More stories

  • in

    German Conservatives Appear to Lead in Last State Election Before National Vote

    The contest in an eastern state, a stronghold of the Alternative for Germany, had been closely watched for signs of the far-right party’s appeal.BERLIN — Voters in the eastern German state of Saxony-Anhalt appeared in a Sunday vote to support a return of the ruling conservatives, which made strong gains in a contest that had been closely watched for signs of a far-right party’s strength months ahead of a national election.Initial partial returns suggested that the conservative Christian Democratic Union were poised to break a losing streak in state ballots and expand their past margins over the nationalist Alternative for Germany, or AfD.Although Saxony-Anhalt is one of the country’s smallest states, with only 1.8 million people eligible to cast ballots, many Germans were looking to Sunday’s vote for indications about the national election for a new Parliament on Sept. 26.The outcome on Sunday could bolster the campaign of Armin Laschet, the current leader of the Christian Democrats, who is hoping to replace Angela Merkel. She is stepping down after 16 years in office as chancellor.Mr. Laschet, 60, the governor of North Rhine-Westphalia, has struggled to gain traction across the country, especially in the states of the former East Germany, and the strong showing for his party in the last regional election before the national ballot could give his contest a boost.“Today is a clear win for the Christian Democrats,” said Volker Bouffier, the governor of the western state of Hesse and a senior member of the conservative party. “But the fight is still at the beginning, the fight for the democratic center.”Despite the conservatives’ apparent ability to attract more support, the early partial returns suggested that AfD remained firmly the second most popular party in the state, a position it won five years ago when it received nearly a quarter of votes in the Saxony-Anhalt state election, shocking the country and propelling the party from the far-right nationalist fringe onto the national stage.The following year, the AfD won more than 12 percent in the national election, becoming the largest opposition party in the national Parliament, with 88 seats.A polling place at an art history museum in Magdeburg, the capital of Saxony-Anhalt, on Sunday.John Macdougall/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesSince then, Alternative for Germany has struggled to contend with a more extremist wing that has pulled the party branch in Saxony-Anhalt even further to the right, capturing the attention of the country’s domestic intelligence service. The state’s leaders in the party, along with those from the branches in Brandenburg and Thuringia, are under official scrutiny for their anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim statements. Whether the AfD at the national level will also be placed under observation is on hold, pending the outcome of a legal challenge.While much about the Saxony-Anhalt contest is unique to the region, heavily focused on local issues like schools and economic restructuring, a majority of voters told pollsters with infratest.dimap on Sunday they were satisfied with the work of their governor, Reiner Haseloff, a member of the Christian Democrats who sought to clearly distance his party from the AfD.“I am thankful that our image remains, we have a reputation of democracy here in Saxony-Anhalt that we upheld tonight,” Mr. Haseloff said after initial projections had shown his party the clear winner of the evening.Mr. Haseloff has been a strong champion of the states in eastern Germany, home to many regions that are still struggling with the fallout from economic restructuring more than 30 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall.The persistent lack of jobs and economic infrastructure in those states, and a feeling that traditional parties do not take their concerns seriously, were other key factors that led many voters to shift their support to the AfD five years ago. That result forced Mr. Haseloff to form a coalition government across a wide political spectrum, including the center-left Social Democrats as well as the environmentalist Greens, in an effort to keep the far-right in the opposition.On Sunday, the Social Democrats suffered one of their worst showings in a state election, while the Greens were able to gain marginal support in the region, where they have traditionally struggled to attract voters.The other winner of the state ballot, along with the conservatives, appeared to be the pro-business Free Democratic Party, which voters returned to the statehouse for the first time in a decade. More

  • in

    Despite It All, López Obrador Has My Vote

    MEXICO CITY — There seem to be just two types of people in Mexico: those who hate their president and those who love him.Even Andrés Manuel López Obrador himself seems to be fascinated by the division he inspires, fueling the polarization by casting Mexicans as either for the “Fourth Transformation” — the set of administrative, economic and social reforms that he promotes — or against it, with no room for nuance. Every morning the president turns his daily news conferences into a battlefield, singling out adversaries and laying the groundwork for the next 24 hours of verbal attacks.But this polarization is not new. Mexico stopped being one society a long time ago, splitting into two countries, so to speak, that struggle to coexist where they overlap. Both sides are genuinely convinced that their approach for ​​Mexico is the one that best suits the country. And they are both correct, except that they are talking about two different countries.In this Sunday’s midterm elections, these competing visions will face off in what is also a kind of plebiscite three years into the López Obrador administration. Although his Morena party appears to lead in the polls, it’s still unclear whether he can achieve a qualified majority in the legislative branch, which would allow him to modify the Constitution without negotiating with the opposition.Some believe that granting even more power to a president they consider authoritarian would endanger Mexican democracy. His supporters, for their part, are convinced that controlling Congress is necessary to undo the years of economic policies that have prevented poor Mexicans from prospering.Although I disagree with Mr. López Obrador’s personalist leadership style and some of his authoritarian actions, I believe his political aims are a legitimate attempt to afford greater representation to the Mexicans who have been left behind, many of them living in underdeveloped rural areas. More than three decades of an economic model that increased inequality has led to the fragmented and unequal Mexican society that we see today. Given that the opposition has thus far been unable to offer an alternative to this model, I am convinced that Mr. López Obrador is our only viable option.According to the National Institute of Statistics, 56 percent of Mexicans work in the informal sector and lack social security, and not by choice. Mr. López Obrador has enacted social programs that have benefited more than 20 million Mexicans, although it’s not enough for the estimated 52 million who live in poverty.So it’s no surprise that he has significant support among much of the population. That support is even easier to understand when you consider one of the milestones of contemporary Mexico: In 1992, President Carlos Salinas de Gortari signed the North American Free Trade Agreement, betting that privatizing the economy and relying on market forces would modernize and grow the country.But something went awry in the calculations. Over the past 30 years, Mexico’s G.D.P. has grown at an average annual rate of only 2.2 percent, and there are enormous internal inequalities. The 10 richest people have the same wealth as the poorest half of the country, according to a 2018 Oxfam report.Mr. Salinas was unable or unwilling to rein in the elites who benefited from a system of protected monopolies, kickbacks and extraordinary profit margins derived from corruption and inefficiency.Mexico has also modernized its electoral system and built democratic institutions to promote competition, transparency and the balance of power. To the many Mexicans who saw that these supposedly democratic and transparent norms were applied selectively, the changes did not amount to much. Again, modernization seemed to pan out for some Mexicans, but had little effect for those who couldn’t take advantage of it — a majority of the population in need. For many, “democracy” is nothing but a word wielded in elections and in the discourse of leaders who have made themselves rich at the expense of the treasury. According to Latinobarómetro, a regional polling organization, just 15.7 percent of Mexicans said they were satisfied with their country’s form of democracy, making Mexico one of the countries in Latin America with the lowest levels of confidence in government.In 2018, when Mr. López Obrador ran for the presidency for a third time, the indignation and rage of those left behind had reached a boiling point. The signs of discontent were visible: historically low approval of government performance and communities that were willing to take justice into their own hands. Mr. López Obrador offered a political pathway to dissipate this tension and won the election with more than 50 percent of the vote.Since then he has radically increased the minimum wage; established about $33 billion in annual direct transfers and handouts to disadvantaged groups; and begun ambitious projects, like the Mayan train and the Dos Bocas refinery, in regions traditionally overlooked by central governments. Mr. López Obrador’s administration’s financial policy is practically neoliberal, with its aversion to indebtedness; inflation control; austerity and balance in public spending; and rejection of private sector expropriations. During the pandemic, he has been harshly criticized across the political spectrum for his refusal to expand fiscal spending to counteract its disproportionate impact on people, especially those who did not benefit from direct Covid relief.Many describe Mr. López Obrador’s style of governance and his social and economic projects as populist in nature. In attempts to fend off criticism, he’s gone as far as attacking the independent press and anti-corruption groups. The small portion of the population that prospered these past decades has good reason to be irritated and concerned.But in short, Mr. López Obrador is a less radical politician than he’s accused of being and is more prudent with his management of government than he’s given credit for.It’s understandable how the 61 percent of the population that backs him, people belonging to groups that have the most reason to be dissatisfied with the system, assumes that the president is on their side. Mr. López Obrador is not a threat to Mexico, as his adversaries claim. The real threat is the social discontent that made him president.A failure to resolve this issue puts everyone at risk. The two Mexicos must come together. Right now, despite it all, only Mr. López Obrador is in a position to make that possible for his fellow citizens. On Sunday we will know how many of them concur.Jorge Zepeda Patterson (@jorgezepedap) is a Mexican economist and sociologist. He founded the digital daily SinEmbargo and is the author of “Los amos de México,” among other books. This essay was translated from the Spanish by Erin Goodman.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Elecciones en México y Perú: qué está en juego

    El TimesElecciones del 6 de junio: México y Perú van a las urnasLabores previas a la elección del 6 de junio en el Instituto Estatal Electoral de Chihuahua en Ciudad Juárez, MéxicoJose Luis Gonzalez/ReutersLas dos jornadas electorales han sido percibidas como referendos sobre el manejo de la pandemia y un modelo económico que parece incapaz de mitigar la desigualdad.Las elecciones de hoy, domingo 6 de junio, serán cruciales para millones de latinoamericanos que acudirán a las urnas en México y Perú. América Latina es una de las regiones más afectadas por la pandemia de COVID-19: alrededor de una tercera parte de las muertes causadas por el virus en el mundo se han registrado en países latinoamericanos, a pesar de que solo el 8 por ciento de la población mundial vive ahí. El impacto regional del virus al sur del río Bravo es notable si se considera que, mientras Estados Unidos se prepara para volver a la normalidad pospandémica, países como Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica y Uruguay atraviesan su peor brote.Mexicanos y peruanos no son los únicos que han votado desde que inició la pandemia. En total, entre 2020 y 2022, se celebran 9 comicios presidenciales a lo largo de 25 meses en América Latina.Ecuador eligió en abril a un exbanquero conservador como su presidente después de una campaña que fue crucial para el movimiento indígena. En noviembre, Honduras y Nicaragua tendrán elecciones presidenciales.Además, este año, los chilenos aprobaron en un plebiscito reescribir su Constitución y Argentina irá a las urnas en octubre para las legislativas de medio término.¿Qué está en juego en las elecciones de hoy? Aquí tenemos las claves. México a elecciones de medio términoLa votación será una prueba de la popularidad del presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador, quien busca consolidar la mayoría que hoy tiene su partido en el Congreso para avanzar en su proyecto político en los tres años restantes de su sexenio. Para alcanzar una supermayoría en la Cámara baja (334 escaños) el partido de López Obrador, Morena, ha formado coaliciones con el Partido Verde y el Partido del Trabajo.La jornada del domingo será el ejercicio electoral más grande de la historia: 93 millones de mexicanos están convocados a las urnas para decidir sobre unos 20.000 cargos, entre ellos los 500 asientos de la Cámara de Diputados, 15 gubernaturas y miles de puestos locales.López Obrador, quien gobierna el país desde 2018, ha emprendido lo que llama “la cuarta transformación” del país con la promesa de combatir la corrupción y la violencia y redistribuir la riqueza entre los más vulnerables. La austeridad es parte clave de su mandato.Los críticos del presidente han señalado que hasta ahora no ha cumplido con sus promesas electorales y señalan que, en materia de migración, cedió a las demandas del expresidente Donald Trump. Sin embargo, López Obrador llega la mitad de su mandato con altos índices de popularidad.México ha sufrido los embates del coronavirus sin cerrar fronteras ni suspender actividades como muchos de sus vecinos con un manejo muy cuestionado de la emergencia sanitaria. El brote ha infectado a 2,3 millones de mexicanos y ha cobrado la vida de más de 221.695 personas.Los resultados comenzarán a darse a conocer la tarde del domingo y el Instituto Nacional Electoral hará un anuncio hacia las 11 p. m., hora del centro de México, en cadena nacional. Perú en segunda vueltaLos peruanos elegirán a su próximo presidente en un balotaje entre Pedro Castillo, un exmaestro rural y dirigente sindical que postula con un partido de extrema izquierda, y Keiko Fujimori, heredera del legado del exmandatario encarcelado Alberto Fujimori y ella misma acusada por crimen organizado. Ninguno de los dos era el favorito en primera vuelta, cuando se presentaron 18 candidatos.La votación en segunda vuelta se ha convertido en una suerte de referéndum sobre el modelo económico del país, que en los últimos 20 años ha logrado un crecimiento ejemplar en la región pero no ha conseguido eliminar la desigualdad. El Congreso, definido en la primera vuelta, estará dominado por Perú Libre (37 escaños de 130), el partido de Castillo; Fuerza Popular, el partido de Fujimori, tendrá 24 congresistas en la nueva legislatura.Perú ha tenido cuatro presidentes en el último quinquenio: Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, el último mandatario electo en contienda regular, renunció en 2018 después de varios intentos del Congreso por destituirlo; su vicepresidente y sucesor, Martín Vizcarra, quien gozaba de aprobación incluso en los primeros meses de la pandemia, tuvo el mismo destino. La turbulencia política del último quinquenio ha estado marcada por escándalos de corrupción y un creciente descontento popular con la clase gobernante. Tres expresidentes de Perú han estado investigados por casos de corrupción y uno más, Alan García, se suicidó cuando las autoridades estaban a punto de arrestarlo. A pesar de las rápidas medidas para contener el avance del coronavirus, el país ha sido uno de los más afectados por la pandemia a nivel mundial. Recientemente las autoridades sanitarias reconocieron que la cantidad de fallecimientos por COVID-19 era de más de 180.764, casi el triple de lo reflejado en el registro oficial.Los resultados empezarán a darse a conocer en el sitio del Jurado Nacional de Elecciones conforme vayan cerrando las mesas de votación la tarde del domingo. More

  • in

    Election in East Germany Will Test the Far Right’s Power

    Voting on Sunday may hint at how strong the Alternative for Germany party is in the east, and what that means for national elections in September.BERLIN — Five years ago, the nationalist Alternative for Germany sent the country’s traditional parties scrambling when it finished ahead of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives in the regional vote in the eastern state of Saxony-Anhalt, an ominous portent of the far right’s growing allure.This Sunday, voters in Saxony-Anhalt will be back at the polls, and the result of this state election, coming just three months before a national one, will be scrutinized to see whether a nationally weakened AfD can hold on to voters in one of the regions where it has proved strongest.While much about the Saxony-Anhalt contest is unique to the region and heavily focused on local issues about schools and economic restructuring, a strong showing by the AfD — which rode a wave of anti-immigration sentiment in 2016 — could cause headaches for Armin Laschet, the leader of Ms. Merkel’s Christian Democrats. Mr. Laschet, who is hoping to replace her in the chancellery, has struggled to gain traction in the former East German states.A sign in Magdeburg pointing the way to an “election event” and a “vaccination center.” Ronny Hartmann/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images“A strong showing by the Christian Democrats would remove a hurdle for Mr. Laschet and could strengthen his position heading into the national race,” said Manfred Güllner, who heads the Forsa Institute political polling agency.At the same time, he conceded, “If the AfD were to perform as well as the Christian Democrats, it would have repercussions for the federal vote.”Amid an election campaign largely carried out online because of pandemic restrictions, Mr. Laschet visited the state’s mining region last weekend. He stressed the need for time and investment to shift successfully away from coal and pledged to provide support similar to what his home state, North Rhine-Westphalia, got when it quit coal.Armin Laschet leads the Christian Democratic Union and hopes to be the next German chancellor.Jens Schlueter/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe effort may have paid off: A survey released on Thursday showed his party at 30 percent support in Saxony-Anhalt, a comfortable margin of seven percentage points ahead of the AfD, which is known by its German initials and currently holds 88 seats in the German Parliament.If that margin holds, it could bolster Mr. Laschet’s standing as campaigning begins in earnest for the Sept. 26 election, despite a bruising contest for the chancellor candidacy against a rival from Bavaria.In 2016, Germany was adjusting to the arrival of more than one million migrants the previous year, and Saxony-Anhalt was struggling against looming unemployment. While pollsters had predicted that the AfD, which made itself the anti-immigration party after forming in 2013 to protest the euro, would easily earn seats in the statehouse, no one expected it to come in second, winning more than 24 percent support from the region’s two million voters.Since then, Alternative for Germany has swung even further to the right, capturing the attention of the country’s domestic intelligence service, which placed the party’s leadership under observation over concerns about its anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim expressions and links to extremists. The party’s branches in Brandenburg and Thuringia are also under scrutiny, while an attempt to observe the national party has been put on hold pending the outcome of a legal challenge.The AfD in Saxony-Anhalt “has become very strong, despite the various messy and dubious scandals,” said Alexander Hensel, a political scientist at the Institute for Democracy Studies at the University of Göttingen, who has studied the party’s rise in the region. “Instead of breaking apart, they have consolidated, becoming an increasingly radical opposition force.”Candidates at a debate ahead of the election in Saxony-Anhalt.  Ronny Hartmann/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe continued support for Alternative for Germany in places like Saxony-Anhalt has created a split among many mainstream conservatives over whether the Christian Democrats should be willing to enter a coalition with the far-right party if needed.Mr. Laschet has made his opinion clear in recent days. “We don’t want any sort of cooperation with the AfD at any level,” he said in an interview with the public broadcaster Deutschlandfunk.But with the jockeying for the future direction of the Christian Democratic Union underway after 16 years under Ms. Merkel’s largely centrist leadership, some members on the party’s right flank see her exit as a chance to shift harder to the right.In December, the conservative governor of Saxony-Anhalt, Reiner Haseloff, a Christian Democrat who is running for another term, fired his interior minister for seeming to float the possibility of a minority government, supported by the AfD.Mr. Haseloff has based his campaign on promising stability as the country begins to emerge from the pandemic, with a pledge to help improve the standard of living in rural areas, many of which lack enough teachers, medical professionals and police officers.Reiner Haseloff, the governor of Saxony-Anhalt, is a Christian Democrat up for re-election. On Wednesday he discussed reforestation in Oranienbaum-Wörlitz.Christian Mang/ReutersSaxony-Anhalt has the oldest population in all of Germany, a reflection of the number of young people who left the state in the painful years after the reunification of Germany’s former East and West in 1990.While the state has benefited from an attempt under the latest government to create jobs in less populated areas, including by setting up several federal agencies in Saxony-Anhalt, the region’s standard of living still lags those in similar regions in the former West Germany, Mr. Haseloff said.“There continue to be clear differences between east and west, and not only in the distribution of federal offices,” Mr. Haseloff said this week, ahead of an annual meeting focused on increasing regional equality.The Alternative for Germany has campaigned this time around on a rejection of the federal government’s policies to stop the spread of the coronavirus. “Freedom Instead of Corona Insanity” reads one of its posters, showing a blue-eyed woman with a tear rolling down to the rim of her protective mask.Among the other parties, the Social Democrats and the Left are both polling in the 10 to 12 percent rage, largely unchanged from where four years ago.Both the Free Democrats and the Greens are predicted to see their popularity roughly double from where they stood in 2016, which could make it easier for Mr. Haseloff to build a government if he is returned to office. Analysts said regional gains for them were unlikely to have wider repercussions for the national race.“Saxony-Anhalt is a very specific situation, they are coming from a unique history,” Mr. Hensel, the political scientist, said. “But regardless of whether the Greens earn 10 percent or the Free Democrats 8 percent of the vote, a quarter of voters support the AfD. That is worth paying attention to.” More

  • in

    If Netanyahu Goes, Israel's New Prime Minister Faces a Big Mess

    After four election cycles, two years and one man in power since 2009, Israel appears to be on the brink of change. On Wednesday evening, eight wildly ideologically different political parties announced that they would establish a coalition, aligning behind Yair Lapid of the centrist party Yesh Atid (“There Is a Future”) and Naftali Bennett — a former leader of a council of West Bank settlers — of the nationalist party Yamina (“Rightward”) to remove longtime Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.But the new government is not yet a reality. The coalition still faces procedural and political hurdles. Ideological differences nearly killed the coalition in the negotiation stage. Mr. Netanyahu reportedly has no plans to resign and has big plans to sabotage his opponents.Despite all these vulnerabilities, Israel has the first chance in 12 years at a transition of power. And even if the new government has a short life expectancy, it must not settle for limited policies. New leadership means bold vision on the toughest issues in Israel. If it doesn’t provide a substantive vision behind the “anti-Bibi” brand, voters in the next elections, sooner or later, might decide there truly is no alternative.Three guiding values would lead Israel toward genuine change — not only a break from Netanyahu’s leadership, which Mr. Bennett recently described as being “dictated by personal and political considerations” while “creating a smoke screen of personality worship,” but also a new path for the future. To get there, this government must shun a nationalist, illiberal governing style, re-embrace democratic norms and articulate a policy to end the occupation.Setting out these values at the start is the new coalition’s most urgent task. The precarious government will struggle against time and tension to carry out policy — at the very least, it needs a vision.Most immediately, the new government must make a clean break from the divisive rhetoric that Mr. Netanyahu used to poison Israeli society. It won’t be easy. Mr. Bennett, who is designated to serve as the first prime minister in a rotation agreement with Mr. Lapid, and Ayelet Shaked, No. 2 in Mr. Bennett’s party, have been key actors in Israel’s far-right nationalist politics, as was Avigdor Lieberman, another coalition partner.But when Mr. Bennett announced his intentions to join Mr. Lapid’s government on Sunday, he spoke of unity and friendship, team spirit and compromises. For his part, Mr. Lapid has consistently projected calm and conciliation since receiving the mandate to form a government.Reconstituting Israeli leadership is not just about words, but also about Israel’s global orientation. Which leaders does Israel cultivate? Mr. Netanyahu courted the world’s authoritarians and ultranationalists, like Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil, Viktor Orban of Hungary, Donald Trump and Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan. A “change” government should ally with leaders who favor pragmatism and reason — like Joe Biden, Angela Merkel, Emmanuel Macron and Jacinda Ardern.Reversing the illiberal nationalism that thrived under Netanyahu is merely the first step to stanch the bleeding of Israeli democracy. The new government must also embrace democratic values and institutions. But that requires this hodgepodge of ideological bedfellows to actually agree on what those democratic values are.Israel’s democratic erosion has involved numerous aspects, including the passage of undemocratic legislation such as the nation-state law, a law legitimizing de facto housing discrimination, as well as a law to curtail public calls for boycott and one restricting free speech. Even the right-wing parties in the new government can, and must, refrain from this type of legislation. Ending incitement against Palestinian citizens in Israel, such as Mr. Netanyahu’s 2019 accusations that Arab Knesset members are terror supporters who want to destroy Israel, would be one step toward healing democracy.More complex for this government will be defending democratic checks and balances, particularly the independence of the Israeli judiciary. The farthest-right coalition leaders — mainly Ms. Shaked and Mr. Bennett — have made attacks on the Israeli judiciary central to their political mission in recent years. Gideon Saar, now slated to be justice minister, has demanded judicial reforms in line with their views.But Israel’s democracy is ailing not because the judiciary has overstepped its bounds, as the right wing argues. The problem with Israeli democracy is its refusal to define what Israel is: a theocracy, an aspiring democracy or an occupying power. All of which means nothing can be clarified if the government fails to address a third core issue: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.Israel’s identity and democracy have been ambiguous since the birth of the state. But from 1967, the fog of Israel’s intentions regarding the occupied Palestinian territories became a scourge.Gershom Gorenberg’s classic book “The Accidental Empire” documents Prime Minister Levi Eshkol’s striking ambiguity about how much he would tolerate, or support, the settlement project at first. (He eventually did.) The country developed a long tradition of obfuscating its ultimate aim for the fate of those territories. Mr. Netanyahu was no different; in 2009 he announced support for a muddled vision for two states, then worked for years against such a solution, ultimately campaigning for West Bank annexation from 2019 to 2020, only to drop the plan when it no longer served him politically. Meanwhile the occupation deepens, Palestinian independence disintegrates, and the consequences accelerate: In March, the International Criminal Court announced it would be investigating Israel and Palestinian militant groups for possible war crimes; foreign and domestic human rights groups have charged the country with apartheid. A fresh conflict exploded just weeks ago, sparking shocking ethnic violence among Israel’s own citizens.Neither of the first two aims — ending illiberal nationalism, nor strengthening democracy — can happen without a vision of how to end occupation. And there are only two real routes.One option is to revive the commitment toward a two-state solution — preferably in the updated, more humane form of a two-state confederation based on open borders and cooperation rather than hard ethnic partition. The other is to acknowledge the reality of permanent Israeli control and begin handing out full rights to all people under Israel’s control, equally, by law.Here the future coalition can easily run aground, with two right-wing parties — Yamina and New Hope — that broadly reject either approach. But these two parties hold just 13 seats out of 61 in the coalition. Yair Lapid heads the largest party in the new government, which he created. He needs to push this new government to set a new course on ending the conflicts.Without a permanent government, budget or substantive lawmaking on large-scale policy for two years, the country is at a standstill. The escalation with Hamas may flare again. Israel’s election nightmare has been a manifestation of the country’s deepest disagreements. If the new leaders are serious about their promised “change coalition,” they need to start with a vision even if they don’t complete the job.After all, Moses didn’t enter the promised land either, but at least he showed the way.Dahlia Scheindlin is a political analyst living in Tel Aviv and a policy fellow at the Century Foundation.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

  • in

    Netanyahu Rivals Agree on Israeli Coalition to Oust Him

    Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving leader, is on the verge of losing power as his opponents strike a deal that would replace him with an ultranationalist, Naftali Bennett.JERUSALEM — Israeli opposition parties announced on Wednesday that they had reached a coalition agreement to form a government and oust Benjamin Netanyahu, the longest-serving prime minister in Israeli history and a dominant figure who has pushed his nation’s politics to the right.The announcement could lead to the easing of a political impasse that has produced four elections in two years and left Israel without a stable government or a state budget. If Parliament ratifies the fragile agreement in a confidence vote in the coming days, it will also bring down the curtain, if only for an intermission, on the premiership of a leader who has defined contemporary Israel more than any other.The new coalition is an unusual and awkward alliance between eight political parties from a diverse array of ideologies, from the left to the far right. While some analysts have hailed it as a reflection of the breadth and complexity of contemporary society, others say its members are too incompatible for their compact to last, and consider it the embodiment of Israel’s political dysfunction.The alliance would be led until 2023 by Naftali Bennett, a former settler leader and standard-bearer for religious nationalists, who opposes a Palestinian state and wants Israel to annex the majority of the occupied West Bank. He is a former ally of Mr. Netanyahu often described as more right wing than the prime minister.If the government lasts a whole term, it would then be led between 2023 and 2025 by Yair Lapid, a centrist former television host considered a standard-bearer for secular Israelis.It was Mr. Lapid who was picked by the president, Reuven Rivlin, four weeks ago to try to form a new government. And it was Mr. Lapid who called Mr. Rivlin at 11:22 p.m. on Wednesday night, with just 38 minutes left before his mandate expired, to inform him that he had assembled a fragile coalition.Mr. Lapid, the Yesh Atid Party leader, speaking to reporters in Tel Aviv, last month.Amir Levy/Getty Images“I commit to you, Mr. President, that this government will work to serve all the citizens of Israel, including those who aren’t members of it, will respect those who oppose it, and do everything in its power to unite all parts of Israeli society,” Mr. Lapid said, according to a readout provided by his office.Mr. Bennett, 49, is the son of American immigrants, and a former software entrepreneur, army commando and chief of staff to Mr. Netanyahu. His home is in central Israel, but he was once chief executive of an umbrella group, the Yesha Council, that represents Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank. Until the most recent election cycle, Mr. Bennett was part of a political alliance with Bezalel Smotrich, a far-right leader.Though Mr. Bennett’s party, Yamina, won just seven of the 120 seats in Parliament, Mr. Netanyahu could not be ousted without his support, allowing him to set the terms of his involvement in the coalition.Mr. Lapid, 57, is a former news anchor and journalist who became a politician nine years ago and later served as finance minister in a Netanyahu-led coalition. His party placed second in the general election in March, winning 17 seats. But Mr. Lapid considered the ouster of Mr. Netanyahu more important than demanding to go first as prime minister.To avoid exacerbating their differences, Mr. Lapid and Mr. Bennett have promised to focus on largely technocratic issues like the economy and infrastructure, and to stay away from more contentious topics such as trying to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.Mr. Bennett, left, speaking with Mr. Lapid during a special session of the Knesset.Pool photo by Ronen ZvulunBut some commentators say Mr. Bennett’s party will be under pressure to prove to their supporters that their right-wing instincts have not been dimmed by their coalition partners.In a harbinger of potential tensions to come, talks almost collapsed on Wednesday after a disagreement over whether a key lieutenant to Mr. Bennett, Ayelet Shaked, a proponent of major judicial reform, would be allowed to join a committee that appoints new judges.And some leftist and centrist ministers are expected to rile their right-wing partners by promoting police reform or advocating curbs on settlement expansion.The alliance will also include an Arab Islamist party, Raam, which would become the first independent Arab group to join a governing political alliance in Israeli history. The agreement “secures the position of the Arab parties as an influential and legitimate player in the political arena,” the party said in a statement.But its participation is also expected to become a point of friction. Mr. Bennett briefly pulled out of coalition talks during the recent war in Gaza, wary of participating in an alliance with a party run by Palestinian citizens of Israel.Mr. Bennett speaking with reporters  on Sunday.Pool photo by Yonatan SindelRaam joined the coalition on the promise of greater rights and resources for Israel’s Arab minority — but some of its demands, including the repeal of a controversial housing law that disproportionately hinders the Arab minority, are deemed unacceptable to some of the coalition’s hard-right members.In the meantime, Mr. Netanyahu, who remains caretaker prime minister, is doing all he can to upend the agreement. The speaker of the Israeli Parliament, Yariv Levin, is a member of Mr. Netanyahu’s party, Likud, and can use parliamentary procedure to delay the confidence vote until Monday, June 14, constitutional experts said.In that time, his party has promised to pile pressure on right-wing members of the alliance to jump ship, telling them that they have sold out by aligning themselves with leftist and Arab lawmakers.If Mr. Netanyahu fails to persuade enough opponents, it will spell the end — at least for now — of his run at the pinnacle of Israeli politics, the longest tenure of any Israeli prime minister. Either way, he leaves a lasting imprint on Israeli life, and will likely seek to retain significant influence as leader of the opposition.Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arriving at the Knesset on Sunday.Pool photo by Yonatan SindelThe presence of Mr. Bennett at the threshold of power is testament to how Mr. Netanyahu has helped shift the pendulum of Israeli politics firmly to the right..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Under Mr. Netanyahu’s watch, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process collapsed, and tensions between Jews and Arabs inside Israel peaked in May when unrest swept across mixed Jewish-Arab cities during the latest Gaza war.By forging an electoral pact between far-right parties, which later helped them win elected office, Mr. Netanyahu also helped accelerate the impact of the far right on Israeli society and media debates.Against this backdrop, he nevertheless defied expectations and convention by negotiating diplomatic agreements with four Arab countries, subverting assumptions that Israel could make peace with Middle Eastern states only once a final deal with the Palestinians had been made.Israeli right-wing supporters  demonstrated against the formation of new government on Sunday.Sebastian Scheiner/Associated PressHe fostered a strong bond with former President Donald J. Trump, who gave Israel several diplomatic victories, shifting the American Embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv, shuttering an American consulate that dealt with Palestinian issues, closing the Palestinian mission in Washington and ripping up an Obama-era deal with Iran.The recent impasse in Israeli politics is also a result of Mr. Netanyahu’s divisive decision to remain in office despite being on trial for corruption.By doing so, his critics argued, he undermined democratic norms, and by attacking the judges in his case, he risked undercutting the rule of law.Mr. Netanyahu denied the charges, and said he had the right to remain in office to defend himself against what he presented as a backdoor coup attempt.But many even in his own base disagreed, leading to a political deadlock in which Mr. Netanyahu retained just enough support to remain in power but not enough to form a stable government — leading to the four inconclusive elections in the past two years, most recently in March.A desire to avoid a fifth election was what ultimately prompted Mr. Bennett to abandon Mr. Netanyahu’s right-wing camp and ally with rivals who, like Mr. Lapid, do not share most of his long-term political vision.If Parliament confirms his government, Mr. Bennett will start his term just as a new president, Isaac Herzog, begins his. Mr. Herzog, a former leader of the centrist Labor party, was elected president by lawmakers on Wednesday. He will assume office in July, and perform the largely ceremonial role for the next seven years. Isaac Herzog with Yariv Levin, speaker of the Knesset.Pool photo by Ronen ZvulunMr. Bennett’s government, if it passes the confidence vote in Parliament, may fall far earlier.Should it collapse, some analysts believe Mr. Lapid may emerge with more credit than Mr. Bennett. While Mr. Bennett gets the first go at the premiership, his decision to work with centrists and leftists has angered his already small following.“Lapid has made a very strong set of decisions, conveyed an amazing level of maturity and really made a big statement about a different kind of leadership,” said Dahlia Scheindlin, an Israeli political analyst and pollster at the Century Foundation, a New York-based research group. “That will not be lost on the Israeli public.”Adam Rasgon, Isabel Kershner, Gabby Sobelman and Carol Sutherland contributed reporting. More

  • in

    Will Cuomo Run for a 4th Term? A $10,000-a-Plate Fund-Raiser Says Yes.

    The event on June 29 will be the first fund-raiser for Mr. Cuomo since overlapping investigations engulfed his administration earlier this year.Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo will host a fund-raiser for the first time since overlapping scandals engulfed his administration and prompted calls for his resignation — the latest indication that he is gearing up to run for re-election.The fund-raiser, which will take place on June 29 at an undisclosed location in New York City, was advertised as a “summer reception” in a campaign email to supporters, who will need to fork over $10,000 per person, or $15,000 for two people, to attend.The mere act of holding a high-dollar, in-person fund-raiser after the end of the legislative session inflamed Mr. Cuomo’s critics, even as it underscored his everything-is-normal strategy in the face of several federal and state investigations into his personal conduct and the actions of his administration.The fund-raiser comes as Mr. Cuomo’s poll numbers have stabilized in recent months and he has dedicated most of his time to shoring up public support. Mr. Cuomo, a third-term Democrat, has a sizable $16.8 million cash on hand, according to campaign filings from January, and he appears intent on adding to it before the next filing in July.Still, few donors or lobbyists who were invited to the event were interested in discussing their plans publicly on Wednesday. Of eight invitees, only two said they planned to go. But none doubted that the governor, a prolific fund-raiser, would be able to attract enough takers for the event to raise its expected amount. (Similar events in the past — one asked couples to pay $25,000 — have aimed to raise $500,000, according to a person familiar with the governor’s fund-raising efforts.)“The pitch is, ‘I’m governor and I’m governing, head down, straightforward,’” said one person who received an invitation and requested anonymity to discuss it. The person did not plan to attend the fund-raiser.While Mr. Cuomo could use campaign contributions to mount a bid for a fourth term in 2022, he could also, in theory, use the money to pay for legal expenses related to the inquiries he is confronting, should he choose to hire his own lawyer, as some state officials have done.He has ignored the calls to resign that accompanied the investigations into sexual harassment claims from several women, his administration’s handling of nursing home deaths during the pandemic and his $5.1 million deal to write a memoir about the coronavirus outbreak.At a news conference on Wednesday, Mr. Cuomo said that he has not hired private counsel to represent him in the investigations, relying instead on outside lawyers paid for by the state, and that he had no plans “at this time” to use campaign funds for personal legal expenses.When Mayor Bill de Blasio faced state and federal inquiries into his campaign fund-raising activities during his first term, he used city funds to pay for the bulk of the legal fees. But he announced that he would personally pay a portion of the fees, about $300,000 that pertained to his “nongovernmental work.” (Mr. de Blasio has yet to settle that debt.)Last week, the state comptroller office approved a $2.5 million contract for Morvillo Abramowitz Grand Iason & Anello, a Manhattan law firm, to represent the administration in a federal investigation, overseen by the Eastern District of New York, into nursing home deaths and questions related to the publication of the governor’s book, “American Crisis.”The firm is also handling state and federal inquiries into the preferential access to coronavirus testing afforded to Mr. Cuomo’s family and other influential people, according to a partner there, Elkan Abramowitz.“The executive chamber has retained counsel, and that is a state expense,” Mr. Cuomo said on Wednesday. “It has been in every investigation, so that’s where we are now.”As the inquiries have multiplied, so has state spending on legal representation for Mr. Cuomo and his aides. In the case of Mr. Abramowitz’s firm alone, the state went from a $1.5 million in initial precontract paperwork in March to the approved $2.5 million just over two months later.And there are several other firms representing Mr. Cuomo, his aides and other state officials.A separate request for the state to contract with Mitra Hormozi, a lawyer with Walden Macht & Haran LLP, which is representing the executive chamber on an investigation overseen by the state attorney general into the sexual harassment claims, is under review, according to the state comptroller office.Another contract for Paul J. Fishman, a partner at Arnold & Porter, a firm which is also representing the governor’s office on the sexual harassment accusations, has not been submitted to the comptroller office.Mr. Cuomo is being represented individually by another attorney, Rita Glavin, who started her own firm this year.“We are in the process of finalizing these contracts subject to approval by the comptroller’s office,” Richard Azzopardi, a senior adviser to Mr. Cuomo, said in a statement. “We are abiding by all applicable rules and standards, and in matters like this it is not uncommon for legal representation to begin while the contracts are simultaneously being drafted for submission and approval. Doing it the other way could potentially leave the chamber and its employees without representation.”Mr. Cuomo could take on private counsel of his own apart from the lawyers being paid for by the state. Were he to do so, he could use campaign funds to pay for that representation.However the governor plans to spend the money, the June 29 fund-raiser would be the first test of his ability to gather contributions, something Mr. Cuomo has been effective at throughout his tenure.Even as most fund-raisers were canceled or went virtual during the pandemic, Mr. Cuomo raised more than $4 million during the latter half of 2020 and the first two weeks of 2021, during which the state confronted the second wave of the coronavirus pandemic and he promoted his pandemic memoir.His top-dollar contributors, who gave up to $69,700 each during that time period, included Larry Robbins, a hedge fund manager; Eric Schmidt, the billionaire former chief executive of Google; Frank McCourt, the businessman and former owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers; and Robert Hale, a co-owner of the Boston Celtics.Real estate developers Gary Barnett, Daniel Brodsky, Jeffrey Gural, Harrison LeFrak and Larry Silverstein each gave $20,000 or more, while the billionaire leaders of the Estée Lauder Companies, Leonard A. Lauder and William Lauder, collectively contributed $82,000. More

  • in

    How Naftali Bennett, Head of a Small Right-Wing Party in Israel, Rose to the Top

    The energetic leader of the small, right-wing Yamina party has managed to leverage his modest electoral gain for a shot at the top job.JERUSALEM — The morning after Donald J. Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election, Naftali Bennett, the energetic leader of a relatively small, Israeli pro-settlement party, exulted before an audience of foreign reporters in Jerusalem, “The era of a Palestinian state is over!”Now, Mr. Bennett, 49, a former high-tech entrepreneur who insists that there must never be a full-fledged Palestinian state and that Israel should annex much of the occupied West Bank, is poised to become Israel’s next prime minister, replacing Benjamin Netanyahu.Mr. Bennett, a former ally of Mr. Netanyahu often described as more right wing than the prime minister, is the independently wealthy son of American immigrants. He first entered the Israeli Parliament eight years ago and is relatively unknown and inexperienced on the international stage, leaving much of the world — not to mention many Israelis — wondering what kind of leader he might be.Shifting between seemingly contradictory alliances, he has been called a right-wing extremist, a pragmatist and an opportunist.But in a measure of his talents, he has now pulled off a feat that is extraordinary even by the perplexing standards of Israeli politics: He has maneuvered himself into the top office even though his party, Yamina, won just seven of the 120 seats in the Parliament.A canny and ambitious beneficiary of Israel’s prolonged political morass, Mr. Bennett leveraged his modest but pivotal electoral weight after the inconclusive March election, Israel’s fourth in two years. He entered coalition talks as a kingmaker, and emerged as the one wearing the crown.In a career full of paradoxes, Mr. Bennett, once a top aide to Mr. Netanyahu, 71, played a crucial role in toppling his former boss, Israel’s longest-serving leader. As a result, Mr. Netanyahu was brought down — for now, at least — not only by his longtime rivals on the center and left of the political spectrum but also by someone considered even more hard-line.Naftali Bennett, left, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2020.  Sebastian Scheiner/Associated PressMr. Bennett has long championed West Bank settlers and once led the council representing them, but he has never been a settler, himself, and lives in Ra’anana, an affluent town in central Israel, with his wife and four children. He is religiously observant — he would be the first prime minister to wear a kipa — but he will head a governing coalition that is largely secular.He is best known for views on settlements, annexation and Palestinian statehood that many on Israel’s left and center — not to mention much of the world — consider not just wrong but dangerous. Yet his coalition spans Israel’s fractious political spectrum from left to right, and relies on the support of a small Arab, Islamist party.That coalition proposes to paper over its differences on Israeli-Palestinian relations by focusing on domestic matters.Mr. Bennett has explained his motives for teaming up with such ideological opposites as an act of last resort to end the political impasse that has paralyzed Israel.“The political crisis in Israel is unprecedented on a global level,” he said in a televised speech on Sunday. “We could end up with fifth, sixth, even 10th elections, dismantling the walls of the country, brick by brick, until our house falls in on us. Or we can stop the madness and take responsibility.”Now Mr. Bennett faces the greatest challenge of his political career, trying to hold that unlikely coalition together, to vault from being a second-tier figure to a national leader, and to maintain relations with Israel’s most important ally, the United States. President Biden has been cooler toward Mr. Netanyahu than Mr. Trump was.“There will be, I think, a collective sigh of relief within the Biden administration that they have new, young Israeli blood to deal with,” said Martin S. Indyk, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel and a former special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.Mr. Bennett will be pressured by the settler right to deliver for them, Mr. Indyk said, but it appears that “he has already accepted that he won’t be able to pursue that agenda.”He campaigned as the right-wing alternative to Mr. Netanyahu, who has held power for 12 years consecutively and 15 years overall, and is now standing trial on corruption charges. They have often differed more in tone than substance, as Mr. Bennett avoided the inflammatory language and long-running legal drama of his predecessor.Aida Touma-Sliman, a lawmaker from the Joint List of predominantly Arab parties, wrote on Twitter that Mr. Bennett would lead “a dangerous right-wing government,” one that would “remove Netanyahu and preserve his path.”After Mr. Bennett described Mr. Netanyahu on Sunday as a divisive and polarizing force, Mr. Netanyahu accused his former aide of using “the same hollow slogans about hate and division,” and of “committing the fraud of the century.”People who know him describe Mr. Bennett as likable and tolerant behind closed doors, a pragmatist at heart, though how that private person would translate to governing remains to be seen.Mr. Bennett, then serving as the economy minister and head of the Jewish Home Party, posing with high school students in 2015.Uriel Sinai for The New York Times“People think he’s a fanatic. He’s not,” said Ayelet Frish, an Israeli political consultant. She said Mr. Bennett once told her that he had grown up in a home of “Woodstock parents,” surrounded by mostly secular culture, and noted his time in the largely secular high-tech business world.Orit Galili-Zucker, a former strategic communications adviser to Mr. Netanyahu, said Mr. Bennett aimed “to present an alternative to Netanyahu’s toxic discourse.”In Mr. Bennett’s first campaign, in 2013, Mr. Netanyahu’s Likud party branded him as “a dangerous, messianic right-winger,” she said. Now Likud was calling him a “dangerous leftist,” she noted, for joining forces with the opposition leader Yair Lapid to unseat Mr. Netanyahu.Now Likud and its staunch ultra-Orthodox allies will be heading into the opposition.Under the new coalition’s government, Mr. Bennett will serve as prime minister for the first part of a four-year term, to be followed by the secular, centrist Mr. Lapid. By conceding the first turn in the rotation, Mr. Lapid smoothed the way for other right-wing politicians to join the anti-Netanyahu alliance..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}.css-uf1ume{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;}.css-wxi1cx{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Mr. Bennett represents a new generation in Israeli politics and would be the second-youngest prime minister in the country’s history; only Mr. Netanyahu, when he first came into the office a generation ago, was younger.Born in Israel, Mr. Bennett spent parts of his childhood living in the United States and Canada. He served in the same Israeli Army commando unit Mr. Netanyahu had. He then moved to New York and founded a software company that he later sold for $145 million, and served as chief executive of another company.He has had a fraught relationship with Mr. Netanyahu since a stint as his chief of staff ended in acrimony in 2008. A sharp critic of some of Mr. Netanyahu’s policies, he nevertheless sat in several Netanyahu-led governments as a minister, as well as in the opposition. In late 2019, Mr. Netanyahu appointed him as defense minister to keep Mr. Bennett on his side at a time of political turmoil, and he served in that role for about six months.Mr. Bennett at the Western Wall in Jerusalem ahead of parliamentary elections in 2013.Ammar Awad/ReutersOver the past decade, Mr. Bennett and his senior partner in Yamina, Ayelet Shaked, have run for office in an array of right-wing, pro-settlement parties with a dizzying series of name changes and allies. In 2013, when they were a pair of political newcomers, he formed what was seen as a surprising alliance with Mr. Lapid.Mr. Bennett has often punched above his weight on security issues. On the eve of the 2014 Gaza war, he presciently raised the threat arising from tunnels dug by Hamas beneath the Gaza-Israel border and pressed for a plan of action to neutralize them.Later that year, he wrote an uncompromising op-ed in The New York Times explaining his view that Israel could not allow the creation of a Palestinian state. He has proposed granting the Palestinians “a sort of autonomy on steroids” in about 40 percent of the West Bank, and gradually applying Israeli sovereignty in the rest of the territory — a move much of the world would consider illegal.The next year he wrote another op-ed forcefully condemning Jewish extremists who had stabbed participants at a gay pride parade in Jerusalem and burned three members of a Palestinian family to death in a West Bank village, denouncing the perpetrators as “terrorists.”At times, Mr. Bennett and Ms. Shaked joined forces with more radical political factions in the religious Zionist camp who are heavily influenced by their rabbis. Running as the New Right party in the April 2019 election, without their more extreme partners, they failed to gain enough votes to enter Parliament.In the run-up to this year’s election, the pair tried to broaden their appeal to more mainstream Israelis, and had more success, gathering some support from disaffected former Netanyahu voters. Mr. Bennett has been pushing a program for economic reform that he calls his “Singapore Plan,” supports curbing the powers of the judiciary and has criticized the present government’s handling of the pandemic.After the election, neither the pro-Netanyahu bloc of parties nor the anti-Netanyahu group could form a parliamentary majority without his party. Both sides courted him, offering him a chance to serve as prime minister in a rotation agreement. Mr. Bennett made it clear he would have preferred to join a right-wing government, but Mr. Netanyahu proved unable to form one. More