas this week dropped its yearslong libel lawsuit against The New York Times. The lawsuit accused The Times of defamation for an article published in 2020 that reported that researchers from Stanford University and the University of Washington had described some videos produced by Project Veritas as probably part of a coordinated disinformation effort. The group also sued the researchers. Project Veritas lost its defamation claims against the university researchers in 2022, and was ordered to pay Stanford nearly $150,000 in legal fees. But the group had continued to pursue its claims against The Times after defeating the news organization's motion to dismiss. 'We are pleased that Project Veritas decided to withdraw its libel suit without any settlement,' Charlie Stadtlander, a Times spokesman, said in a statement, adding: 'The claim against The Times should never have been brought.' Lawyers for Project Veritas did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Months after Project Veritas filed its lawsuit, The Times published an article about a federal investigation into Project Veritas for possible involvement in the reported theft of a diary belonging to Ashley Biden, the daughter of President Joe Biden. The article quoted memos written by some of the group's lawyers. Lawyers for Project Veritas accused The Times of intruding on attorney-client privilege and trying to embarrass an opponent in active litigation. A judge ordered The Times to stop publication of any Project Veritas documents, a decision that First Amendment advocates protested as an attack on press freedom. A New York State appeals court ruled in February 2022 that The Times was free to publish while it appealed the judge's order. With Project Veritas's decision to drop the libel suit, the group's accusations of intruding on attorney-client privilege were also dropped.


Miami Herald
36 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
France will recognize Palestinian statehood. How many countries already do?
France will become the latest country to recognize Palestinian statehood — joining most of the rest of the world. 'Consistent with its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognize the State of Palestine,' French President Emmanuel Macron announced in a statement posted on X on July 24. Macron, founder of the centrist Renaissance Party, said he will make the official announcement during the United Nations General Assembly, which will take place in New York in September. He also reiterated his call for an immediate cease-fire in Gaza, where nearly 60,000 Palestinians have been killed as a result of Israel's war against Hamas and millions more face famine, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Many attempting to get food have been killed by Israeli forces, the U.N. human rights office said. 'This move is a victory for the Palestinian cause,' Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestine Liberation Organization, said in a statement. 'It reflects France's genuine commitment to supporting the Palestinian people…' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhu denounced Macron's move, writing on X, 'A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it.' The U.S. government echoed this sentiment. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called Macron's announcement a 'reckless decision' that 'only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace.' How many countries recognize state of Palestine? France will now join the vast majority of nations — with some notable exceptions — in formally acknowledging the state of Palestine. As of June 2024, 146 of the 193 U.N. member states, or 74%, had recognized Palestine as a sovereign nation. Palestine was officially declared as a state in 1988 by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). As its territory, it claims the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and parts of 'historic Palestine' occupied by Israel starting in 1967, per the U.N. Following this declaration, many countries quickly recognized Palestinian statehood, including China, Russia and India, according to the Washington Post. Over time, most governments of South America, Africa, the Middle East and Asia moved to do the same, according to the World Population Review. The most recent nations to recognize the state of Palestine were Spain, Ireland and Norway, which did so in 2024 amid Israel's war in Gaza. However, the U.S. and many of its western allies — including the U.K., Canada, Germany, Japan and Australia — have refrained from formally acknowledging Palestine as a nation. France's decision, though — making it the only G7 nation to recognize Palestine — could spark a change in other western countries, policymakers and experts have said. 'For a 'European heavyweight' such as France to recognize Palestinian statehood sends a 'clear signal to the United States, Israel and the international community that what's going on in Gaza is unacceptable and that there has to be a diplomatic way out of this crisis,'' Shahram Akbarzadeh, nonresident senior fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, told the Washington Post. 'It's very likely now that [the United Kingdom] will do the same thing. That is where we are heading,' a senior U.K. lawmaker told the Financial Times. U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer released a statement on July 24, saying, 'The suffering and starvation unfolding in Gaza is unspeakable and indefensible.' He added that 'statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people,' though he stopped short of saying he would move to formally recognize the state of Palestine. International recognition alone, though, will not change the situation on the ground; it's not a 'magic wand' that can achieve a two-state solution, according to the Associated Press. But, it could shift the global conversation.


New York Post
36 minutes ago
- New York Post
Cheapening ‘genocide', strip the NEA of its charter and other commentary
Mideast beat: Cheapening 'Genocide' 'There is a glaring dissonance to the charge that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza,' contends The New York Times' Bret Stephens. 'Why isn't the death count higher?' After all, 'it's not that Israel lacks the capacity to have meted vastly greater destruction.' The answer: 'Of course' Israel is 'manifestly not committing genocide,' and the deaths in Gaza are just a side effect of war. 'What is unusual,' though, 'is the cynical and criminal way Hamas has chosen to wage war': embedding itself in civilian areas and hoarding food aid. 'The war in Gaza should be brought to an end in a way that ensures it is never repeated. To call it a genocide does nothing to advance that aim, except to dilute the meaning of a word we cannot afford to cheapen.' Education beat: Strip the NEA of Its Charter The National Education Association is facing a move 'to revoke [its] national charter,' enthuse Daniel Buck & Anna Low at National Review. Though federal charters are 'largely symbolic,' they're not 'powerless.' Charter holders have a 'special national distinction' that helps them raise money. But today's NEA is 'a lobbying and funding juggernaut with almost 3 million members,' and though ostensibly an educational organization, 'its real purpose is political.' Over 97% of the 'millions' it spends on lobbying and donations goes to Democrats, and its 'calls to action' are always for liberal causes. If Congress chooses not to revoke the charter, it could still at least 'place limitations on the NEA's lobbying and political activity.' Foreign desk: Ukrainian Unity Is Unbreakable 'Russia wants to break the Ukrainian will as it seeks to dismantle Ukrainian identity,' thunders The Wall Street Journal's Jillian Kay Melchior, noting Vladimir Putin's relentless 'missile and drone attacks on the Ukrainian capital and other cities.' Yet instead of the attacks breaking their will, many 'enraged' civilians 'donate to support the military,' and 'the raids could boost voluntary enlistment.' Bottom line: Ukrainians are 'becoming more united.' There's little doubt that, 'Putin wants to erode the American and European will to arm Ukraine' by 'promoting the myth that Russian momentum is unstoppable and Russian victory is inevitable.' Zelensky adviser Mykhailo Podolyak admits, 'We're not winning right now' — but he also adds: 'Moscow isn't winning either.' Advertisement From the right: Dem Hypocrisy on ICE Agents' Masks Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and her fellow Democrats are hypocrites for saying ICE agents 'spread fear in immigrant communities,' thunders the Washington Examiner. That's because Dems like them are the ones who 'amplify hoaxes and demonize law enforcement officers' — by saying that 'masked men in unmarked cars' are 'kidnapping people.' ICE agents who wear masks have genuine security concerns. Considering that 'activists in Portland have been posting ICE agents' addresses in officers' neighborhoods,' officers' 'desire for anonymity' is 'understandable.' If Bass is so concerned about calming people's nerves, she 'could start by not spreading illegal immigrant hoaxes.' Her labeling of federal law-enforcement officers as 'outrageous and un-American' puts them 'in danger and makes donning a mask a necessary precaution to protect their families.' Libertarian: Bleak Path to Fixing Social Security 'With neither Democrats nor Republicans appearing willing to reduce benefits or increase the retirement age, the only way to make Social Security solvent is to increase revenue,' reports Reason's Jack Nicastro. 'While this can be done, it will come at the great financial detriment of young people entering the work force.' Calculations show that 'to eliminate Social Security's projected $25 trillion deficit over the next 75 years while maintaining planned benefits,' payroll taxes would need to be increased from 12.4% percent to 16.05%. Other options would be 'lifting the income ceiling on the payroll tax and borrowing to cover deficits.' The latter could 'precipitate a systemic debt crisis in the U.S.' and 'massive inflation . . . resulting in another situation in which working-age people are forced to subsidize the retirements of the elderly.' — Compiled by The Post Editorial Board