Jewish votes for Arab parties? What would that mean?

Reaching a parliamentary majority without a party majority is the same sausage-making in every country. The only difference in Israel is that, between Jewish and Arab voters, pork is not in the grinder. And the mainstream media is just looking at the grind, while not asking anything about what went in.

From my seat as a progressive observer in the U.S., I see the mainstream narrative for Israel's election as deadlock, how well the Arab parties did, and how no other parties will enter coalition with Arab parties. This is the dilemma set for Gadi Eisenkot and his Yashar party, repeated across all the coverage. In the New York Times alone, over a few days: “Israel in Limbo as Voting Yields No Clear Victor,” “What to Make of Israel’s Ambiguous Election,” “Netanyahu Did Not Win the Israeli Election, but He Is Far From Out,” and, on the opposition leader, “Eisenkot’s ‘Catch-22’: Main Rival of Netanyahu Has No Easy Options.”

Missing in the mainstream

But here is a wrinkle no one considers: how many Jewish voters cast a vote for an Arab party? Well, the Arab parties went after Jewish voters. I am no expert on Israel, but there are some universal truths in political campaigns. Arab parties spent time and effort on Jewish community outreach for their well-researched reasons. So the Arab-versus-Jewish parties narrative may not be the full picture once you take such outreach into account.

The parties labeled Arab are the Joint List (a micro-coalition of three political parties, including the old Israeli Communist Party) and Ra'am. Both campaigned in Jewish communities and both put Jewish candidates on their lists. The Joint List had a specific aim of one seat's worth of Jewish votes. Ra'am's number two candidate is Yoav Segalovitz, a Jewish former member of parliament from a centrist Zionist party who, before politics, led the Israeli police's anti-corruption and national crime unit. In August he quit his party to run with Ra'am, on the condition, which Ra'am accepted, that it recognize Israel as the Jewish state. Segalovitz is betting his career that Jewish voters will follow him across this line; Ra'am is betting its identity that he is right.

Smaller parties, outsized impact

A vote for a smaller party in Israel is not always wasted, unlike in the United States, because Israel has always been governed by party coalitions, from center-left to the current very, very right. If your party clears 3.25% of the vote to earn Knesset seats and holds positions coalition-builders can work with, small parties have outsized power to press their issues into the new government. Israeli voters understand coalitions and how a smaller party can set policy. A Jewish voter could decide the most credible party to oppose the war and ethnic cleansing is an Arab party. Jewish parties can backslide, but how could an Arab party turn away from such fundamental goals?

Read the article I cited above and consider this: How many Jewish voters expressed a desire to end the war and find a new direction by voting for an Arab party? It is a typically progressive response--elect oppressed people to the parliament oppressing them. An Arab party that owes success to high Arab turnout and more Jewish votes than ever before, well, that would challenge the narrative if true. Such a turn would also expand how people can discuss entering into an agreement with an Arab party.

Netanyahu's box

Back to the media narrative, which does have a connection to reality. From what I gather, the opposition stands nearly as firm against coalition with Arab parties, after being boxed in by Netanyahu. Eisenkot, whose party is the largest in the anti-Netanyahu bloc, has said he will build only on a “Zionist majority.” Other centrist and right-leaning leaders in the anti-Netanyahu bloc have ruled out Arab partners as well. So the people who most need the Arab parties are publicly refusing to discuss the parties' participation. Only the leader of the main left-wing Zionist party (which won eight seats) is openly calling for an Arab partnership—whether he speaks only for the left flank or is testing the waters for the broader opposition, time will tell.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu and his coalition will cry to the heavens that there is no “Zionist majority” to run the country (when he is not claiming Arabs stole the election). A Zionist majority is not a legal requirement, but Arab parties are the only path to a government without Netanyahu. So the Netanyahu side, which could never publicly reach such an agreement, will scream loudest that no one should, because the best result for Netanyahu is no result. And here in the U.S., that is the narrative we will hear--deadlock because no one will work with the Arab parties.

New questions, better understanding

The story behind this election is likely much more than the stark choice looping in the media. This piece is not intended to counsel Israeli politicians; they know their politics. It is for progressives to take in the Israeli election story, question narratives, and look for unexpected solutions. A thought experiment: you need a coalition with parties you said you could never join. What do you do? The answer may be to redefine the partners by how the election played out. For this Israeli election, if the local vote counts bear it out, that could mean recognizing cross-cultural support for peace in the votes for Arab parties. Not an exercise in compromise, but in focus. What matters today for a better tomorrow? What can we agree on now to preserve our right to disagree later?

Back in the U.S.

The MAGA era is lumbering to a close, and how it closes decides whether another follows. Progressives cannot just win elections. While our governance does not explicitly rely on building multi-party coalitions, we all know the Democratic party has its spectrum of concerns that cluster and often divide Democrats. Then there are rural voters across the country, written off by most Democrats in spite of clear common interests. Unfortunately, we are often trapped in our own mainstream media loop of how broad coalitions cannot be reached.

To end MAGA for good, progressives must find what we can agree on with people we have stood apart from for decades. We cannot stay trapped in false choices and half-understanding, consoled by the warmth of familiar animosities. We must take an honest look at the political field, find partners who want to stop the bleeding, and move toward a better country. Israel could make that journey with the right decisions in the coming weeks. I hope we can follow such a path soon.