Peloni: Was Netanyahu’s move to take significant if not full control over the Likud list the real reason that we saw the recent resignations of MKs Yuli Edelstein and Dan Illouz? While the mirage of an emerging anti-Likud party seemed to evaporate over the past several months, the close timing of these resignations to Bibi’s consolidating power around himself makes this conclusion reasonable. It is noytable that Likud used to be remarkable for its democratic election of leader and party lists. Ultimately, the voters will stand in judgement of Bibi’s move to solidify his control in the party, but it isn’t a point of strength which led him towards this policy shift, even as it may have the potential of making the party stronger. Time will tell.
Of further note, the Right needs to focus on solidarity as the election draws closer. Maximizing the preservation of lost votes is how the national camp came to power in 2022 and if such a focus is not once again the fundamental focus of the entire Right Bloc, it may see their majority electoral support dissolve before a Left Bloc victory.
| Published: July 20, 2026
By Hudson Institute – Flickr, CC BY 2.0, Wikipedia
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday was granted the authority to select candidates for eight reserved slots on the Likud party’s list ahead of the next Knesset election.
The decision was approved by the Likud Constitution Committee, chaired by Knesset Member Haim Katz, which also authorized Netanyahu to suspend the party primary process in the event of a “wartime situation.”
The committee’s decisions give Netanyahu massive influence over the composition of the Likud candidate list, particularly as, according to current polls, the number of Likud Knesset members is set to shrink significantly.
Netanyahu now has the authority to place his own hand-picked candidates in these eight slots, and the 4,500-member Likud Central Committee will have no authority to interfere. The prime minister has argued that this would enable him to “optimize” the list for the coming elections, indicating his dissatisfaction with the lawmakers placed in high positions by the last primary elections.
The possibility of postponing a primary was approved as Israel remains engaged in ongoing security tensions, including heightened military activity involving Iran and continued IDF readiness for possible renewed hostilities.
Netanyahu reportedly told committee members that he is “in favor of a primary,” but that “there is a possibility that we could find ourselves in an exceptional security situation that would make it difficult to hold campaign events. It could fall on the day of the vote or beforehand, and that would make voting difficult.”
Netanyahu’s move has faced strong opposition within Likud. Knesset Member David Bitan criticized the decision, saying that Katz was attempting to “create a faction within a faction.” Bitan also argued that measures introduced specifically for Netanyahu could remain in place after a future party leader takes over, saying, “Today, we vote because of Netanyahu; tomorrow someone new will come and receive those reserved spots.”
Several Likud MKs and party officials have resigned in recent weeks, citing disagreements with decisions made by Netanyahu and legislation passed during the final days of the outgoing Knesset. The legislation included measures sought by the ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) parties Shas and United Torah Judaism, some of which faced opposition among Likud supporters. In addition, some Likud officials criticized Netanyahu’s handling of the legislation, arguing that he supported the measures out of concern that the Haredi parties could withhold their support from a future coalition government after the elections.
However, the moves come amid declining support for Likud in public opinion polls, as well as surveys indicating that a significant share of Israelis believe Netanyahu should step aside, with his age cited among the factors influencing their views.
“Bibi seems to think he’s going to live forever,” lamented Idan Menkowitz, a Jerusalem resident who told ALL ISRAEL NEWS that he voted for Likud in every election since he was old enough to vote, but voted for a different party in the last election in 2022.
“I remember the trauma of suddenly losing Arik,” he continued, referring to Ariel Sharon, who suffered a massive stroke while serving as prime minister on Jan 4, 2006. “I wonder what it’ll be like this time.”
Israeli voters are scheduled to go to the polls on Oct. 27.
Very good many people have the left the Likud. So, of the main reasons and reasons perhaps there is current dissatisfaction with his continued leadership can be summed up partially for the following:
Across multiple departures, the recurring themes are:
(1) Likud has become centered on Netanyahu personally rather than its historic ideology;
(2) internal democracy has eroded;
(3) policy is driven by political survival and ultra?Orthodox parties rather than national interest;
(4) responsibility and accountability have collapsed.
@Rafi
I think you just don’t like Bibi, for whatever reason. Otherwise you would respond to at least one of the inquires I made of you. It is difficult to argue with someone who prefers to shadow box with themselves rather than engaging in honest dialogue, so I will disengage at this point with this final comment:
If baseless hatreds are left to choose the future of our people, it will not only be as devastating and terrible as before, but more likely even more so.
I actually have liked Bibi over the years but as I said I believe he has been Prime Minister too long!
Your framing of questions are to be polite not things I feel necessary to answer. They appear to be created to take one down a rabbit hole for you to get one to only be able to view things from your viewpoint.
I state my view and belief. You may agree or disagree but you in my view reframe what I have said for the purposes of you winning your viewpoint.
You like Bibi and I believe you would concur with that statement. If re-framed the statement as, you keep stating that, Bibi can do no wrong and any critique of him is certainly must be wrong. Perhaps you would think that statement goes too far on the face of it.
I believe in term limits for the reasons I stated and believe the PM’s office in Israel should be under term limits. Did I say all the reasons I listed why I believe in term limits are things Bibi violated. No, I did not but there are few that he has and I specified those more than once.
I believe the large majority of voters in Israel want someone new in office. Barkat, could do a very good job and he is in the Likud. Under Bibi’s complete control of the Likud there will no longer be a primary to choose who will head the party. Likud used to be democratic but no longer
Here is a partial list but significant of people (MKs and other prominent leaders) who have left the Likud under Bibi’s watch (or reign of power for close to 2 decades).
Major Likud Figures Who Left or Broke With Netanyahu
1. Gideon Sa’ar
Role: Former Likud minister; long?time senior figure; Netanyahu’s #2 for years.
Outcome: Left Likud in 2020; founded New Hope.
Reason: Said Likud had become a “cult of personality”; challenged Netanyahu for leadership and was politically frozen out.
2. Moshe Kahlon
Role: Former Likud minister; popular social?policy figure.
Outcome: Left Likud in 2014; founded Kulanu.
Reason: Felt sidelined by Netanyahu; said Likud abandoned socioeconomic priorities.
3. Naftali Bennett
Role: Former Netanyahu Chief of Staff; later Defense Minister; PM.
Outcome: Left Netanyahu’s orbit; formed Jewish Home, then Yamina.
Reason: Netanyahu pushed him out of the PMO; later political rivalry escalated. Netanyahu repeatedly blocked Bennett’s advancement.
4. Ayelet Shaked
Role: Senior minister; Bennett’s political partner.
Outcome: Left Likud orbit; joined Bennett in Jewish Home and Yamina.
Reason: Ideological and strategic break; Netanyahu refused to include her in Likud or give her senior roles.
5. Yuli Edelstein
Role: Former Knesset Speaker; senior Likud figure.
Outcome: Left Likud in 2026.
Reason: Marginalized after challenging Netanyahu; stripped of committee chairmanship.
6. Dan Illouz
Role: Likud MK.
Outcome: Resigned from Likud and Knesset in 2026.
Reason: Said Likud was “hijacked”; claimed many MKs wanted Netanyahu out after Oct. 7.
7. Limor Livnat
Role: Former minister; long?time Likud stalwart.
Outcome: Left Likud.
Reason: Pushed aside as Netanyahu elevated loyalists; cited as part of a pattern of “castoffs.”
8. Benny Begin
Role: Former minister; son of Menachem Begin.
Outcome: Left Likud; later joined other right?leaning parties.
Reason: Said Likud abandoned its principles; clashed with Netanyahu’s style.
9. Dan Meridor
Role: Former minister; senior Likud veteran.
Outcome: Pushed out; later left politics.
Reason: Netanyahu blocked his advancement; ideological disagreements.
10. Michael Eitan
Role: Former minister.
Outcome: Left Likud orbit.
Reason: Criticized Netanyahu’s leadership direction.
11. Moshe Ya’alon
Role: Former Defense Minister.
Outcome: Left Likud in 2016; joined Lapid; later formed Telem.
Reason: Netanyahu fired him; Ya’alon accused Netanyahu of undermining democratic norms.
12. Tzipi Hotovely
Role: Senior Likud minister.
Outcome: Not forced out, but sidelined and sent abroad as ambassador.
Reason: Internal Likud politics; Netanyahu preferred other loyalists.
? Netanyahu Chiefs of Staff & Senior Aides Who Were Removed or Forced Out
1. Naftali Bennett
Role: Chief of Staff (2006–2008).
Outcome: Pushed out.
Reason: Netanyahu accused him of disloyalty; Bennett later built his own political base.
2. Ziv Agmon
Role: Acting Chief of Staff & PMO Spokesperson.
Outcome: Forced out in 2026.
Reason: Leaked racist remarks; Likud backlash.
3. Tzachi Braverman
Role: Chief of Staff.
Outcome: Removed from PMO.
Reason: Criminal investigation; court barred him from PMO duties.
4. Ari Harow
Role: Chief of Staff (twice).
Outcome: Resigned; later became state witness.
Reason: Investigated for corruption; Netanyahu distanced himself.
5. David Sharan
Role: Chief of Staff.
Outcome: Arrested; removed.
Reason: Involved in submarine affair (Case 3000).
6. Eli Feldstein
Role: Senior PMO aide.
Outcome: Removed; charged.
Reason: Linked to Qatargate and leak cases.
7. Yoaz Hendel
Role: PMO Communications Director.
Outcome: Resigned.
Reason: Fell out with Netanyahu; later joined Blue & White.
8. Nir Hefetz
Role: Senior media adviser.
Outcome: Left; became state witness.
Reason: Involved in Cases 2000/4000.
@Rafi
In that 20 years, the people consistently chose to support Bibi. Both in the party and in the general election by voting for parties which would ultimately support him as PM, for most of those twenty years, all while these people left Likud or joined other parties, which seems a somewhat arbitrary argument against Bibi running the govt today, if that is your continued point in sharing this list. So what’s the problem with that?
Politics is not a contest where everyone receives a trophy. Not everyone gets a turn to pilot the ship of state. Only one can lead, and that leader is chosen by the people. For most of these twenty years, the leader chosen was Bibi, even when Bennett used his Right Bloc votes to form a Left wing govt to support him in taking Bibi’s place with the added use of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Why do should we have so little respect for the will of the people? Stated otherwise, why is the will of the people too irrelevant a basis on which to to choose the country’s leader? I think this is a fair question.
As to the particulars of the people listed above, nearly half of them were targeted or used in lawfare cases against Bibi. Are you suggesting that either those cases were legitimate or that Bibi was responsible for the weaponization of the legal/judicial system against him? And what is the point of adding Tzipi Hotovely to this list? If Glick goes to become the NYC counsel will she add to this list as well? This is quite silly.
Bibi, has been Macavellian to a tee and not democratic. The Likud party started as an exemplary democratic party. Now has evolved to Bibi’s party. This is not healthy for Israel.
10/7 – Certainly, occurred under Bibi’s Watch and he should talk responsibility!
The draft dodging crisis with the Haredi is occurring under his watch and he is not solving the problem but exasperating it, to maintain in power.
@Rafi
Just so we are clear, you are saying that since Bibi has reserved 8 members of his list, it is not healthy for Israel? What about all the other parties which you are considering supporting? Which one is as democratic as Likud? This again is a serious question. You do seem undeterred by Bennett/Lapid’s party or by Eisenkot’s party or by Lieberman’s party, as you have only objected to Bibi having reserved the 8 seats. This doesn’t seem like a serious or fair criticism.
This is not a fair portrayal of the facts. Bibi had negotiated a bill which significantly addressed this issue several weeks (months?) ago, but the High Court struck it down. Bibi is clearly motivated to deal with this, and he has made his position clear on this point. He is not responsible for the High Court striking down his legislation, and if we are to be fair, it should be admitted that this will be the same deal which the Left will cut with the Haredim after the election, when they will not be similarly harassed by their allies on the High Court.
You still have yet to answer even one question I have raised to you. I think they were fair questions to raise, and thus far you have ignored them entirely.
@Rafi Is this one of your “good people” and does this constitute being “forced out by Bibi?” If you believe, Amit Segal of Channel 12, who started the public backlash against Bibi’s unelected spokesman by exposing his telephone conversations, was lying, why do you believe polls coming out of left wing stations like all of them except Channel 14?
https://www.jns.org/netanyahu-spokesman-accused-of-racism-insulting-pm-and-his-family
Do not know yet if the polls will be accurate. Too many variables to go. They are interesting to me but perhaps upsetting to some. What I personally see and maybe some do not who do not interact with Israelis on a personal level is that Israelis want change in the large majority. Huge reasons are distrust of current government spurred on by events of Oct. 7th and the draft evasion by the Haredi and the current governments involvement in what has become a scandal.
Polls in my mind are reflecting this.
Bibi has dominated the Likud, now has for many years, during this time many capable leaders have been forced out. Usually, the ones who could compete with him for the top job. Now there is no more primary for the top job, and he gets to appoint many top people on this list.
The Likud used to be a democratically run party. No longer, it is now Bibi’s party.
This party has become vulnerable,
This party has squelched Oct 7th national inquiries. The opposition claims because Bibi would be found culpable in this disaster and expected to resign. This is very plausible or why has he stopped such an investigation, which is customary in Israel after a national disaster.
Bibi is hanging on to power even at the cost of partnering with the Haredi draft dodgers and creating (an unenforceable law) allowing them to escape arrest for draft dodging.
Eisenkot has several dubious past statements of a left leaning nature but much of the country is united against draft dodging and the evasions of Oct 7th inquiries, leading many to believe that Bibi is avoiding responsibility his part for that disaster. That is why Eisenkot is strong in the polls at the moment.
We do not know what will happen in the election and there certainly are a percentage of the voters who will stick with Bibi “uber alles” (regardless of everything).
I believe Israel should have term limits for the PM. Just like it does for positions of power such as the Chief of Staff and other top security positions. USA went to term limits after FDR was elected 4 times. A healthier democracy benefits from term limits.
Term limits are often adopted because long?term concentration of power increases the risk of corruption, abuse of authority, and weakened democratic accountability.
? Why staying in power too long becomes risky
Several mechanisms explain why long tenure can lead to corruption or democratic erosion:
Power becomes entrenched — A leader who stays for decades can dominate institutions (courts, legislature, media), making it harder for anyone to challenge them.
Patronage networks grow — Over time, leaders build loyal networks of supporters who benefit from keeping them in office, which can encourage bribery, favoritism, and misuse of public funds.
Reduced accountability — If a leader expects to remain in office indefinitely, the incentive to govern responsibly decreases.
Weakening of opposition — Long-serving leaders often use state resources to suppress political rivals, making elections less competitive.
Institutional decay — Democratic checks and balances can erode when one person or party controls them for too long.
@Rafi
I disagree. Term limits focus on equity of opportunity regardless of one’s record of service at the cost of the enfranchisement of the people to choose their own representative govt.
Term limits infringe on the will of the people. It is just that simple. Not one of your explanations for why term limits should be used defends the rights of the people, but rather explains why the will of the people should not be trusted. In fact, those who call for term limits usually stand firm on the concept of democracy, but term limits are the antithesis of any democratic principles. It disenfranchises the people, and leaves the final term of office for anyone being term limited out with a free hand for that entire term as there is no consequence for poor performance, as the next election, which would bear a consequence for them, is prohibited.
Either you believe in the will of the people or you don’t. Term limits limit the will of the people. It is interesting that you use the word democratic 4 times while trying to prevent the democratic will of the people to choose their own representative govt.
More specific to your claims:
Yeah, I think Bibi has demonstrated that the longest serving premiere in the world is not dominating the courts, the legislature or the media. But the people chose him anyway.
Again, Bibi as the longest serving premiere in the world needed a special legal interpretation using coerced witnesses and faked testimony to build a rigged case of corruption such as you suggest is evident in long term representation in govt.
Nonsense. The election is political accountability. The lack of any forthcoming election, such as is the case with term limits, eliminates that accountability.
Again, Bibi as the longest serving premiere in the world has no limit of political rivals. As far as the concept of his experience making the elections less competitive, I think this election alone disproves this claim.
Give me an example if you can of how Bibi’s decades of service has eroded the checks and balances.
Believe as you like!!
@Rafi
So no examples to prove your claims accurate?
With all due respect, we should both believe as we like, but you made a series of claims about the benefits of term limits and I only asked you for one example to support just one of your claims. You are of course welcome to not respond, but that hardly proves your point about the benefits of term limits.
I was quite sincere in the request if you have an answer.
Even when the same rotating tiny left wing cast of characters have been competing in every election as the only viable opposition?
Of note, this challenge is never raised with respect to the haughty, self aggrandizing, special sauce jurists who hold democracies as their private play things as they hold terms upto life, and the consequences of having such dim lit sources of justice are present every day in the proceedings of the High Court.
Rafi
Bibi? Are you serious? 😀
I consider PM Netanyahu one of Israel’s best leaders and certainly the best leader on the planet today. I thank G-d for him being in charge at this time. He has done so much for Israel, even as far as taking a bullet for his country. I can’t see anyone else taking over and doing as good a job as he has currently. May G-d bless him and may G-d give the Israeli people the correct mindset to re-elect him! The PM of Israel is by far the hardest job on the planet. A job most people wouldn’t ever consider taking on. Clearly it’s a thankless job too.
@leonkushner
I generally agree with you. Bibi has made mistakes, big ones, such as refusing to take control of Gaza and to return settlements there, but even with these gross errors baked into the calculus, the election is not on the merits of one man alone, but on which man would be the best suited for the job. I find it difficult to see anyone likely to replace Bibi, such as Eisenkot and Bennet, more suitable for the job. In fact, I find the potential of either of them might replace Bibi to be a frightening possibility.
I’m guessing Eiseknkot is the new PM.
I can not find anything about him as to real positions on anything except mealy mouthed politcian talking points.
Anyone know what Eisenkot believes in about the economy, about Israel’s totally corrupt judicial system, about Islam? About anything other than some of his closest relatives have been killed in IDF actions?
I think Bibi fatigue has set in and I love the guy, but eventually your time is up.
Sharon Haskell (Deputy Foreign Minister) also resigned. Many people in Israel are seriously upset by the disgusting bill Bibi and the Haredi passed giving the Haredi a pass on serving their country (trying to legalize draft dodging).
Bibi has done many good things for Israel. Having one person in charge for so long is not healthy. He has for a longtime pushed good people out of the Likud. More are now leaving! Likud needs new leadership and continuation of being a democratic party (not the Bibi party).
@Rafi
Bibi was democratically elected, amid the greatest efforts, both domestically in internationally, to defeat him. The public chose him over and over again, and most recently, all I can say is , thank G_d they did. This is how democracies work. Suggesting that government chosen by the public will is unhealthy bears a lack of respect for the democratic process in general.
Win or lose the public’s will is the only legitimate, and I would argue healthy, basis for choosing the PM. It is a messy process with erratic and inconsistent results at times, but the fact that the results have been consistentin supporting Bibi does not impeach either him, his action or the process. It just demonstratesthat the people have beenhappy and supportiveof their having chosen him with their continued support. So we will see if that continues into the next election.