Israel's Election Debates: A Rare Absence in Global Political Norms

With less than a month until the elections, the political contest in Israel has focused on the question of whether a televised debate between the leading candidates will occur. Gadi Eisenkot challenged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to a live debate, but Netanyahu and his associates have responded with campaign messages. What could have been a simple scheduling matter has become a political power struggle, testing who is willing to face direct questions and who prefers to remain in the realm of videos and slogans.

Globally, televised election debates are a common practice, even legally mandated in some countries like South Korea and Mexico. Israel, along with Turkey, stands out as an anomaly among developed OECD nations for not holding such debates. The United States, where the presidential debate is a cornerstone of political culture, pioneered these events, with the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon debate being a landmark example. Professor Zfira Grabelski-Lichtman of the Hebrew University notes that the non-verbal aspects of that debate, particularly Nixon's perceived nervousness, significantly influenced public perception and led to the development of media training for politicians.

In Israel, televised debates were a tradition between the two major party leaders from 1977 until 1999. Initially, due to election laws restricting pre-election candidate appearances on television, these debates were pre-recorded and part of allocated campaign broadcast time. The 1996 debate between Netanyahu and Peres is considered a turning point that influenced the election outcome. However, in 1999, Ehud Barak, then leader of the One Israel party, refused to participate, setting a precedent. This led to Ariel Sharon's refusal to debate in 2001, and since then, formal election debates between leading candidates have not occurred.

Despite attempts to revive the format, such as a multi-participant debate in 2015 that Netanyahu and Herzog did not attend, the tradition has not returned. In that instance, Netanyahu participated in a brief, "improvised" broadcast from home, with Herzog in the studio. Professor Grabelski-Lichtman explains that debates are a powerful tool for voters, especially undecided ones, allowing for direct comparison of candidates' charisma and leadership. She suggests that a close election might incentivize leaders, like Netanyahu and potentially Eisenkot, to agree to a debate, as candidates with a clear lead have little incentive to risk such an event.