Israel must return to the vote

For the first time in its history, Israel is forced to repeat the elections after they have just been played. In fact, the result released by the polls on April 9 did not allow any training for an executive capable of governing the country. The vote that determined this decision was etrogenous because the 64 members of the majority were joined by 10 representatives of the Arab parties, who saw in this decision an opportunity to take on greater significance. On the contrary there are all 45 deputies of the minority, the entire center-left, who voted in this way to emphasize the inability of the winners to find an agreement and to express their opposition to the expenses that the country will have to bear for the new round election, which have already seen several setbacks in Israeli civil society. Netanyahu personally enjoys favorable surveys, but these may not be enough to address the magistrates who accuse him of corruption and, above all, politically to manage the political fragmentation of the conservative camp, which represents the real reason responsible for the new elections. The six right-wing formations, which should have come to an agreement, have proved to be too many even for a politician accustomed to unscrupulous condemnations like Netanyahu, too many particular interests that have led to the failure of the common cause, on the other hand to put together a coalition of conservatives, right-wing religious nationalists and ultra-orthodox Jews is far from easy and the Israeli leader has underestimated these difficulties. The repetition of the elections, therefore, sees Netanyahu as the main loser and the damage to his image could cost him the renunciation of a future leadership, despite the appreciation of the country. Moreover, the fragmentation of the right can be seen in one of his tactics to better govern the differences and remain the head of a coalition that failed to be born. The mistake was probably that of giving too much importance to the most extreme part, believing that we know how to govern activism and, at the same time, manage to reconcile the interests of the more moderate part of the Israeli right. This time the unprejudiced tactics carried out with continuous hazards, as in foreign policy and as with the Palestinians, was not successful. The Israeli leader now has to face inquiries for corruption and the possible aggregation of the center-left lists with the Arab parties, an extreme attempt by the opposition to make him lose power. It should be remembered that the abstention rate among Israeli Arabs in the last elections was very high and a greater response to the elections, thanks to a campaign that could allow the Arabs to no longer feel themselves to be citizens of minor importance, could have effects capable of reversing relations of strength. On the contrary, the electoral campaign to be held in the summer, the legislative elections have been set for September 17th, will not be welcomed by the Israelis, who are upset by the political inability to form the executive and by the expenditure for a new electoral competition. The threat of abstention due to obvious distrust represents a serious danger to the result of the conservative electorate. A possible prediction is that a further blockage of the policy can occur thanks to a result close to balance or a repetition of the current proportions of force, a destiny that would oblige a compromise solution far more difficult than the one that was not found by perimeter of the right: condemning the country to dangerous instability and uncertainty even in foreign policy scenarios.