'It's not as if voters forget about Oct. 7 on any other day'

In Knesset breakup ado, Netanyahu, Haredim seen jostling for leverage, not a ballot date

As Likud takes control of dissolution process triggered by ultra-Orthodox demands for draft exemption, analysts say sides locked in a power struggle but may not actually want early elections

The Knesset’s overwhelming vote in favor of a government-backed bill that would dissolve the legislature last week appeared to set Israel on the path to early elections.

The measure must still go through committee and pass three more Knesset readings, but what’s at stake in the legislation is not really whether Israelis head to the polls in September or October. Rather, analysts and political insiders describe the dissolution process as the latest front in an ongoing power struggle between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ultra-Orthodox coalition partners, who are seeking to force movement on legislation exempting yeshiva students from military service.

For now, the fate of whether and when the Knesset dissolves is up to the coalition. After the preliminary vote, the next step is for the Knesset House Committee, led by coalition whip Ofir Katz, to begin deliberations on the measure, including determining a date for elections.

A hearing on the bill is possible as early as Monday, and the bill could be passed within days, though the coalition may also decide to drag out the process or let it stall out completely.

Politicians and commentators have spent days speculating about the various factors at play and game out when which parties may prefer for the vote to take place. The current window is fairly narrow, with the election currently scheduled for October 27 and the earliest realistic date in early September. Those seven weeks are already crowded with Jewish holidays, the UN General Assembly and the heavily freighted anniversary of the October 7, 2023, massacre.

But according to several analysts interviewed by The Times of Israel, the debate over timing itself is largely a mask for a larger internal dispute between Netanyahu and Haredi leaders.

“That difference of seven weeks between September 1 and October 27 is unlikely to make any difference,” pollster and political analyst Dahlia Scheindlin told The Times of Israel, noting that the ultra-Orthodox parties in particular draw support from a highly stable and defined electorate unlikely to shift their votes based on the calendar.

Some had speculated that ultra-Orthodox parties favored an early September election, riding the religious fervor that takes hold in the lead-up to the High Holy Days.

But Scheindlin argued that the dissolution push was primarily intended to strengthen the Haredi parties’ bargaining position and increase pressure on Netanyahu to advance a draft exemption law, or at least give the impression that they are doing so.

The dissolution vote came days after the United Torah Judaism party announced that it would push to dissolve the Knesset over the coalition’s failure to pass legislation codifying military conscription exemptions for ultra-Orthodox yeshiva students. Netanyahu had told Haredi MKs that the coalition currently doesn’t have the votes to pass the draft exemption legislation, and reportedly asked them to agree to shelve the bill until after the elections.

“They want to show Netanyahu, their rabbis and the public that they are doing something,” said Assaf Shapira, director of the Political Reform Program at the Israel Democracy Institute. “But they also want the draft exemption law to be passed. So they are using the dissolution bill as a leverage point to convince Netanyahu to advance the draft law.”

A source in the ultra-Orthodox Agudat Yisrael faction, which comprises half of the UTJ alliance, told The Times of Israel that the threat is genuine, arguing that because the government “didn’t manage to secure the standing of yeshiva students,” it “doesn’t deserve to exist.”

A spokesman for Degel HaTorah chairman Moshe Gafni, who heads the other faction in the UTJ alliance, did not respond to a request for comment.

Shapira argued that the fate of the dissolution legislation is inseparable from the fate of the draft bill itself.

“If the government manages to somehow advance the draft bill, it is far from certain that there will be early elections,” he said. “If the coalition fails to advance this law, then early elections might be possible.”

At the same time, the ultra-Orthodox parties, who have repeatedly threatened to topple the government over its failure to pass a draft exemption law, have limited incentives to actually bring down the government.

While they could theoretically support opposition efforts to topple the coalition, Shapira noted that they have consistently avoided doing so, recognizing that they are unlikely to find more favorable partners outside of their current allies.

Netanyahu largely neutralized the Haredi threat by having Likud put its own dissolution forward, giving him control of the process, though he may still need Haredi support.

Still, he may not necessarily want to actually send the Knesset home early, which would freeze any legislation still working its way to passage. And keeping the ultra-Orthodox happy may be necessary to avoid a scenario in which his rivals force the dissolution, which would project an image of weakness to voters.

The dissolution battle is therefore best understood not as a race toward elections, but as a contest between two groups with competing interests that may have little choice other than working together.

As Shapira put it, each side is pursuing its own interests, but it isn’t clear that “the political interests of either the ultra-Orthodox or Netanyahu are to dissolve the Knesset.”

A bid for control

Analysts interviewed by The Times of Israel were skeptical that Netanyahu is driven by calculations about when elections should be held.

While some commentators have suggested that the prime minister may prefer delaying elections in hopes of securing a military or diplomatic achievement vis-à-vis Iran, or to avoid campaigning around October 7, Scheindlin expressed doubts that either factor is decisive.

“I never really bought into the theory that he doesn’t want to hold elections in October,” she said. “It’s not as if Israelis have forgotten about October 7 on any other day of the year.”

Those who blame Netanyahu for the failures surrounding the Hamas-led massacre “will continue to blame him every single day,” she argued, adding that there is no evidence that a difference of several weeks would significantly alter the political landscape.

Instead, Scheindlin said, Netanyahu’s overriding political objective has long been to remain in office for as long as possible, a consideration that has become even more important amid his ongoing corruption trial and “such colossal failures” that have occurred on his watch.

That objective better explains Netanyahu’s response after UTJ announced plans to advance dissolution legislation and opposition parties submitted bills of their own. Rather than allowing rivals to dictate the process, Katz quickly introduced a coalition-backed dissolution bill — the proposal that ultimately passed its preliminary reading unanimously on Wednesday.

“He wanted to take control of the situation,” Shapira said simply. “Netanyahu has much more power now than he did two days ago.”

The move placed the dissolution process largely in the coalition’s hands. As chairman of the Knesset House Committee, Katz controls the committee agenda and timetable, giving the coalition broad discretion over whether the legislation advances quickly or stalls.

While the coalition could theoretically push the bill through the Knesset within days, it could also delay deliberations for weeks “until it becomes essentially meaningless,” said Shapira.

Given that elections cannot be held until at least three months after the Knesset dissolves, every delay narrows the window for holding elections significantly before the latest possible vote on October 27.

The opposition retains one potential source of influence. On Wednesday, lawmakers also approved a preliminary reading of a separate dissolution bill sponsored by lawmakers from Benny Gantz’s Blue and White party. Should the coalition decide not to promote its own legislation, Blue and White’s bill could still be viable as a sword of Damocles over Netanyahu’s head.

Still, analysts caution against overstating its significance. Katz still controls the committee’s legislative process, and while the opposition and ultra-Orthodox parties could theoretically cooperate to pressure him to advance the legislation, they are highly unlikely to do so.

For now, the dissolution process appears less a countdown to elections than a continuation of the coalition’s internal power struggle by other means. Whether the legislation ultimately moves forward is largely up to Netanyahu, and it remains unclear whether holding elections a few weeks earlier would make much difference to either side at the ballot box.