After Israel held its elections this past fall, I was excited for the future of Israel. The moderate candidate, Benny Gantz, beat out the far right incumbent Benjamin Netanyahu, promising limits on corruption in office and better relationships with the U.S.
However, I’ve noticed that the general public opinion is that there was barely any change. The prime minister of the Palestinian Authority even likened the difference between the two to the difference between “Pepsi Cola and Coca-Cola.” Recently Netanyahu was chosen instead of Gantz to form a governing coalition, compromising with various parties to form a majority in the Knesset (Israeli parliament). Since he is unlikely to succeed, there’s a good chance of a unity government where Netanyahu and Gantz share power somehow. This has caused many outside commentators to express frustation that neither candidate offers a clear path to ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
However, I think it’s unfair to frame everything that happens in Israel through the lens of creating peace or not. Although these elections could cause a cooldown in the region, that’s not the main thing they accomplish. Instead, they promise improvements in Israeli democracy and removal of corruption in the Israeli political system.
One of the main things these elections accomplished was limiting the power of Netanyahu in government. He has been in power since 2005 and is currently being accused of corruption while in office, potentially facing an indictment. He has also been bad for Israeli relationships with the U.S., seeming to favor Republicans over Democrats, and has contributed to the polarization in American politics surrounding Israel. Finally, although he’s made relationships with other Arab countries, he’s mostly burned his Palestinian bridges by threatening to annex parts of the West Bank.
Gantz, on the other hand, is a relatively clean candidate, with many of his stances on issues still unknown. In the election he opened a dialogue with the Arab party coalition, showing willingness for increased communication with Israeli Arabs. He also expressed the desire for bipartisanship in relations with the U.S. Gantz has none of the baggage of Netanyahu, meaning anything’s possible as far as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is concerned.
This election could be a healthy power check on Netanyahu. Although it did not remove him from office, it could still limit his power and force him to take more moderate stances in order to govern. This new government will give a voice to more moderates and limit corruption, which is a net positive, even if it’s not as much change as people would have liked.
