Tuesday January 22, 2013, 5:56 pm
Thanks Cal for the link to the article and Analysis byYolande Knell. I'm very surprised Mr. Netanyahu and allies didn't t win with a bigger majority. I am haeartened by the Labour and Yesh Atid party gains. Read and noted.

Tuesday January 22, 2013, 6:54 pm
noted, thank you Cal

Tuesday January 22, 2013, 7:11 pm
Thanks.

Tuesday January 22, 2013, 10:52 pm
Thankyou for the post, Cal!

Tuesday January 22, 2013, 11:44 pm
Now let's see how the coalition-making works out.

The Jewish Home, led by Naftali Bennet, is not nearly as "right wing" (the political divisions which apply in much of the West are not quite the primary divisions in Israel) as is often reported. It does not support the two-state solution at all, having apparently given up hope for peace with an independent Palestinian state, but on economic issues it wants to support education and small business, and break monopolies and oligopolies. I expect that it may be welcomed into a new coalition, but only given positions of power with respect to the economy, not negotiations with Palestinians.

If Yesh Atid is willing to accept Netanyahu's latest compromise, of phasing in Hasidic and Arabic conscription or national service at a rate that the military and government can handle, then I could see them playing a major role in the next coalition. According to CNN, Netanyahu expressed an intent to build a "broad-based" coalition, effectively extending an invitation to centrist and left-wing parties to join.

Those three alone could total over 60 seats, but for safety, Netanyahu will likely seek 20-30 more seats' worth of coalition-members, making any one alliy expendable to keep them from getting too demanding while keeping his own party vital to the coalition. That could be satisfied by Labour or Shas, and minor parties, or just by those two. Labour, the standard "left-wing" party, and The Jewish Home, characterized as "extreme right-wing" actually have compatible demands regarding handling the economy, and Labour apparently ran on a purely economic platform this time.

This, of course, all assumes that those parties would be willing to join the new coalition. They very well may refuse, and I would be far from surprised to see at least one do so. Yesh Alid may be unwilling to work with Shas, or vice-versa. Labour, as Likud's traditional opponent, may not join its coalition. Still, I suspect Netanyahu will be able to build a coalition without too many concessions to minor parties.

Wednesday January 23, 2013, 6:14 am
Thanks, waiting to see what coalition can be built.

Wednesday January 23, 2013, 6:56 am
Noted

Wednesday January 23, 2013, 12:56 pm


If one cares to do the reading and looking, the Israeli people are not nearly as right-wing as Netanyahu. Good for them.
It's kind of like thinking Paul Ryan represents all Americans - not even CLOSE to anything resembling reality.

Wednesday January 23, 2013, 12:57 pm
Sad to read that so many Israeli newspapers consider Netanyahu to be weak and a failure, after he started out strong. He will need to do a lot of hand-holding and negotiating to retain his position. And the popular newcomer, Yesh Atid, does not sound like the makings of a good ally - given their opposing positions on the Palestinian issue. Glad they all agree on one thing - stopping Iran from obtaining nuclear strength.

Wednesday January 23, 2013, 1:08 pm
Maybe, we'll get a little sanity in Israeli politics after this election.

Wednesday January 23, 2013, 8:11 pm
Thanks Cal. Robert O I hope you are right.

Thursday January 24, 2013, 12:42 pm
I think Israelis simply switched their focus to economy, after realizing that peace is impossible to make with both Palestinian Authority and Hamas.

Housing and job creation are the more urgent and achievable goals than Peres' "New Middle East" dream.

Thursday January 24, 2013, 1:29 pm
Read and Noted with thanks Cal.
Shall be interesting what coalition can be built.

Thursday January 24, 2013, 2:52 pm
Noted. Thanks, Cal. Maybe there is hope for Israel and peace with Palestine.

Thursday January 24, 2013, 4:14 pm
Some democracy where %50 of the the inhabitants in the area (Palestinians) can't really vote on how their lives are controlled because they are religated to Bantu stands under military occupation. Their choice is the Palestinian authority and Humas. When they vote for Humas they are severely punished.

The question is can Israel be a democracy and a Jewish state at the same time. Hell no. Israel can only be a racist, and a religiously bigoted state because the vast majority of Palestinians don't really have a vote to determine their fate.

Friday January 25, 2013, 5:03 am
Imagine restricting half of the non-white populations of the United States by harse military occupation with the threat of having you and your childrens flesh burned off with white phophorous and depleted uranium to Florida and California and only allow voting within these two states.

You essentially have the status of a person without a country because Palestine is not an official country and the Arab population in Israel is %20. A one state solution is not allowed by Israel because Palestinian population would be equal to or surpass the Jewish population.

Obama is President because the Whit population no longer hold a decisive majority over non-whites. Isreal sees these trends in the US which resulted in an Obama Presidency so they doubled down with settlements within Palestinian occupied territory, more stealing of land from Palestinians, and more brutal occupation to keep the Palestinian population in a virtual prison on the West bank and Gaza.

This notion that Israel is moving to the center is a charade. ths Israeli ruling party goals are simolar to the republican in the United States. Keep the non-white population from gaining political power. An essentially racist agenda.