Internal Likud Battle Focuses on Primary Rules, Not Just Candidate Rankings
As the Likud party prepares for its upcoming primaries, the central conflict is not merely about which candidates will secure top spots on the Knesset list, but rather about the fundamental rules governing how the list is composed. Media strategist Moran Shmueloff explains that the core debate revolves around balancing the influence of Likud party members against the powers of party leader Benjamin Netanyahu.
Supporters of expanding Netanyahu's authority argue that increasing the number of reserved slots ("sharionim") would allow him to include professionals and public figures who strengthen the party's electoral slate. However, opponents warn that such expansion could undermine internal party democracy and diminish the role of tens of thousands of registered members. Critics also question whether Netanyahu truly needs to reserve more candidates, noting that in the past, ministers were appointed without being Knesset members and later entered via the Norwegian Law.
Another contentious issue concerns the party's electoral districts. Likud's secretariat chairman, Haim Katz, is promoting a proposal to allow incumbent Knesset members to run in district races rather than only on the national list. While some view this as a move to boost female representation, others suspect it aims to benefit specific candidates, notably MK Eti Atiya.
Meanwhile, veteran Likud members emphasize preserving the current primary system, warning that increasing the leader's control over the list could erode the party's strength as a membership-driven organization. Ultimately, the debate transcends individual candidate placements, focusing instead on whether the party list should primarily reflect the members' will or enable the leader to assemble a team he believes can govern most effectively. As the primaries approach, the battle within Likud is increasingly about the rules of the game, with the question of who controls the candidate list potentially as consequential as who is on it.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.