What happens when political parties that oppose the Jewish character of the state become indispensable to forming its government?
By Jordan Levy, World Israel News
The biggest story of Israel’s election is not Benjamin Netanyahu’s political survival, Gadi Eisenkot’s performance, or even the possibility of another parliamentary deadlock.
It is the historic surge in the Arab vote.
And its implications could be far more consequential than the identity of Israel’s next prime minister.
The predominantly Arab parties won 19 seats in the 120-member Knesset, nearly doubling their representation from the outgoing parliament.
That is almost one-sixth of Israel’s legislature.
More importantly, with neither of the two major political blocs reaching the 61 seats necessary to form a government, Arab party leaders could find themselves holding extraordinary influence over the future of the Jewish state.
This is not simply another election-night surprise. It is a warning about the political future Israel may face if the trends visible in Tuesday’s vote continue.
And there is every reason to take that possibility seriously.
The Warning From 40 Years Ago
More than four decades ago, Rabbi Meir Kahane warned that Israel faced a fundamental contradiction between its identity as a Jewish state and the possibility that political movements rejecting Jewish sovereignty could eventually gain substantial power through the democratic process.
Kahane argued that the Jewish people had returned to their ancestral homeland not merely to establish another Western-style parliamentary democracy, but to restore Jewish national independence after nearly 2,000 years of exile.
His central concern was that Jewish sovereignty could be undermined from within if political power eventually shifted toward movements opposed to the state’s Jewish character.
Kahane’s proposed solutions, including removing Arabs from Israel and denying political rights on ethnic grounds, were widely viewed as extreme measures. His movement was subsequently barred from participating in Knesset elections.
But rejecting those proposals does not mean Israel can afford to dismiss the underlying question.
What happens when political parties that oppose the Jewish character of the state become indispensable to forming its government?
What happens when a prospective prime minister cannot secure a majority without their support?
And what happens if their parliamentary strength continues to grow?
These questions are no longer confined to ideological debates from the 1980s.
They are emerging directly from the results of Israel’s 2026 election.
From 10 Seats to 19 – What Happens Next?
The numbers are remarkable.
In 2015, the Joint List won 13 Knesset seats. In March 2020, the united Arab parties reached a then-record 15 seats.
In the 2022 election, the Arab-majority parties that crossed the electoral threshold won a combined 10 seats.
Now, just four years later, they have surged to a staggering 19 seats.
The increase has been driven by extraordinary mobilization in Arab communities across Israel.
In Nazareth, turnout jumped from approximately 48% in 2022 to more than 72% on Tuesday. In Umm al-Fahm, it surged from 38% to nearly 76%. In the Bedouin city of Rahat, turnout reached 82%, compared with approximately 61% four years earlier.
These figures demonstrate an enormous reservoir of electoral strength that had previously gone largely untapped.
The implications are unmistakable.
Arab citizens already constitute approximately one-fifth of Israel’s population. Their electoral influence depends on population growth, turnout, party unity, and the distribution of votes among competing lists.
Tuesday’s election demonstrated what can happen when those factors begin working together.
And what happens if this becomes the new normal?
What happens if Arab political participation remains at historically high levels, while demographic changes gradually increase the size of the Arab electorate?
A future in which Arab-majority parties win 20, 22, or even 25 seats is not mathematically impossible.
Those are hypothetical figures, not demographic forecasts. But after an election in which Arab parties have reached 19 seats, they are scenarios that deserve serious consideration.
At 25 seats, such parties would control more than one-fifth of the Knesset.
They would not possess anything close to a majority on their own. But in Israel’s fragmented parliamentary system, where governments frequently rise or fall on a handful of mandates, their bargaining power could be enormous.
The Arab Political Leadership’s Own Words
The concerns surrounding the growing electoral power of Arab-majority parties are not based on speculation. Their leaders have publicly challenged Israel’s Jewish national identity, and some have made deeply controversial statements concerning Palestinian violence and terrorism.
Consider Ahmad Tibi, one of the most prominent and influential Arab politicians in the Knesset.
Tibi has long opposed Israel’s definition as the nation-state of the Jewish people. In a 2006 interview with Ynet, he argued that Israel could not simultaneously define itself as the state of the Jewish nation and claim to be democratic.
His political vision is fundamentally different from the Zionist principle upon which Israel was founded.
But Tibi’s record goes considerably further than constitutional disagreements.
In a 2011 speech in Ramallah, Tibi praised Palestinian shahids, or martyrs, declaring that they represented the pinnacle of national sacrifice.
Tibi has also described Jerusalem as Arab, Muslim, and Palestinian, challenging Israel’s national claims to its capital.
Then there is Mansour Abbas, chairman of the Islamist Ra’am party, whose image as a pragmatic coalition partner has frequently overshadowed his own controversial political record.
Abbas has declined to give an unequivocal answer when asked whether Hamas should be destroyed as a terrorist organization, even after the October 7 massacre. He has described Israeli military operations against Palestinian terrorist organizations as aggression and has advocated Palestinian political cooperation involving Hamas.
In August 2026, Abbas acknowledged that Israel’s Jewish character was a reality imposed on Arab citizens, rather than a national identity they had voluntarily embraced.
Other Arab political movements have similarly advocated replacing Israel’s Jewish national identity with a state defined without a specifically Jewish national character.
These are not merely disagreements over public spending or municipal development.
They concern the foundational identity of the state itself.
Who Should Determine the Future of the Jewish State?
Israel was established as the national homeland of the Jewish people, and protecting that identity is a fundamental responsibility of its political institutions, regardless of which bloc controls the government.
That responsibility becomes particularly significant when politicians who reject Israel’s Jewish character, or express support for armed struggle against it, seek influence over the country’s most important decisions.
Israeli law already recognizes this concern.
Section 7A of Basic Law: The Knesset allows parties and candidates to be disqualified for rejecting Israel’s existence as a Jewish and democratic state, inciting racism, or supporting armed struggle against Israel by an enemy state or terrorist organization.
Yet just weeks before Tuesday’s election, the Supreme Court overturned decisions to disqualify the Joint List and Ra’am, ruling that the evidence did not meet the strict legal requirements.
The election results have now placed renewed attention on these constitutional safeguards and the standards used to enforce them, particularly as Arab-majority parties gain greater parliamentary influence.
The challenge facing Israel’s institutions is to uphold the country’s Jewish national identity while respecting the equal political rights guaranteed to its citizens.
The issue extends beyond who wins the next election. It concerns how Israel’s existing laws and institutions will protect the foundational principles on which the state was established.
The Coalition Question Israel Cannot Escape
The growing strength of Arab-majority parties raises a question that extends far beyond the formation of Israel’s next government: What happens if their parliamentary support becomes increasingly difficult for either major political bloc to govern without?
As Arab-majority parties gain seats, the number available to other parties shrinks. Unless Zionist parties overcome their political divisions, assembling a 61-seat majority without Arab-party support could become increasingly challenging.
The implications go well beyond determining who becomes prime minister.
A government dependent on Arab-party support could face significant pressure over critical national issues, including military operations, counterterrorism policies, Palestinian statehood, Jewish sovereignty, and Israel’s national character.
The 2021 Bennett-Lapid coalition, which included Ra’am, demonstrated that Arab-party participation in government is already a political reality.
For Zionist parties that oppose such arrangements, the prospect of becoming dependent on Arab-majority factions presents a serious dilemma. Their refusal to cooperate with one another could leave them facing precisely the coalition arrangements they seek to avoid.
And the more fragmented the Knesset becomes, the greater the potential leverage of parties whose support is necessary to sustain a government.
Protecting Israel’s Jewish Identity
Israel’s founding documents establish two commitments that have existed alongside one another since independence.
The country was founded as the sovereign nation-state of the Jewish people.
It also committed itself to equality of political rights for its citizens.
The 2018 Nation-State Basic Law reaffirmed the first principle by establishing that national self-determination in Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
Section 7A of Basic Law: The Knesset provides a separate safeguard against certain forms of anti-democratic and anti-state political activity.
Together, these provisions create a framework intended to protect Israel’s Jewish national identity while maintaining political participation for all its citizens.
The election results have renewed questions about whether that framework is sufficient.
Those questions include whether existing laws adequately prevent parties that support terrorism or armed struggle against Israel from entering the Knesset and whether the grounds for disqualification need to be strengthened.
More far-reaching questions about eligibility to serve in the Knesset may also arise, including how additional restrictions would affect equal political rights and democratic representation.
There may be no simple solution. But with Arab-majority parties gaining unprecedented political influence, the debate over how Israel can safeguard its Jewish identity is becoming increasingly urgent.
Israel was established to guarantee the Jewish people’s right to determine their own national future. Ensuring that this fundamental purpose is preserved for generations to come remains one of the country’s most consequential challenges.
The post The nightmare Israel can no longer ignore: The Arab vote and the future of the Jewish state appeared first on World Israel News.
