Israel's Election Deadlock Exposes Deepening Fault Lines in a Divided Society

As results came in on Tuesday night, exit polls mixed with ballots cast in hope and in fear, and Israel's election produced a result that settled very little. Neither of the two opposing blocs will hold a majority in the Knesset, and no clear route to a new government exists. The analysis comes from the BBC's James Landale.

The vote itself had much to celebrate. Turnout was at record levels among both Jewish and Arab citizens, and many voters spent thousands to fly home from abroad to take part. At polling stations around the country, campaigners worked until the last minute to win over one more voter. President Isaac Herzog called the election a "badge of honour" for Israeli society and said it was remarkable to see how deep the desire for democracy runs.

Still, an inconclusive outcome is not in itself unusual. Israel has never had a one-party government, and its fragmented system of proportional representation is built for coalitions. What worried many commentators was what the result revealed: a country not united around a single cause, but divided along lines that appear to be growing.

Some of those lines are familiar. Judicial reforms drove mass demonstrations in the early years of this government. The attacks of 7 October 2023 split opinion over whether to prioritise saving hostages or destroying Hamas. Casualties among reservists in the subsequent fighting in Gaza sharpened the argument over exempting ultra-Orthodox young men from military service. The ultra-Orthodox now make up almost 15% of the population, and their worldview is far removed from that of the high-tech neighbourhoods of Tel Aviv. The questions that follow are whether the state should subsidise religious study, and whether some families should send their children to defend the country while others do not.

The results also exposed divisions in basic politics. Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud lost significant ground but is still on track to be the largest party in the Knesset. He is accused of corruption, which he denies, and of failing to protect Israel before 7 October, something he will not allow to be investigated. About 10% of voters backed the Jewish supremacist far right, including figures like Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who was promising to establish Jewish settlements in Gaza even as results were announced. Arab parties, representing roughly a fifth of Israeli citizens, made large gains, taking about 15% of the vote and potentially seats numbering in the high teens. The opposition bloc, a mix of centre, left and right led by Gadi Eisenkot, fell short of the change many of its supporters saw as existential.

The arithmetic now forces hard questions. Would Netanyahu abandon his religious allies and build a coalition with right-wingers from the opposition bloc, and would those figures be willing to sit in his government? Would the opposition drop much of its campaign platform to work with Arab parties and push him out? Would the Arab parties risk joining a government that might collapse within months? Yair Golan, the left-wing Democrat leader, urged the opposition to partner with Arab parties, saying Israelis must no longer accept Netanyahu's "racist division between Jewish votes and Arab votes." Amit Segal, a commentator sympathetic to Netanyahu, said high Arab turnout reminded Jews on both sides that, after years of division, they may have to learn to sit together.

The talks could run for months and could fail, sending voters back to the polls. As he prepared to open coalition negotiations, Herzog said Israel must do everything it can, particularly after the previous day's vote, to avoid another round of elections. Landale closes by recalling Churchill's remark that democracy is also insurance against dangers close to home, and asks whether Israeli democracy can meet that test.