Gantz said to rule out unity coalition with Netanyahu, while some in party back idea
National Unity’s Matan Kahana reportedly suggested partnership at faction meeting a few weeks ago, drawing support from at least 3 MKs but objections from party chief
Several members of the National Unity party are in favor of joining a unity government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but faction chief Benny Gantz remains opposed to the idea, Hebrew media reported Thursday.
National Unity MK Matan Kahana, who posted a plan for such an arrangement on social media Thursday, raised it at a party meeting a few weeks ago, Channel 13 reported.
Kahana suggested in his post that the sides reach an agreement for Netanyahu to serve for two more years and then resign ahead of an early election, in order to extract Israel from the crisis it has plunged into as the current government advances its divisive judicial overhaul proposals.
At least three unnamed National Unity lawmakers out of its 12 members were said to back the idea on certain, unclear conditions, while MK Pnina Tamano-Shata apparently completely dismissed the idea.
Gantz reportedly said there was no chance of coming to such an arrangement with Netanyahu: “There’s nobody for us to make deals with.”
Neither Gantz nor National Unity responded to Channel 13’s request for a response. Kahana’s office said they would not comment on closed-door party meetings.
Referring to his proposal as the “Kahana plan to save the State of Israel from crisis,” the MK said it would see National Unity and Yesh Atid — the largest opposition party in the Knesset — join the Likud-led government along with “anyone else who accept values in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.” Two years from now, Netanyahu would “retire to his home in dignity” and an election would be held.
Kahana made no reference to the ongoing corruption trial Netanyahu is facing. Gantz and Lapid have repeatedly rejected any possibility of sitting in a Netanyahu-led government, due to the criminal cases against the prime minister.
They reiterated their positions last month amid reports of a possible normalization deal with Saudi Arabia. Such a development would require concessions to the Palestinians that far-right elements in the coalition would likely not agree to. Lapid and Gantz said they would support a normalization deal from outside the government, but not join the coalition.
This week, however, Yesh Atid MK Elazar Stern said he too would welcome a unity government proposal due to the ongoing national crisis over the judicial shakeup.
“Do you really think there is a better solution to the deep crisis the country is currently in?” Kahana wrote on Twitter. “This government could heal the deep internal divide among us and make room for all parts of society in Israel.”
Despite his party leader’s repeated denials, Kahana said he believes that “if such a scenario were even remotely possible, [Gantz] would seriously consider it.”
Hebrew media cited a source close to Gantz on Thursday who responded that individual MKs are entitled to express their personal views but indicated this did not reflect Gantz’s position.
For its part, Yesh Atid said in a statement, “A unity government with Netanyahu would destroy the country.”
Netanyahu’s coalition of right, far-right and religious parties has made a drastic overhaul of the judiciary a central plank of its policy. The legislation, one piece of which has already been passed into law, has met with months of mass protests. The political turmoil has divided Israeli society and seeped into the military, with some reservists saying they won’t volunteer for service unless the plan is stopped.
The government and its supporters say the judicial overhaul is needed to rein in what they see as an overreaching court system. Opponents say it will dangerously dilute the court’s power, eroding Israel’s democratic character.
Negotiations to reach an agreement between the coalition and opposition, held earlier this year, failed to produce a deal. No further talks are scheduled, with each side blaming the intractability of the other.
