Receive free Israel updates
We’ll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest Israel news every morning.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s hopes for a landmark deal establishing diplomatic relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia received a symbolic boost late last month when, for the first time, an Israeli minister was allowed to make an official visit to the Gulf kingdom.
But as complex multilateral talks between US, Saudi, Israeli and Palestinian officials accelerate, the tightrope the Israeli prime minister must walk to ensure domestic support for a deal with the potential to reorder the Middle East’s geopolitics is also becoming clear.
Normalising relations with a state seen as one of the leaders of the Sunni Muslim world, which could encourage other states to follow suit, is a prize with appeal across the Israeli political spectrum. But Netanyahu’s allies and opponents alike have reservations about aspects of the emerging deal, and in recent weeks have drawn up their battle lines.
For Netanyahu’s far-right coalition, in which ultranationalists hold key roles, the thorniest part of any deal will be making concessions to the Palestinians — something both US and Saudi officials have said would be the price for Israel of normalising ties with Riyadh.
Palestinian officials have indicated to their Saudi and US counterparts what they would like, including a freeze on the expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank — which Palestinians seek as the heart of a future state — and more control of some land in the territory, as well as financial support, according to people briefed on the talks. But it remains unclear what concessions the US and Saudis will seek.
Some hardliners in Netanyahu’s coalition might accept increased economic support for the Palestinians. But the two far-right parties led by national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich — both of which seek to annex the West Bank and reject any steps towards Palestinian statehood — have made clear they would not accept political or territorial concessions.
Ben-Gvir, who already has a fraught relationship with Netanyahu, said last month that his Jewish Power party would leave the coalition if a deal involved concessions to the Palestinians, a threat that, if carried out, would deprive Netanyahu of his majority.
“You cannot get a real deal by giving concessions to the Palestinians — I think that on that there is no debate,” Simcha Rothman, a lawmaker from Smotrich’s Religious Zionism party, told the Financial Times.
Some in Netanyahu’s Likud, which holds half the coalition’s seats, have similar reservations. “I think that any kind of territorial concessions would be a red line for many inside the Likud faction,” said one party insider. “The second [red line] would be things that could be considered symbolic under certain circumstances, [such as] full Palestinian membership of the United Nations.”
If Netanyahu was unable to muster sufficient support for a deal within his own coalition, he would either have to abandon the deal or gamble on the backing of opposition parties — most likely one or both of the centrist Yesh Atid party led by Yair Lapid and the National Unity party led by Benny Gantz — to push it through parliament.
Both Lapid and Gantz have ruled out joining Netanyahu’s existing coalition, or replacing Ben-Gvir’s or Smotrich’s parties should they leave in protest against a deal. But both have expressed broad support for normalisation with Saudi Arabia and left open the possibility of supporting an agreement from outside the government if it did not infringe their own red lines.
As part of the talks, Riyadh is seeking US support for a civilian nuclear programme. Lapid has insisted he would not back an outcome that allowed Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium on its own territory. But US and Israeli officials have been discussing steps the US could take to retain a measure of control over the enrichment process, and opposition officials say resolving this could clear the way for their support.
“The only thing that prevents us at the moment from embracing a deal is the issue of uranium enrichment,” said one opposition official. “If that element is not in the final deal, most of the opposition will enthusiastically support an agreement.”
But others have doubts about whether co-operation between the government and opposition is feasible at a time when longstanding tensions in Israel’s polarised politics have been further inflamed by a bitter dispute over a government drive to rein in the power of the judiciary.
“I don’t think it is realistic at this stage,” said the Likud insider. “There has been an attempt for the last half year to reach a compromise [between the government and opposition] on judicial reform. But even on that, they couldn’t agree. The mutual distrust and suspicion were too high.”
Some analysts also question whether Netanyahu would be prepared to sacrifice his coalition by relying on opposition backing to push through a deal — not least since a slump in support for Likud and his feuds with former allies mean his chances of forming another government are slim.
But others argue that if he secured a favourable deal with the Saudis, he could use the momentum to force early elections — which would be the sixth since 2019 — and attempt to get it through a new, more amenable parliament.
“If most Israelis are in favour and we have a peace deal with the biggest country in the Middle East in terms of land . . . and it seems to be a warmer peace than we have with Egypt and Jordan, Netanyahu will have the best opportunity to call early elections. And he will have the best hand,” said Aviv Bushinsky, a former Netanyahu adviser turned political analyst.
“Netanyahu is very flexible in his strategy. So if it comes down to a binary decision, peace or no peace, I think he will go for it whatever the price.”