The end of Benjamin Netanyahu’s premiership cannot come soon enough

Editorial: The prime minister has endangered the lives of his own citizens through an aggressive programme of territorial expansion. His failure should be celebrated

Netanyahu looks on after speaking to supporters at his Likud party headquarters following the announcement of exit polls yesterday (Reuters)

Pushing 70, the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has dominated the political life of his country for much of the past two decades – for good or ill. To put things into a British context, it is as if Tony Blair was still running Britain, give or take a few absences, and with no great electoral mandate. Indeed, so diminished is Mr Netanyahu’s popular support in these legislative elections that it may just be possible his long reign is drawing to a close.

At any rate, it can hardly be said to be an endorsement for Mr Netanyahu to win about 32 seats in the 120-member Knesset, and to be, more or less, in a draw with his nearest rival Benny Gantz’s Blue and White Party. Even if these two front runners created a “grand coalition” to deliver some much needed stability into Israel’s parliament, they would hardly command a majority. The system of almost perfect proportional representation has endowed Israel with a colourful kaleidoscope of smaller parties, and one of the most variegated political scenes on the planet. Every sect, faction and splinter group is able to enjoy a national voice, but it is hard to argue that it has served the state of Israel well on the central issue of peace, impressive though some of its economic achievements have undoubtedly been.

The Knesset still makes the House of Commons (when it is allowed to sit) look like a cradle of strong government and democratic stability. Still, Mr Gantz is making some brave noises about constructing a “national unity” government, comprising his own movement and a variety of smaller left-wing groups, and possibly with the tacit support of Israeli Arab parties. Although the liberal and pluralistic credentials of the Blue and White Party can be overstated – it remains opposed to the Palestinian right of return and supports Jerusalem as the undivided national capital – a Gantz premiership would at least mark a fresh start for Israel. It would turn the page on the alleged corruption of the Netanyahu era, and all that went with it. It could conceivably mean an end to the expansionism practised by Netanyahu’s Likud governments, and a better deal for the Palestinian and Israeli Arabs. Importantly, it would mean a fresh pair of hands at the negotiating table as President Trump finalises his Middle East peace plan.

At least Mr Gantz talks the talk: “No to incitement and division, yes to unity. No to corruption, and yes to clean hands. No to attempts to destroy Israeli democracy, and yes to statesmanship and Israel as a democratic and Jewish state.”

Perhaps a little triumphalist, Mr Gantz says he is talking to others about building the complicated coalition he will need for his national unity government. Even so, Mr Netanyahu, accustomed as he is to the trappings of office and exercise of power, is unlikely to give up office without at least trying to construct some alliances of his own. If he was to achieve that aim, and somehow cling to office, he will need the support of another force in Israeli politics, the nationalistic Yisrael Beytenu, which retains much of the values of its origins as a secular party identified with Jewish Russian emigres. For his part, the leader of Yisrael​, Avigdor Lieberman, advocates a super-coalition between his open group, plus Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gantz. Given everything, this seems an improbable scenario and would leave Israel with no effective parliamentary opposition.

Today, Israel faces challenges as great as any in its existence, including some of the most vicious terrorism ever witnessed on the planet, and the implacable hostility evinced by regimes such as Iran. At a time when the Iranians are already fighting a proxy war with the Saudis in Yemen, when Bahrain is diving the Gulf powers, when Lebanon, Iraq and Syria are all failed or failing states, and when Turkey, America and Russia are also engaged in regional power games, this is no time for Israel to turn to the right and to militarism for its national security. Israel is perfectly entitled to defend itself, but it is not, and never has been, entitled to annex territory or defy multiple UN resolutions or deny the human rights of its Israeli Arab citizens. This makes Israel less, not more, secure and cohesive as a democratic state. It has endangered the lives of its own citizens through an aggressive programme of territorial expansion. Whatever fate befalls Benjamin Netanyahu, that is surely the abiding lesson of his long years in power.