Before the election, Yisrael Beytenu's Liberman ruled out forming a coalition with Netanyahu, the Haredi parties, and dependence on Arab parties. He has now relaxed the Haredi veto.
Follow us on GoogleThe people I know who debated whether to vote for Avigdor Liberman again kept coming back to the Haredi draft. They wanted ultra-Orthodox Israelis to share the burden of military service. Liberman offered them a right-wing alternative to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with no dependence on Arab parties. Conscription was the issue that persuaded them to vote for him.
On Friday morning, Liberman said forming a government would require compromises across a range of issues, including the draft law. His post on X/Twitter confirmed N12 political correspondent Amit Segal’s report on Thursday that the leader of the secular right-wing Yisrael Beytenu party had lifted his veto on Haredi coalition partners.
“This also includes the draft law,” he wrote. “It hurts me, and I know it hurts many others too.”
His concession opens a possible route to a government without Netanyahu and strengthens the Haredi parties’ negotiating position. For voters who chose Liberman because of conscription, it raises a question about what that government would deliver on the issue that brought them back to him.
Before the election, Liberman ruled out Netanyahu, the Haredi parties and dependence on Arab parties. He has now relaxed the Haredi veto while retaining the other two. If he eventually accepts Arab-party support, opposition to Netanyahu could become the sole surviving condition from those three campaign commitments. Friday’s post expressly rejected that possibility.
He also ruled out another election. Within those limits, the terms of the draft law have become negotiable.
Race to form coalition explains Liberman's flexibility
The arithmetic explains the opening. The non-Arab opposition parties’ 48 seats and the Haredi parties’ 13 would produce a majority of 61 in the 120-seat Knesset, Israel’s parliament. That gives the bloc seeking a government led by former military chief Gadi Eisenkot a potential route to office.
Liberman rejected the alternative under discussion: a minority government enabled by abstentions from Ra’am and the Joint List, the Arab political groupings whose lawmakers would remain outside the coalition. He argued that such a government could collapse quickly and return Netanyahu with a stronger majority. He also denied discussing a rotation agreement to share the premiership.
Securing the Haredi parties’ agreement remains a separate task. United Torah Judaism withheld a recommendation for Netanyahu during the president’s consultations on whom to ask to form a government. Shas, the other Haredi party, recommended him. The 61-seat formula requires both.
United Torah Judaism chairman Yakov Asher welcomed the new flexibility on conscription on Friday, while saying his party had received no concrete proposal. Any offer, he stressed, would go before its rabbinical leadership.
Even talks that produce no agreement could improve the Haredi parties’ bargaining position with Netanyahu’s Likud. They can compare what his opponents offer with what continued loyalty to his bloc would deliver.
Haredi sector says loyalty to Netnayhu left community 'empty-handed'
An editorial published Friday by the Haredi news website Behadrei Haredim supplied an argument for changing partners. It said loyalty to Netanyahu’s bloc had left the community empty-handed and advocated joining an opposition-led government if legislation secured the status of yeshiva students. Its conditions included protected education budgets and an end to arrests over non-enlistment.
The editorial’s political flexibility rests on firm religious priorities. Schools, yeshivot, or religious seminaries, and families whose lives revolve around full-time Torah study depend on funding and legal protections. For leaders defending those institutions, a different prime minister can become acceptable if he offers stronger guarantees. Budgets help sustain the way of life they were elected to protect.
That represents one argument within the Haredi sector. Shas’s recommendation of Netanyahu demonstrates the continuing attachment to the existing alliance. Party interests and rabbinical decisions will determine whether the alternative becomes viable.
The same agreement could therefore carry sharply different meanings for its signatories. A Haredi leader who secures budgets and protection for yeshiva students can present them as achievements for his electorate. Liberman’s supporters who prioritized conscription would assess the additional service it produces.
His campaign language increases the risk for Liberman. In an appeal reported by Channel 13, Liberman demanded universal military or civilian service, rejected quotas and exemptions, and insisted on binding commitments before the election. He specifically dismissed winning first and settling the details afterward. Concessions now risk weakening the reason some voters chose his party.
Reactions indicate competing expectations for Liberman
The online reactions show the competing arguments taking shape. Itamar Ben-Gvir, Netanyahu’s far-right ally, mocked the opposition’s proclaimed alliance of those who serve. That gives Netanyahu’s camp an opportunity to accuse its opponents of accepting concessions they had condemned. Yoaz Hendel, leader of the Reservists party, responded to Thursday’s report with “Shame on you,” citing repeated military call-ups and shortages of soldiers. He renewed his criticism on Friday.
Hendel’s response identifies a pressure Liberman will face from advocates of broader service. Removing Netanyahu may offer insufficient compensation for an agreement that preserves broad exemptions. Some voters could regard such a bargain as a betrayal even if it produces a change of prime minister.
Other opposition supporters see room for compromise. Rabbi Avraham Stav argued online that negotiations could advance a deeper change in the state’s relationship with the Haredi community. He also challenged Netanyahu supporters’ criticism, citing the outgoing government’s own concessions to Haredi parties. These reactions illustrate competing expectations; their effect on voting intentions remains unclear.
The eventual legislation will help determine which argument holds. N12 reported that talks could return to the framework Liberman promoted as defense minister in 2018. That proposal would have delayed financial sanctions on yeshivot for three years and imposed no individual sanctions on students who failed to enlist. Friday’s post specified no agreed terms.
Liberman’s defense of a compromise would depend on the additional enlistment it produces. An agreement that largely preserves exemptions would make the allegation that he subordinated conscription to removing Netanyahu harder to rebut.
A deal with Liberman could give Haredi leaders something particularly valuable: protections for their institutions endorsed by a politician who built his appeal on challenging them. His signature would give them political cover as well as parliamentary votes. The question is what measurable change in enlistment he could obtain in exchange.
Follow us on GoogleSource: The Jerusalem Post · ZVIKA KLEIN
At a glance
- Topic
- World
- Country
- 🇮🇱 IL
- Publisher language
- EN
- Added to Allnira