T. Belman. Bibi is known for holding back the settlement enterprise and not being tough enough on the illegal Arab construction in J&S and on the Bedouin land grab in the Negev. Bennett and Sa’ar are in favour of applying sovereignty in J&S. Bibi did nothing to advance a rightwing agenda. Bennett and Saar will advance the policies of the right with support of his centrist partners then Bibi would have done with the support of Bennett and Sa’ar.
The issue is not that Bennett and Sa’ar have made compromises or abandoned the right, but rather that they have abandoned Netanyahu.
By TOVAH LAZAROFF , JPOST JUNE 5, 2021 22:34
PRIME MINISTER Benjamin Netanyahu and then-education minister Naftali Bennett in the Knesset in 2017.
In his apparent final days in office, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has fallen back on his tactic of fear mongering in a last-minute bid to retain power.
Just before the start of Shabbat, Netanyahu took a swipe at right-wing party heads Naftali Bennett of Yamina and Gideon Sa’ar of New Hope.
“In the coming week’s affair we will read about the spies affair – public representatives in the nation Israel who took out the livelihood of the land and weakened the spirit of the people just out of concern for their personal position,” Netanyahu wrote. ““Also in our generation, in our time, we must stand up [to] those who were elected by the right-wing voices and do the right thing: to create a strong and good right-wing government that will protect the land of Israel, the citizens of Israel and the state.”
Netanyahu’s words are part of a series of attacks by himself or others against Bennett and Sa’ar, in which their forming a governing coalition with left-wing parties and the Arab Islamist party Ra’am has been called “dangerous” to the state and even to the global right-wing movement.
It’s the latest in a prolonged drama in which Netanyahu attempts to label the leadership battle between himself and his opponents as between Right and Left, as if this was a simplistic black and white situation.
Within that archetypal dichotomy, Netanyahu has a right-wing government almost in his grasp, if only Bennett and Sa’ar would agree to sit in his government.
On paper he is correct. With those two parties in tow he would have a stable right-wing government. But could it advance a right-wing agenda? The answer is, it could not.
One needs only look backward at one of the key yardsticks for the Right – issues relating to Judea and Samaria, also known as the West Bank – to know why this is so.
Here is what did not happen while Netanyahu has been prime minister for 12 years:
• The E-1 construction project by Ma’aleh Adumim has not been given final authorization.
• The advancement and approval rate of new settler construction projects has been high, but actual building was fairly consistent with past trends, and as a result the rate of settlement growth dropped.
• Settler outposts have not been authorized en mass, and even a declaration of intent to authorize them never came before the government.
• Save for one isolated case, new settlements were not built from scratch.
• Most significantly, the promised application of sovereignty over all the West Bank settlements never materialized.
True, Netanyahu did not always have a complete right-wing government, but he had enough support enough of the time to have accomplished the entire list, including annexation.
That he didn’t speaks to the limits of what a right-wing government can do when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Time has shown that for a right-wing government to be effective, it must also have the support of a US president, and even then, such activity has limits.
With former US president Donald Trump at the helm, the United States under Netanyahu’s watch relocated the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Trump also recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
But Trump has now been replaced by President Joe Biden, who has spoken against settlement activity, and who is unlikely to allow a right-wing agenda to move forward when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
At best, a right-wing government could play defensive ball. When Trump was in office, a right-wing government had meaning. With Biden, the situation is likely to be in a deep freeze thereby opening the door for Bennett to join a broad based coalition led by himself and Yesh Atid party head Yair Lapid.
As proof, one need only look at the warning put out last week by the Yesha Council on a freeze on the advancement and authorization of new settlement homes by Netanyahu.
Simultaneously, Binyamin Regional Council head Israel Gantz spoke of his support for Netanyahu, and urged Bennett and Sa’ar to support him least they set the cause of the settlements back years.
But once one understand the importance of a US president to settlement policy and looks at the credential of the three men on paper, Bennett and Sa’ar have much more of a right-wing standing than Netanyahu.
Neither men support a Palestinian state, while Netanyahu agreed twice – once under president Barack Obama and again under Trump –to a two-state resolution to the conflict, albeit with a demilitarized Palestinian state.
Bennett and Sa’ar both believe that all of Area C should be part of Israel’s final borders, whereas Netanyahu agreed to Trump’s peace plan that designated portions of Area C for a Palestinian state.
Bennett was the first high-level politician to speak of annexing West Bank settlements, doing so almost a decade ago. Sa’ar followed, with Netanyahu coming to it only two years ago, as one of the last of his party to support it.
Netanyahu has sat in coalitions with Lapid and with the left-wing Labor party. And he spoke in April of creating a coalition that was dependent on Ra’am from the outside, leading people to believe that he might have even formed a coalition with him. He was only blocked from doing so by Zionist Party head Bezalel Smotrich.
Ironically, Bennett and Sa’ar can now sit in a government with Ra’am because Netanyahu made the possibility acceptable.
But that is not the only way Netanyahu helped them weave their path to the current coalition, which will have left-wing, centrist and right-wing parties.
Netanyahu success has been his ability to make compromises, to lean left when needed, in pursuit of a lager goal. He is known for believing that one should be flexible when needed, to be better able to stand one’s ground later in the battle.
With an eye to creating good will with Obama, he agreed to a 10-month moratorium on new housing starts in 2009-2010. Last year Netanyahu broke his promise to the voters to annex West Bank settlements, when he agreed to suspend that application of sovereignty in favor of the Abraham Accords under whose rubric Israel normalized four peace deals with Arab states.
That is just in this current premiership. His first time in office, from 1996 to 1999, he divided Hebron, and shook hands with Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat.
Netanyahu has mastered the art of asking the right-wing public to forgive his compromises in the short run, and to trust that he will achieve their goals in the end. It was his success with this tactic that allowed him to speak of a coalition with Ra’am in the first place.
Bennett and Sa’ar are simply taking a page out of his political playbook with the argument that a compromise does not mean they have abandoned the right.
The argument that only Netanyahu can make such compromises but fellow right-politicians cannot falls flat when viewed against the backdrop of reality.
The issue is not that Bennett and Sa’ar have made compromises or abandoned the right, but rather that they have abandoned Netanyahu. In his playbook, there is only one Right and he leads it, and no one else can follow in his footsteps.
@peloni
Freedom of expression = freedom to express ideas.
Freedom of expression NOT = freedom of emotion or passion.
To give an example:
Then he goes on to say that this passion is hatred.
Not all forms of expression should be protected by law in a free society.
I agree, as I stated clearly twice.
But the time to address institutional problems in a meaningful manner without bias to either side is not at the crux of an election or during a leadership challenge. Many of these people have been in Knessett for some time. Did they address such concerns in that time and they were voted down? Unlikely, I think. Such matters should have been addressed in years past as the repeated assaults on those two kids have been in the news constantly. Unfortunately they were not. And it is not a rationalization. It’s just unfortunate that no one gave a d__n enough to protect such uninvolved players. But these matters involve both assembly rights and rights of personal privacy. It’s not going to be fixed to suit the moment, but it should be fixed – again, hopefully by the next gov’t.
Head of the Shin Bet (Israel Internal Security) has publicly stated that the amount of incitement currently going on could lead to deaths and he is seriously worried about it.
Bibi has chosen to ignore him and keeps on inciting. I do not care who in a democracy does it is WRONG. Whether it is people or your side or from your opponents.
@Bear Klein
Bear, that is not a fair estimate of what I said. I expressed my contempt for such tactics, but if it is an acceptable practice, it will be practiced. I believe violence is the means by which limited intellects try to interact in any venue and such standards should have been put in place long before this to prevent such ill advised techniques of intimidation.
The use of the moves against the Netanyahu boys was notorious and obvious for all to take note of, so none should be surprised of the use of such things here. The market place of ideas should have standards of conduct that should not be breached by violent activist no matter the import of their cause.
These moves towards mob violence is completely contrary to everything modern civilization has moved away from, and now, in recent years with growing occurrence, it has grown more frequent. It should not be tolerated and it should not be allowed by anyone.
But ask the Meretz MK if she called for these moves to be disbanded when they were a tool of her far left friends as they tried to make similar terrorizing moves against the Netanyahu boys. Neither Yair nor his brother should have been allowed to be left to such loathsome tactics and they were for years. It is criminal that such actions are not criminal but as long as they are not they will be used. So I would call for such toleration of intimidation to be acted against by everyone but not on a selective basis.
It shouldn’t be about the individual involved or the consequences of the moment in question. So yes, they are loathsome, but these practices are not new – and this is a fact, not a rationalization. Yair should not have released such info to the public, but people who are subjected to such evil practices without public outcry or response are often given to carryout retaliatory measures, regardless of how ill-advised it might be.
So, no, I thoroughly do not support such tactics, but the fact that it is not new and has been clearly present in recent years leaves me less impressed by the outcry as if it were a public lynching. Should Bennett succeed or Bibi or whoever in having a functional gov’t, perhaps a proper restraint might be put in place so that the public can have their ability to protest to convey their input to their representatives without the involvement of uninvolved parties.
@peloni1986 Kindly help me understand are you rationalizing that Yair is trying to have politicians and their families lives made miserable and possibly enderanged?
Meretz MK had leave her house because she thought her kids and here in danger. Is that okay with you?
@Bear Klein
In fairness, as I recall, Yair Netanyahu had his own address made public with little fanfare made of it beyond his own protestations. Though politically active, Yair is not a member of the gov’t and does not live with his father. . At least that was my recollection of things, correct me if I am wrong in this.
Avner Netanyahu has been publicly harassed for years and he is not politically active at all – he recently went to court to obtain a restraining order. No one should support such public disclosures of private residences as it needlessly places a security concern for non-gov’t groups such as family and friends, but it seems to be a tool of the modern era and the ever increasing uses of the mob input which is an ugly thing, completely contrary to the intent of public protest.
But if such practices are to be deemed an unsafe practice(as it should be) and deemed rather to be politics by intimidation(which it is), such concerns should be placed in law and enforced for all or none. Perhaps whichever gov’t springs to power in the end of this unending process will be wise enough to see to such things.
Yair Netenyahu (Bibi’s son) released publicly the addresses of Yamina members to the public. In other words the stupid reckless son who acts like a royal prince, purposely endangered MKs and their spouses and children because his father is losing his PM seat.
Lapid, is quoted below:
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/307620
REGARDING THE ABSENCE OF THE REPLY BUTTONS, WORD PRESS HAS CANCELLED THE PLUGIN WHICH SETS IT UP.
@ Sebastien
@Reader
Now that you mention it I’ve seen Peloni respond a few times lately just as you both describe. without noticing that the “Comment” and Highlight” were missing. For the past week or so I have bot made a comment, having decided to take a break.
But this time I wanted to highlight a line or so, I noticed that both were missing. There is NO way to highlight. Maybe Ted is playing arund with new systems or something.
@Edgar G.
Yes, I have been doing what Reader is doing. There is no Reply button.
@Edgar G.
I simply type @ and the nickname of whoever I want to address.
I don’t know why “Reply” no longer works, I thoght it was my computer.
What happened to the “Comment” and “Highlight” below each post. They are missing.I just logged out and then in again to see if that would rectify the matter but it hasn’t.
So, how does one comment on the post of another or even reply..??
@Reader Caroline Glick is my idea of a credible source, obviously. Why do you distrust her? Have you ever read her bio?
@peloni
Love your self-criticism.
@Reader
Reader, I don’t mean to ridicule you, so don’t take my many dialogues with you as such, because it is not a fair assessment of our varied conversations. But Haaretz publishes vile antisemitic garbage, as do many Anon’s (there is not Qanon – just Q and Anon’s, but let’s leave that for now).
I would not, and do not, seek my sources of news from either of these. And should I find one of these two having a report of concern or value, I would first confirm it from another corner of intelligent thought as these are likely too poor a well to draw water from, let alone reliable news stories. Haaretz should not be on the Index, as it should not be on the internet as I believe it draws its source of news topics from UNWRA and means us all great misery.
As for Bibi’s campaign headquarters, what it releases is news worthy as would Bennett’s. Your decision to ignore anything from Bibi and support everything opposed to Bibi leads to the obviousness of the fact that you are a partisan and do not look for a fair consideration of the facts.
When you choose a partisan approach, you cast aside all reason and substitute a faith in a prearranged conviction, and seek out every pillar of opinion or thought that would support such a deduction. But it is in fact no deduction as you cherry pick your facts from sources as tainted and corrupt as Haaretz and don’t even recognize there lack of merit as a general source of information.
As it is a propaganda wing of Meretz and Hamas you would be more wise to believe the opposite of anything they print as you would likely be closer to a fair fact. And anyone who might align with even a common thought as Bibi is quickly judged by you as a provocateur, both illegitimate and beyond your trust – such as you suggested with Gantz today and Bennett yesterday, where you believed each might be acting in some contrivance with Bibi to destroy the state which is simply fantasy.
Faith is a valuable tool, but misplaced it can lead to great misjudgements such as placing value in such dodgy news. Just some observations that I thought I should share with you. I would rather you accept them in the spirit I offer them.
@Sebasten Zorn
@peloni
Sorry, I forgot that Haaretz is on the Index.
What is YOUR idea of a credible source?
QAnon?
Netanyahu’s campaign headquarters?
“Alternative” websites trying to make a quick buck off the naive and the gullible?
I won’t discuss things here.
I may post some articles and my ideas about what is going on but I won’t argue about them because it is useless.
@Reader You are quoting Ha’aretz, now? “The Palestinian paper in Hebrew?” This is your idea of a credible source?
@Reader Why do you believe Glick is wrong? As for the article you cited, it’s from today, and says “individuals” who incite violence “may” be subject to arrest. What does that prove? Incitement against Netanyahu and his family and by the Arabs against Jews has been going on unchecked for more than a year. This government just made it clear that the crackdown will be on the right. It’s like January 6th being used a pretext to label Republicans domestic terrorists while real Antifa, BLM, and Palestinian domestic terrorists have been running amok for more than a year in the US.
@Reader
I am in agreement with Sebastien’s response regarding the security issue. The consideration for such basic intolerance for violence was clearly stated by Bibi in his statement that you cited earlier – I have lost track which one, but I noted it at the time you cited it. But such intolerance for hateful speech and security concerns should be bipartisan in nature rather than acting as a partisan attack as appears to be the case here. The ability to express support or displeasure in a free society should not be limited. If security decides that it needs greater assets to protect the public figures, well that is what they to judge and it seems they have acted accordingly.
@Reader
Is the law enforcement going to warn Netanyahu who keeps using the Tanach to incite against the new government?
@Reader
A NOTE: the law enforcement DID wake up:
@Reader
@Sebastien Zorn
Caroline Glick is WRONG.
@peloni
BUT THEY ARE NOT, ARE THEY?
All we hear so far is “warnings” not to inflame the situation but the people who threaten to kill BABIES (!) are not even warned by the police, much less arrested.
The members of the potential new government have to leave their homes together with their families but the violent demonstrations in front of their residences ARE NOT PROHIBITED and no one has been arrested for incitement.
Is it possible that the authorities are preparing the public for the next “Rabin-like” assassination?
Are they THIS DESPERATE?
And if so, WHY?
@ Bear Klein
https://www.reuters.com/article/israel-ratings-sp/update-1-sp-affirms-israels-credit-rating-and-outlook-idUSL4N2N140Q
@Reader. I will let Caroline Glick answer you:
https://carolineglick.com/what-sort-of-government-are-lapid-and-bennett-forming/
@peloni
THERE IS NO SECRECY practiced by Bennett or by the “change bloc”.
By law, they are supposed to release the info about their agreements 24 hours before the date of the vote.
Yariv Levin KNOWS THIS and deliberately smears Bennett, et al. accusing them of withholding the info.
THE REASON for withholding the date of the vote is to make Bennett, et al. scramble at the last moment to submit the agreements, and, hopefully, to submit them late.
This way, more smears and accusations could be forthcoming, AND THE DATE OF THE VOTE DELAYED thus buying more time for “BIBI” to stay in the office and do his dirty work.
You don’t have to quote paragraphs of the article to me – I can read.
Your “BIBI” easily deserves a Nobel in filthy politics and he turned demagoguery, incitement, and lying into an art form.
Please, do not respond to my last statement about “BIBI”, the baby, I won’t waste my time reading it.
@ Bear Klein Are you saying that if the Haredim join the government and Raam leaves, later, the illegal Bedouin settlements can be un-normalized? And, if they join, won’t LIeberman and Meretz, at a minimum, leave? Bennett and Lapid have exactly 61. Can they afford to lose anybody? Will the right wing parties whose leaders decided to be part of this lose a significant part of their base to LIkud, which is completely excluded, though Israel’s largest party by far? I have seen misleading articles saying that most voters voted for parties that were united in being anti-Netanyahu but they weren’t united against Netanyahu when the election took place. This is all the leaders.
The Haredim have been invited to join the government. I hope they say yes to the offer. This will make the government viable not matter what Raam or Meretz wants!
Bennett and or Lapid can take then into the coalition without the consent of the other Coalition members according tho their agreement.
@Reader
This from the second article you listed – it is the second paragraph in the article but otherwise ignored by the TOI writer who penned it.
Oslo was meant to be the death of Zionism, we should all know this. To ignore this fact or pronounce such denunciations of Oslo as illegitimate would only allow such acts of political correctness to usher the State towards the ruinous end to which Oslo was designed.
I am glad that Bibi called it for what it was and remains today. Having stated this, Bibi did not call for any act of violence towards Rabin, nor has he done so towards Bennett. Any politician evoking such violent and evil tendencies should be placed beyond the pale of public debate. But none have.
Any suggestion that Bibi supported Rabin’s murder is dishonest and unwisely slanderous, but this is politics so you have the right to be as dishonest and slanderous as you care to be.
Still any threats to Bennett, which Bear has referenced, should be pursued by authorities as needed and prosecuted harshly. Bennett and his MKs and their family should be afforded every measure of safety possible, as they represent the State and so do all of the MKs, none of whom deserve such unacceptable abuse – not even the terrorist supporting Abbas.
Silencing Bibi’s assertions that Bennett is betraying the country due to possible threats is itself a betrayal of democratic values, something I believe Bennett would not support, though I am sure he would be glad to be rid of such rhetorical attacks.
I am glad that Bibi spoke against such violent moves towards his opponent as we should all recognize and support. So, Bennett will continue his rhetorical attacks on Bibi and Bibi will continue his rhetorical attacks on Bennett. This is the marketplace of ideas where such ideas are the devices of contest. At present Bennett seems to have won this contest, but time will tell. Bennett could help return a measure of certainty, in the meantime to the situation by releasing the negotiated arrangements.
I am uncertain of a real rationale against doing so, as many will tend to think the worst is in store. Ted and Bear may be correct in their judgement that Bennett and his crew are true men of the Right, but such secrecy and lack of disclosure does not merit trust but wild speculation. He would be better served with a cold splash of the truth of his aims than to continue this rising aura of incertitude.
Also I am uncertain why they can’t name the date of the vote. Both these measures could reasonably return an air of calm to this unpleasant mood now rising. But politics is an ugly business so we will likely attempt neither of these moves towards a collective calm.
This from the second article you listed – it is the second paragraph in the article but otherwise ignored by the TOI writer who penned it.
Oslo was meant to be the death of Zionism, we should all know this. To ignore this fact or pronounce such denunciations of Oslo as illegitimate would only allow such acts of political correctness to usher the State towards the ruinous end to which Oslo was designed. I am glad that Bibi called it for what it was and remains today. Having stated this, Bibi did not call for any act of violence towards Rabin, nor has he done so towards Bennett. Any politician evoking such violent and evil tendencies should be placed beyond the pale of public debate. But none have. Any suggestion that Bibi supported Rabin’s murder is dishonest and unwisely slanderous, but this is politics so you have the right to be as dishonest and slanderous as you care to be.
Still any threats to Bennett, which Bear has referenced, should be pursued by authorities as needed and prosecuted harshly. Bennett and his MKs and their family should be afforded every measure of safety possible, as they represent the State and so do all of the MKs, none of whom deserve such unacceptable abuse – not even the terrorist supporting Abbas.
Silencing Bibi’s acertions that Bennett is betraying the country due to possible threats is itself a betrayal of democratic values, something I believe Bennett would not support, though I am sure he would be glad to be rid of such rhetorical attacks. I am glad that Bibi spoke against such violent moves towards his opponent as we should all recognize and support. So, Bennett will continue his retorical attacks on Bibi and Bibi will continue his retorical attacks on Bennett. This is the marketplace of ideas where such ideas are the devices of contest. At present Bennett seems to have won this contest, but time will tell. Bennett could help return a measure of certainty, in the meantime to the situation by releasing the negotiated arrangements. I am uncertain of a real rationale against doing so, as many will tend to think the worst is in store. Ted and Bear may be correct in their judgement that Bennett and his crew are true men of the Right, but such secrecy and lack of disclosure does not merit trust but wild speculation. He would be better served with a cold splash of the truth of his aims than to continue this rising aura of incertitude. Also I am uncertain why they can’t name the date of the vote. Both these measures could reasonably return an air of calm to this unpleasant mood now rising. But politics is an ugly business so we will likely attempt neither of these moves towards a collective calm.
The government can not formed without Raam. It will fall without Raam. Normalizing Bedouin control of the Negev is it’s condition. See Glick’s latest articles in Israel Hayom. Bennett and Lapid kept the signed agreement a secret. Raam did not. And Ganz flew to Washington in 2015 to support the Iran Deal. How can you compare? And what will happen to the Abraham Accords when Israel caves.
An interesting comment under the 2nd article:
@Ted Belman
I see your point, Ted. Still, I will be greatly alarmed should anyone support Gantz in this policy of capitulation. I just can not believe Bibi would capitulate on this point with the Terrorists and Arab street calling in unison for him to do so, not to mention the issue of the US summit.
Netanyahu has either lost his mind or he is incredibly desperate to stay in power, for some reason.
Or, he is just making noise in order to go out with a bang.
The parade is to take place during Bibi’s watch. So now Gantz remains part of the government he formed with Bibi. I think Bibi has a history of avoiding confrontation. Look at his attempts to quell the riots on the Temple Mount. He backed off and removed the barriers. Just one example. And what happened, is that it lead to the Gaza War. Bibi likes calm. He likes to pick his battles like hi did with his public fight with Obama on the JCPOA.
Biden maybe gave him his marching orders. He also wants calm.
@Ted Belman
Ted, why do you think Bibi will cancel the parade? This is a move to surrender from a position of status quo in response to violent threats, not maintaining it, as characterizes most of your criticisms of his deflection of Right-wing goals that you list. And such assaults of violence over what? A traditional parade whose cancellation was only due to mob violence? It would greatly surprise me should either he or Bennett lend their support in such an action.
I can not believe anyone but a great fool would accept such calls of surrender given this most recent threat from the Arab street and their now acknowledged Terror spokesmen. And Gantz is not in a position to accept such a surrender, as he is actually calling for it.
It must be a difficult position for him to be so close to bringing his aim of seeing the back of Bibi, while exposing this new gov’t to such a moment and at such an impropitious time as this. But he knows full well the surrender he calls for. It seems unfortunate that retired Israeli generals have made such a recurring appearance to enter politics only to display that they have lost all sense of reason, tactics or strategy.
And he is simultaneously calling for a less public rhetoric while negotiating with the minions of Obama’s Third Term? This most recent call for surrender surely should question if he would not serve the state better in some retirement home for the senior staff.
He holds a key position of authority and much will ride with his use of good judgement, but if surrender is the best strategy that this militarist can propose, I, for one would ask many hard questions of him, were I either Bibi or Bennett.
His calls for capitulation to avoid strife with the soon to be rewarded rioters and mollifying Obama’s minions with calls for less public incitement when such incitement is just a public face of Israel’s position, are each too concerning to ignore.
For both of these two concurrent calls to provide a public acquiescence to our enemies can hardly not inform something about his broader sense of strategy and where it might lead.
So should either Bibi or Bennett move to support the Defense Minister in such an unwise policy decision, they should be taken to task by any that hold sway over these two men, each of whom seems to maintain their own council.
I am curious what we will hear from each of them. For, we should hear from each of them soon enough, and failing to elicit any such response from either of them, we will be able to to discern their intended response by their action or their silence.
@ Gila
This article points out that Bibi is not the right-winger many think he is. I recognize much of what Bibi has done for Israel but recognize that he has also held us back when it comes to J&S.
I expect that Bennett will do more for J&S with the backing of Lapid than Bibi would do with a right wing government. But as you know Bibi couldn’t put such a government together.
Bennett and Sa’ar are more ideological than Bibi. They are less likely to cave to the demands of Hamas for prisoner swaps and the like. They will hold the line better also.
So what is the downside.
Bibi could have solved the problem by resigning but he refused though half of Likud wanted him to do so.
Now that Gantz is on record of on stopping the Jerusalem parade Bibi will probably back him ( he is still PM) but Bennett and Saar won’t.
Majority of Israelis prefer the new government. Bibi could not after four elections form a government because the majority of Israelis do not trust him as is reflected in the Knesset MKs. None of the leaders and many of the members of the parties that would be willing happily to be in coalition with the Likud would NOT do it under the leadership of Bibi. You can kick people to the curb, spit on them verbally, attack their spouses and make up lies about what they are doing without consequences in the end.
Ted, I am afraid you changed your position by blaming Bibi for betrail of his former allies. From my perspective, Bibi who was the legitimate choice of most of the voters who gave him twice as many mandates as Benett and Lapid combined, has the stamina to stand up bravely for his million constituents despite being personally attacked by hoards of leftists. It is Bibi who holds the democratic values of justice. It is absurd that the guy who holds 6 Mandates will become the Prime Minister instead of Bibi who holds 30 mandates. The hatred openly expressed by opposing parties is the sole common ground that unites them.