Ex-IDF Officer Explains Party's Withdrawal, Backs Religious Zionism

Retired Colonel Chazi Nehama has explained the decision of the 'Achdut' (Unity) party, which he was slated to co-lead with Gilad Erdan, to withdraw from the upcoming elections. Nehama stated that the party's founding principles were unity, preventing a government composed of both blocs, promoting right-wing stances, and advancing a universal conscription law. However, he admitted the party failed to gain traction in polls and could not approach the electoral threshold, leading Erdan to make the "informed decision" to withdraw.

Nehama expressed concern about the possibility of a left-wing government, particularly one influenced by figures he described as "leftist" like Ronen Manelis, whom he believes is closer to Yair Golan's views than Benny Gantz's. He suggested that Gantz is being pulled in different directions and that if forced into a "change bloc" coalition with Arab parties, he would form a left-wing government. Nehama believes this scenario must be prevented at all costs.

Despite his previous association with Erdan's party, Nehama announced he will now support and vote for the Religious Zionism party led by Bezalel Smotrich. He acknowledged that while Religious Zionism has advanced settlement efforts and Smotrich performed well as Finance Minister, he still believes the party has shortcomings regarding conscription and list diversity.

Nehama also commented on the political landscape, suggesting that the "boycotts" initiated a decade ago, specifically the boycott of Benjamin Netanyahu, are detrimental to political discourse. He believes that some leaders in the opposing bloc understand this, which is why Gantz has not explicitly ruled out sitting in a government with Netanyahu. Nehama anticipates that if the Israeli public grants a right-wing majority, Gantz will seek to join a government to influence its direction.

Reflecting on the judicial reform, Nehama stated a preference for an 80% reform agreed upon by 80% of the public over a 90% reform agreed upon by only 50%. He emphasized the importance of a government that a majority of citizens can identify with, rather than an adversarial one where half the population feels unrepresented.