Eisenkot in Political Standoff with Lieberman Over Coalition Talks
Translated & summarized from Maariv by baba
Avigdor Lieberman's veto on a government supported by Arab parties has pushed Gadi Eisenkot to negotiate with Haredi parties, escalating demands and the risk of new elections. Prime Minister Netanyahu is reportedly under pressure amid these complex coalition talks. The article details a political "game of chicken" between Lieberman and Eisenkot, fueled by past disputes and differing strategies regarding the Haredi factions. The author warns of severe consequences if further elections are triggered by this standoff.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Avigdor Lieberman's veto on Arab-supported government complicated coalition talks for Gadi Eisenkot.
- Eisenkot is now negotiating with Haredi parties, whose demands have reportedly increased.
- The political standoff between Lieberman and Eisenkot could lead to another Israeli election.
- Prime Minister Netanyahu is reportedly under significant political pressure.
- The Haredi parties may be in a weak position and need a coalition deal urgently.
Avigdor Lieberman's veto on a government supported by Arab parties has complicated coalition negotiations for Gadi Eisenkot, pushing him towards discussions with Haredi parties. This situation is exacerbated by a long-standing animosity between Lieberman and Eisenkot, escalating demands from the Haredi factions, and the fear that this political game of chicken could lead to another election.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is described as a shrewd politician sensing a threat, particularly with the possibility of a government backed by Arab parties remaining viable despite Lieberman's opposition. This, coupled with internal family pressures, is reportedly creating significant political tension.
Lieberman, who has extensive experience in political negotiations, is seen as having miscalculated by announcing his opposition to a government reliant on Arab support. Instead of weakening the opposition bloc, his move has reportedly inflated the demands of the Haredi parties. The article suggests Lieberman has a history of disputes with Eisenkot from their time when Lieberman was Defense Minister and Eisenkot was IDF Chief of Staff, though these were previously kept private.
Eisenkot's "Big Party" campaign is also cited as a factor that has angered Lieberman. The article posits that Lieberman is now engaged in a high-stakes confrontation with Eisenkot, a situation the author warns is dangerous. Lieberman's proposed alternative of a compromise with the Haredi parties is presented as a bitter pill for him to swallow, with the risk that the Haredi parties might ultimately align with Netanyahu.
The author warns that another election cycle resulting from this political maneuvering would be unforgivable and a global embarrassment. While acknowledging Lieberman might have insider knowledge, the article presents two opposing theories regarding the Haredi parties' stance: one suggesting they will always prefer Netanyahu and the right, and another arguing they are at a low point in public perception and desperately need a solution that only the opposition bloc can provide. The latter theory highlights the potential collapse of Haredi educational networks and yeshivas if a resolution isn't found soon.
