Israel's election deadlock deepens as foreign interference allegations trigger security investigation
By Shahnoor Saqib — SCN NEWS
JERUSALEM — Israel's disputed political future became increasingly uncertain on Thursday as election authorities requested an investigation into allegations of foreign interference, while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud party challenged the legitimacy of Arab-led parties' electoral gains. With final results still pending, the controversy has intensified a parliamentary deadlock that could remove Netanyahu from power, produce an unprecedented political alliance or force Israelis to return to the polls.
The Central Elections Committee asked the Shin Bet domestic intelligence agency to examine suspicions of interference by unspecified foreign actors. The request followed allegations that outside interests had attempted to influence the outcome of Tuesday's parliamentary election, although officials did not publicly identify those responsible or provide evidence establishing that interference had occurred. The investigation was requested as election authorities continued counting votes and prepared to publish the results.
Netanyahu and Likud responded by accusing Arab-led political parties of benefiting from an election that they claimed had been improperly influenced. The party alleged that the vote had been stolen and urged other political groups not to cooperate with Arab-led lawmakers in forming the next government. Those accusations were not supported by publicly disclosed evidence, and the elections committee's request for an intelligence investigation did not specifically implicate Arab-led parties.
The distinction is central to the developing controversy. A request to investigate possible foreign influence is not a finding that electoral fraud occurred, nor does it establish that any political party knowingly participated in wrongdoing. Election authorities have not announced evidence of systematic violations, and the outcome of the intelligence inquiry remains unknown.
The acting director-general of Israel's elections committee said in a letter on Thursday that officials had no basis, based on the information available to them, for concluding that systematic breaches of election integrity had taken place. The committee nevertheless sought further examination of the foreign interference allegations, with findings requested within a week.
The controversy emerged as preliminary parliamentary projections showed Netanyahu's political alliance falling well short of the 61 seats required to control the 120-member Knesset. Israeli media projected approximately 53 seats for parties aligned with the prime minister, 48 for other opposition parties and 19 for Arab-led parties. Those figures remained projections rather than certified final results.
Although Netanyahu's Likud appeared to remain the largest individual party, the projected distribution of seats left the prime minister without a clear governing majority. His opponents also lacked enough seats to form a government independently, placing Arab-led parties in a potentially decisive position in negotiations over Israel's next administration.
The results have created an unusual political opening. Parties representing Israel's Arab citizens could help determine whether Netanyahu remains prime minister or whether a coalition of his opponents can take power. Such an arrangement would require difficult compromises among political groups divided over national identity, security policy, the Palestinian question and the future of the Israeli government.
Arab citizens account for approximately one-fifth of Israel's population, but their political parties have frequently remained outside governing coalitions. Their increased electoral participation has therefore become one of the most consequential developments of the election, particularly because it could translate into influence over parliamentary leadership and government formation.
Netanyahu's campaign had portrayed Arab-led parties as a threat to Israel's political direction, an approach criticised by opponents who argued that it marginalised Arab citizens and questioned their legitimate participation in democratic institutions. The unexpectedly strong showing by those parties has intensified the dispute over whether their elected representatives should be included in negotiations to replace the government.
The prime minister's latest allegations prompted immediate criticism from opposition leaders, who accused him of attempting to undermine confidence in the election rather than accepting the emerging parliamentary arithmetic. They argued that political disagreements with Arab-led parties did not justify portraying their voters or representatives as illegitimate participants in the electoral process.
Yair Golan, leader of the Democrats party, accused Netanyahu of seeking to delegitimise the election results and the political participation of Arab citizens. Other opposition figures warned that unsupported accusations could deepen divisions at a time when the country faced an already difficult process of forming a government.
Mansour Abbas, leader of the Arab-led Ra'am party, welcomed an investigation into any genuine foreign interference while rejecting suggestions that his party was involved. His position highlighted the difference between supporting scrutiny of possible wrongdoing and accepting accusations directed at political parties without substantiated evidence.
The Arab-led Joint List also challenged Netanyahu's claims, accusing the prime minister of attempting to discredit an election in which Arab voters had exercised their democratic rights. Its representatives maintained that their parliamentary mandate should be recognised in the same way as that of other elected parties.
The allegations took on an international dimension when Qatar issued a categorical denial of claims that it had interfered in the Israeli election or financed activities intended to influence the outcome. The Gulf state rejected suggestions that it had attempted to purchase political support among Arab voters.
The elections committee had not publicly identified Qatar as the subject of its request to the Shin Bet, making it important to distinguish political accusations from the scope of the formal inquiry. No evidence was presented publicly establishing Qatari involvement in the election, and the intelligence agency had not announced findings.
Qatar's response added a diplomatic dimension to an already sensitive domestic dispute. Allegations involving foreign governments can affect international relations, particularly when they arise during a contested election. However, without verified findings, such accusations remain claims rather than established evidence of interference.
President Isaac Herzog urged political leaders to exercise restraint while the matter was investigated. He warned against allowing the controversy to cast suspicion on an entire community that had participated in the democratic process and emphasised the importance of maintaining confidence in Israel's institutions.
Herzog's role will become increasingly important once the final election results are formally certified. Under Israel's parliamentary system, the president consults political parties before selecting the lawmaker considered most likely to assemble a governing majority. That process does not automatically guarantee the premiership to the leader of the largest individual party.
The distinction matters because Netanyahu could remain the leader of Likud while failing to secure enough parliamentary support to form a government. Conversely, an opposition candidate could potentially assemble a majority by obtaining the backing of parties with sharply different political positions.
Former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, whose Yashar party emerged as a central force among Netanyahu's opponents, has indicated that cooperation with Arab-led parties could be considered under certain conditions. Such an arrangement would represent a significant political shift, although the parties involved would still need to agree on leadership, policy priorities and the terms of parliamentary support.
Eisenkot also warned against attempts to manipulate the timetable for the next Knesset, which is scheduled to be sworn in on November 10. His party said he had been briefed by the Shin Bet chief regarding the emerging controversy, underscoring the attention being given to the allegations at senior political and security levels.
The opposition faces a difficult strategic choice. A coalition involving Arab-led parties could provide a route to replacing Netanyahu, but it might prove politically contentious among Jewish parties whose voters disagree strongly over the Palestinian issue and national security. Other combinations could require parties that campaigned against Netanyahu to reverse their positions and negotiate with him.
The projected 19 seats held by Arab-led parties could also influence parliamentary decisions even if those parties do not formally join the government. Their support might help the opposition elect a new Knesset speaker, gain control of the legislative agenda and shape parliamentary proceedings while negotiations over the premiership continue.
Ahmad Tibi, a senior figure in the Joint List, indicated that opposition representatives had discussed support for replacing the Knesset speaker. Such an arrangement could provide Netanyahu