Palestinian parties hold leverage over Israel’s political future

JERUSALEM, Palestine (MNTV) — Palestinian political parties have emerged as decisive players in Israel’s post-election political landscape after securing 19 seats in the Knesset, potentially giving them the leverage to influence government formation and challenge policies directed against Palestinian citizens and communities.

The October 27 election left neither Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc nor its principal rival, led by former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, with the 61 seats required to form a parliamentary majority. 

The electoral success of the Joint List and the United Arab List (Ra’am) has therefore placed Palestinian representatives in an unusually influential position, according to an analysis by Palestinian journalist and author Ramzy Baroud published in Arab News.

The combined 19-seat result reflects an increase in Palestinian political representation and the ability of Palestinian voters to influence the balance of power despite longstanding political and institutional barriers.

Baroud argued that the outcome was particularly significant because major Israeli political parties have repeatedly treated Palestinian participation in government as a threat rather than an ordinary feature of parliamentary democracy.

During the election campaign, Netanyahu warned voters against the possibility of a government dependent on Palestinian parties, invoking the prospect of Mansour Abbas and Ahmad Tibi exercising political influence.

Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir also appealed to Jewish nationalist sentiment, urging supporters to vote to preserve Israel’s Jewish and Zionist character. 

Eisenkot, despite presenting himself as an alternative to Netanyahu, similarly ruled out forming a government with Arab parties, saying he did not consider them compatible with his political principles.

The statements highlighted the limits of Palestinian political participation in a parliamentary system that formally grants citizenship and voting rights while maintaining constitutional provisions that privilege Jewish national self-determination.

One of the central restrictions is Section 7A of Israel’s Basic Law: The Knesset, which allows electoral lists and candidates to be disqualified under specified conditions, including rejection of Israel’s character as a Jewish and democratic state.

In 2018, Israel also passed the Nation-State Basic Law, which declares that national self-determination within the state is exclusive to the Jewish people.

Palestinian political movements have long disputed the compatibility of these provisions with equal citizenship, arguing that the constitutional framework institutionalizes unequal national rights.

The debate over participation in Israeli parliamentary politics has consequently divided Palestinian political organizations.

Some movements advocate boycotting Knesset elections, arguing that participation risks legitimizing a political structure that discriminates against Palestinian citizens. 

Abnaa al-Balad, for example, has historically supported electoral boycotts and political organizing outside Israeli parliamentary institutions.

Others argue that parliamentary participation can provide an important means of securing resources, challenging discriminatory policies and protecting Palestinian communities.

The latest election has renewed this debate, particularly as Palestinian parties confront the possibility of influencing government formation without necessarily joining a governing coalition.

Ra’am, led by Mansour Abbas, previously participated in the coalition government formed by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid in June 2021. 

Its approach emphasized municipal funding, socioeconomic development, combating crime and addressing the needs of Palestinian communities inside Israel.

Ra’am secured eight seats in the latest election, and Abbas has indicated his willingness to pursue a similar strategy of parliamentary engagement.

The Joint List, meanwhile, won 11 seats and has emphasized Palestinian national rights, opposition to Netanyahu’s political agenda and social justice for Palestinian citizens.

Baroud argued that the two political formations could achieve greater influence if they coordinated their parliamentary strategies rather than allowing ideological and organizational differences to undermine their collective position.

Their potential leverage comes at a particularly sensitive moment for Palestinians across the region.

In Gaza, the continuing consequences of Israel’s genocide have devastated civilian infrastructure and displaced large sections of the population. 

In the occupied West Bank, settlement expansion, forced displacement and settler violence have intensified, while Palestinian citizens inside Israel continue to face political discrimination and restrictions.

The electoral result could therefore create an opportunity for Palestinian representatives to challenge aspects of Israeli government policy, although the extent of their influence will depend on negotiations and the willingness of opposition parties to cooperate with them.

Baroud cautioned against interpreting the possible removal of Netanyahu as a fundamental transformation of Israel’s political system.

Eisenkot, who leads the principal opposition bloc, has a military background and Zionist political commitments that offer no automatic guarantee of a change in Israeli policy toward Palestinians.

A government formed without Netanyahu could still preserve existing structures of occupation, settlement expansion and discrimination.

The significance of the election, therefore, lies less in the prospect of an immediate transformation than in the possibility of disrupting the political alliance that has enabled Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich to advance policies of annexation and repression.

Baroud argued that Palestinian parties should consider using their parliamentary leverage strategically to weaken the far-right bloc and limit its capacity to continue policies that have intensified violence against Palestinians.

He also stressed that electoral participation alone could not deliver Palestinian liberation or dismantle Israel’s existing political and constitutional structures.

Meaningful change, he argued, would require broader Palestinian political unity, sustained international solidarity, legal accountability and political action beyond the Knesset.

The election has consequently exposed a central contradiction in Israeli politics: Palestinian citizens possess the right to vote and elect representatives, but their participation in determining the country’s government remains contested by major Jewish political parties.

With neither principal bloc securing a parliamentary majority, Palestinian representatives now have an opportunity to test whether their electoral strength can translate into concrete political influence.