Eisenkot Bloc Leaders Fear Bennett May Favor New Elections Over Haredi Coalition
Translated & summarized from i24NEWS Arabic by baba
Leaders within Gadi Eisenkot's bloc are concerned about Naftali Bennett's position on forming a government with Haredi parties, citing disagreements between Eisenkot and Avigdor Lieberman over coalition structure and military conscription. Bennett's ambiguous stance and reduced public engagement have led to speculation that he might prefer new elections. While Eisenkot favors a phased approach to including Haredi parties, Lieberman believes they can be included from the start. Bennett's continued focus on military service equality, despite his silence on Haredi issues, has raised questions about his ultimate intentions.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Eisenkot bloc leaders fear Naftali Bennett may prefer new elections over a coalition with Haredi parties.
- Disagreements persist between Gadi Eisenkot and Avigdor Lieberman on coalition structure and military conscription.
- Bennett's stance on concessions to Haredi parties regarding military conscription remains unclear.
- Eisenkot favors a phased approach to including Haredi parties, while Lieberman seeks their inclusion from the start.
- Bennett has maintained a low media profile and silence on contentious Haredi coalition issues.
- Speculation suggests Bennett believes new elections could enhance his political position.
Leaders within Gadi Eisenkot's political bloc are expressing concern over Naftali Bennett's stance on forming a government that includes Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) parties. Sources within the bloc revealed on Friday that disagreements persist between Eisenkot and Avigdor Lieberman regarding the proposed coalition structure and concessions needed on the military conscription issue.
The ongoing coalition-building negotiations highlight divisions among potential partners, with Bennett's position remaining unclear. While both Eisenkot and Lieberman are working to bring Haredi parties into the coalition, bloc members question whether Bennett will endorse the emerging framework, particularly concerning agreements on military conscription.
There is no consensus within the Eisenkot bloc on how to integrate the Haredi parties. Eisenkot favors a phased approach, believing that waiting for Shas party leader Aryeh Deri could delay government formation. Lieberman, however, thinks an agreement with both Haredi parties is possible from the outset and prefers not to rely on Shas joining later.
Other partners in Eisenkot's bloc have not taken a clear position. While bloc leaders state their support for Eisenkot, they are not currently involved in negotiations with the Haredi parties. Bennett's ambiguous stance on the proposed coalition framework and potential concessions to Haredi parties on conscription has fueled internal questions.
Sources indicate Bennett has reduced his public appearances and remained silent on contentious issues and negotiations with Haredi parties, while Lieberman faces criticism for softening his stance and Eisenkot is attacked for his willingness to include them. Bennett's silence on the Haredi issue, contrasted with his continued messaging on supporting those who serve in the military, has raised questions among potential coalition partners. He recently posted on Facebook about redirecting funds from draft dodgers to those serving as a priority.
Concerns about Bennett are not new; his political team held a brief, closed press conference without allowing questions, and he has maintained a limited media presence during coalition talks. Some within the Eisenkot bloc suspect Bennett might believe new elections would improve his political standing. These assessments suggest that Bennett's adherence to principles of service equality and anti-draft evasion messaging, central to his campaign, could benefit him in a new election scenario. Some members of Bennett's list have indicated readiness to advance a conscription law as part of understandings with Haredi parties.
Discussions within the bloc also revealed fears that potential partners do not share the same vision for government formation or necessary concessions. Thus, while Eisenkot seeks agreements with Haredi parties and Lieberman presents his conditions, Bennett's position remains an open question.
