Lieberman's Veto Forces Eisenkot to Seek Ultra-Orthodox Support
Translated & summarized from Cursorinfo by baba
Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the "Change Bloc," is seeking alliances with ultra-Orthodox parties after Avigdor Lieberman vetoed cooperation with Arab parties. Political commentator Ben Caspit reported that Lieberman's move complicates coalition talks, forcing Eisenkot to choose between compromising with Haredi factions or risking new elections. Tensions rose after meetings between Prime Minister Netanyahu and Haredi leaders, while Eisenkot also engaged with them. The Haredi parties may seek significant concessions due to their current government's perceived failures and financial challenges.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Gadi Eisenkot is seeking ultra-Orthodox support after Avigdor Lieberman vetoed cooperation with Arab parties.
- Commentator Ben Caspit reported Lieberman's veto complicated coalition talks for Eisenkot's "Change Bloc."
- Eisenkot faces a choice between Haredi compromise or risking new elections, according to Caspit.
- Prime Minister Netanyahu met with Haredi leaders amid heightened coalition negotiation tensions.
- Ultra-Orthodox parties may demand significant concessions due to current government challenges.
Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the "Change Bloc," faces a complex challenge in forming a government after Avigdor Lieberman's veto on cooperation with Arab parties. This move has compelled Eisenkot to seek alliances with ultra-Orthodox factions, who may demand significant concessions for their support. Political commentator Ben Caspit reported on November 14 that Lieberman's decision has complicated negotiations within the "Change Bloc," presenting Eisenkot with a difficult choice: compromise with the Haredi parties or risk new elections.
Tensions reportedly escalated following a meeting between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Yaakov Asher, head of Agudat Yisrael. Despite reports that Netanyahu aimed to prevent a Haredi alignment with Eisenkot's camp, the Prime Minister remained uncertain about the security of his own coalition. Asher also met with Eisenkot, leading to further contacts and discussions about forming negotiation teams between the parties. The stance of the Shas party and its willingness to join Ashkenazi ultra-Orthodox factions in a potential agreement remain unclear.
Caspit highlighted Lieberman's position, suggesting the Yisrael Beiteinu leader underestimated the impact of his public rejection of a government supported by Arab parties. Instead of easing Haredi negotiations, this action increased their political leverage, allowing them to expect greater concessions. The commentator also noted the historical tension between Lieberman and Eisenkot, stemming from their past disagreements when Lieberman was Defense Minister and Eisenkot was IDF Chief of Staff.
Lieberman's opposition to Eisenkot's campaign to form a large party has further fueled their political rivalry. Caspit views Lieberman as an experienced negotiator who, to avoid isolation, proposed seeking compromise with the Haredi parties. However, this strategy carries risks, as ultra-Orthodox parties could prolong negotiations, secure concessions, and then return to Netanyahu. The Haredim also have reasons to consider cooperation with the opposition, as their relationship with the current government has yielded unsatisfactory results, with challenges including draft evasion arrests, frozen funding, and financial difficulties for educational institutions.
Caspit suggests that the Haredim need a swift political solution, and for the first time in a long while, the "Change Bloc" might offer them a way out. The journalist warned that if negotiations falter and lead to early elections, responsibility for the failure to change the government could fall on those who disrupted the formation of an alternative coalition.