Israel’s Knesset is scheduled to meet on November 10 for the swearing-in of its 120 MKs (Members of Knesset): 53 from the bloc led by Prime Minister Netanyahu, 48 from the opposition bloc whose largest party is led by former IDF (Israel Defense Forces) chief Gadi Eisenkot, and 19 from the Arab parties.The elections held on October 27 were remarkable in several respects. Voter turnout, at 77.9 per cent, was the highest since 1999. Turnout among Arab citizens, who make up about a fifth of Israel’s population but about 16 per cent of its electorate, was even higher, at an estimated 80 per cent. Contrary to the opinion polls, Netanyahu’s bloc came out ahead of the opposition bloc, and his Likud party won the most seats, with 27. The Arab parties won a record 19 seats, roughly matching the Arab share of the electorate, suggesting that Arab voters overwhelmingly backed one of the two Arab lists.AdvertisementAlso Read | Omer Bartov’s ‘Israel: What Went Wrong?’ forces the world to rethink Gaza and ZionismThe fractured election outcome, particularly the sharp rise in Arab-Israeli representation, has made government formation extremely difficult. Though the opposition bloc together with the Arab-Israeli parties forms a majority of 67 in the Knesset, a viable government cannot be formed unless the opposition parties break one or more of their campaign pledges.Three of the four opposition parties have campaigned against relying on the Arab-Israeli parties, the party led by former foreign minister Lieberman being particularly opposed. Without its seven seats, the remaining opposition parties and the Arab-Israeli parties together have 60, one short of a majority. Even a minority government sustained by the Arab-Israeli parties from outside would therefore depend on Lieberman at least abstaining, which he is unlikely to do. Moreover, the precedents are not encouraging. Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin relied on Arab support to pass the Oslo accords in 1993–95, and Prime Minister Bennett relied on an Arab party to form his government in 2021. In both cases, Netanyahu attacked the arrangement as illegitimate and won the next election. The reality is that even if an opposition government is formed with the support of an Arab-Israeli party, which appears unlikely, it will not survive for long.The single most important factor bringing the four parties together as the opposition camp was their common cause of preventing Netanyahu from becoming Prime Minister again, hence its label, the “Change Bloc.” Even if Lieberman, who served in Netanyahu’s governments in the past, were to switch sides, the Netanyahu bloc would still fall one seat short of a majority.AdvertisementThe two ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) parties in Netanyahu’s coalition, Shas and United Torah Judaism (UTJ), are unhappy that the Prime Minister did not deliver on his promise of legislation exempting Haredi yeshiva students from compulsory military service, which in practice most of them have been avoiding. UTJ is reportedly willing to switch sides and back Eisenkot in return for such an exemption, and Shas may follow. But one of Eisenkot’s key campaign promises was legislation to ensure that all Israelis, including the Haredim, undergo compulsory military service. He cannot accept a draft exemption without breaking that promise and alienating all three of his partners.Israel’s President is reportedly keen to avoid another election and is said to favour the formation of a national unity government. This too is unlikely, except through arm-twisting of the opposition parties by President Trump. Netanyahu’s continuation as Prime Minister would suit Trump, who in a highly unusual move openly endorsed him before the elections, as it would make it easier for Trump to carry out further military strikes on Iran. Likud sources are already floating a unity government in which Netanyahu would remain Prime Minister until the end of Trump’s term, as part of a rotational arrangement. But if the Republicans lose in the US midterm elections, Trump’s arm-twisting is unlikely to succeed.Under Israel’s Basic Laws, the formation of a government could take several months, and if no one succeeds, a fresh election follows. This would mean Netanyahu continues as Prime Minister, with considerable latitude to pursue his domestic and foreign policies, including the war with Iran, even as a caretaker. Netanyahu may well calculate that a fresh election, in the event of a failure to form a government, would bolster his chances, and in any case prolong his tenure. However, Eisenkot is keen to deliver on some of his election promises even if he is unable to form a government, particularly a state commission of inquiry into the October 7 terror attack by Hamas, which Netanyahu has consistently resisted. This is possible if the opposition bloc, with the support of the Arab-Israeli parties, elects a new Speaker in place of Likud’s Amir Ohana when the Knesset meets on November 10, and then legislates to set up the commission.Most of the opposition parties have reportedly agreed to do so. Such a move would affect Netanyahu’s political future. To thwart it, as well as any Eisenkot government relying on Arab-Israeli support, Netanyahu’s Likud has claimed that the Arab-Israeli parties “stole” the election, a claim the police have rejected for lack of evidence, while Israel’s internal security agency, the Shin Bet, is separately probing suspected foreign funding of the vote. But such moves cannot prevent the Knesset from meeting on November 10 and electing a new Speaker, though the tense atmosphere may spill onto the streets with unintended consequences. Another complicating factor is that Lieberman is reportedly reluctant to cooperate with the Arab-Israeli parties even on the election of a new Speaker. But if his party abstains, as the other opposition leaders are urging, the opposition would still have a simple majority. Eisenkot would then be able to proceed with setting up the commission of inquiry, as well as with legislation on compulsory military service for all and on reversing the judicial overhaul, which was a major issue in the months preceding October 7.The left parties in Israel have been in drastic decline, from 56 seats in 1992 to just four in 2022. The Democrats’ 8 seats in the recent elections are a modest recovery, but still a fraction of the left’s former strength. The collapse of Camp David and the outbreak of the Second Intifada in 2000 were the turning points. The decline was accentuated by continued rocket fire after the Gaza withdrawal in 2005 and Hamas’s takeover of Gaza in 2007, culminating in a decisive rightward shift in Israeli society after the October 7 attack. In the new Knesset, parties that reject a Palestinian state hold as many as 93 of the 120 seats.you may likeAccordingly, while there could be some changes in domestic policies in the near term, aimed largely at holding Netanyahu to account, Israel’s policies towards Gaza and the West Bank will remain essentially the same. In the West Bank, the only change would be a reduction in settler violence; settlement expansion would continue. On foreign policy, there is a broad consensus on the war with Iran, though Eisenkot has signalled a more cautious approach until a new government is formed. If the opposition bloc comes to power, it would seek to repair relations with Europe.As of now, government formation in Israel is in flux. There should be some clarity after the US midterms and by the time the new Knesset meets on November 10.The writer is a former Ambassador of India to Egypt and concurrently Permanent Representative to the Arab league