“BENNY GANTZ 2”: Lieberman Accuses Eisenkot of Plotting Coalition With Netanyahu, Deri and Goldknopf
Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Lieberman has launched a blistering attack on Yashar party leader Gadi Eisenkot, accusing him of positioning himself to join a government headed by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu after the October 27 elections, potentially alongside Shas chairman Aryeh Deri and United Torah Judaism’s Yitzchok Goldknopf.
In a lengthy statement published Friday, Lieberman charged that Eisenkot’s campaign strategy was weakening the very political bloc seeking to replace Netanyahu. He suggested that Eisenkot was pursuing his own ambitions at the expense of a unified effort to defeat the current government.
Lieberman titled his statement “Gadi Eisenkot – Benny Gantz 2,” drawing a comparison between Eisenkot and another former IDF chief of staff who entered politics and ultimately joined a Netanyahu-led government.
At the center of Lieberman’s criticism was Eisenkot’s campaign to emerge from the elections as the leader of the largest party. According to Lieberman, the strategy would accomplish little beyond transferring votes between parties already opposed to Netanyahu.
“Eisenkot’s ‘largest party’ campaign is not designed to move a single vote from the draft-dodgers’ bloc to the serving public’s bloc. Its purpose is to siphon votes from within the bloc itself,” Lieberman wrote.
He maintained that the approach ran counter to understandings reached among opposition party leaders at a September 26 meeting, where they had discussed coordinating their efforts ahead of the election.
Lieberman argued that Eisenkot’s ultimate objective was to gain enough parliamentary strength to negotiate directly with Netanyahu, rather than secure a government composed exclusively of parties opposed to the prime minister.
“Gadi Eisenkot is planning for the day after the elections, and what interests him is not being the largest party in the serving public’s bloc, but being larger than Likud and entering negotiations to form a government with Netanyahu from a position of strength.”
Lieberman pointed to several political developments that he said reinforced his suspicions, including comments from Likud Minister Miki Zohar suggesting cooperation with Eisenkot might be possible.
He also referenced reports of efforts by President Isaac Herzog to encourage a unity government involving Netanyahu and Eisenkot, along with alleged messages from the White House concerning Israel’s post-election political landscape.
“When I hear Minister Miki Zohar discussing the possibility of cooperation with Eisenkot, read reports about President Herzog’s initiative to form a Netanyahu-Eisenkot government, and hear the briefings coming from the White House, the pieces begin to fall into place,” he wrote.
The Yisrael Beytenu leader also attacked Eisenkot’s position on the military draft, arguing that his proposed arrangement for yeshiva students would perpetuate the existing system of exemptions rather than fundamentally change it.
Under the framework Lieberman criticized, thousands of yeshiva students would continue to receive annual deferments from military service. Lieberman maintained that such a policy was incompatible with the principle of universal enlistment advocated by his party.
“The implication is that things will remain exactly as they are. The exemption from IDF service will not be abolished,” Lieberman claimed, emphasizing that Yisrael Beytenu opposes military service exemptions and supports universal enlistment.
Lieberman invoked his party’s refusal to enter a Netanyahu-led coalition in 2019 because of disagreements over the draft legislation, presenting that decision as evidence that he would not compromise his position for political advantage.
He further criticized Eisenkot’s proposals concerning a constitution, arguing that the Yashar leader had failed to offer a sufficiently clear path toward the changes Lieberman believes Israel requires.
Another major point of contention was the possibility of establishing a government dependent on Arab political parties, even if those parties remained formally outside the coalition.
Lieberman ruled out any arrangement in which Yisrael Beytenu would participate in a government relying on support from Ra’am or the Joint List.
To explain his opposition, he cited MK Ofer Cassif’s backing of a petition connected to proceedings against Israel in The Hague, as well as statements by Ra’am lawmaker Yasser Hujirat concerning Hamas.
“Anyone who wants to form a government and rely on Cassif and Hujirat is welcome to do so. Yisrael Beytenu will not be part of it,” he declared.
Lieberman then laid out what he described as Eisenkot’s likely post-election strategy: negotiating a coalition with Netanyahu and the chareidi parties while simultaneously keeping open the prospect of a minority government as a bargaining tool.
“My conclusion from Eisenkot’s conduct is that he is seeking to form a government with Netanyahu, Goldknopf, and Deri, while keeping the possibility of a minority government on the table as leverage against Netanyahu in order to secure the first turn in a rotation agreement.”
Lieberman accused Eisenkot of prioritizing the possibility of becoming prime minister over the ideological objectives of the political camp he claims to represent.
“Unfortunately, I see far more personal ambition here than a genuine desire to correct the injustices of the draft-dodgers’ government.”
The Yisrael Beytenu chairman also questioned whether Eisenkot possessed the political judgment needed to navigate Israel’s complicated coalition system, arguing that a distinguished military career did not necessarily prepare a former general for the challenges of parliamentary politics.
“Unfortunately, Gadi’s lack of political experience reminds me of a phenomenon we have already seen among former chiefs of staff who entered politics. From Yigael Yadin, through Ehud Barak, to Benny Gantz, military rank and experience are no substitute for political experience,” he wrote.
Lieberman urged the four parties he considers central to the anti-Netanyahu bloc to work toward securing a clear parliamentary majority without depending on Eisenkot’s participation.
He warned that anything less could leave Eisenkot holding the balance of power, potentially allowing him to negotiate a coalition arrangement that would keep Netanyahu in office.
The election campaign has increasingly exposed divisions among Netanyahu’s opponents, who remain united in their desire to replace him but disagree over coalition partners, military enlistment requirements and the possibility of forming a government with parties from the current coalition.
Lieberman insisted that his preferred outcome was a government committed to what he described as Zionist and liberal principles, with particular emphasis on military service, employment and the obligations of citizenship.
“I believe in the Israeli public, I believe in the serving public’s bloc, and I believe that on October 27, we will win, and win big,” Lieberman concluded.
The criticism drew a sharp response from Blue and White chairman Benny Gantz, who accused Lieberman of contributing little to the country despite his decades in public office.
“After 30 years in Israeli politics, Liberman has not accomplished even ten percent of what Gadi Eisenkot and I have done for the State of Israel. Ever since I exposed his plan to form a minority government with Bennett and the Arab parties, he has been under pressure and lashing out in every direction.”
Gantz also rejected Lieberman’s approach to coalition building, arguing that the political deadlock could be overcome only through a broad unity government bringing together parties from opposing political camps.
“Liberman, your attacks will not conceal the dead end toward which you are leading Israel. There is only one solution: a broad-based Zionist unity government that crosses political blocs. And only Blue and White can deliver it. Vote for unity. Save the country.”
