How Israel's Primary Elections Evolved From Promise to Flawed System
On January 14, 1993, during the first Likud party primaries, Benjamin Netanyahu exposed a political scandal live on television, revealing threats against his wife involving a "hot tape" that allegedly documented an extramarital affair. Netanyahu accused a senior party figure, linked to rival David Levy's camp, of mafia-style blackmail. Despite the bitter and personal nature of the contest, Netanyahu won with 52% of the vote, securing his leadership of Likud.
The introduction of primaries in Likud was a direct response to the party's 1992 defeat, when the Labor Party used primaries to rejuvenate its image and propel Yitzhak Rabin to victory. This shift marked a move toward direct democracy within Israeli parties, breaking away from the old closed-door nomination committees known as "arranging committees." The idea of primaries had been discussed since the 1960s, with figures like Shulamit Aloni and others advocating for broader member participation to reduce establishment control.
The demand for party primaries intensified after the Yom Kippur War, amid public disillusionment with traditional political mechanisms. By the late 1970s, internal party elections became more common, though they did not immediately restore public trust or political dominance. The Democratic Movement for Change (DSh) in the late 1970s further advanced the primary system, but internal conflicts and organized membership drives foreshadowed challenges ahead.
It was not until 1992 that primaries became institutionalized in Israeli politics, with Labor adopting them to select its leader and Knesset list, leading to Rabin's historic win over Shimon Peres. Likud followed suit in 1993 to regain public confidence. However, the system's expansion brought significant costs: campaigns required vast financial resources, increasing candidates' dependence on wealthy donors. Additionally, new vote-buying mechanisms and orchestrated membership drives undermined fairness and equality.
Political scientist Danny Koren predicted nearly three decades ago that while primaries promised renewal and democratization, they often weakened party structures, increased financial dependencies, and promoted media-driven populism over substantive parliamentary work.
