[Video below.] Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir is warning that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu could shut Otzma Yehudit out of the next government and instead bring Gadi Eisenkot into his coalition, despite Netanyahu’s assurances that Ben Gvir would receive a senior ministerial position if he returns to power.
Speaking in an extensive interview with Arutz Sheva-Israel National News in Yerushalayim, the Otzma Yehudit chairman said his party must secure at least ten Knesset seats in the upcoming elections to prevent Netanyahu from pursuing a coalition that would sideline the right-wing agenda Ben Gvir has been promoting.
“If Otzma Yehudit doesn’t win double-digit seats, they’ll leave us out. Don’t have any illusions about that,” Ben Gvir said.
Although Netanyahu has publicly expressed his intention to include Ben Gvir in a future government, the national security minister said he remains deeply skeptical. He pointed to comments by Israeli Ambassador to the United States Yechiel Leiter, Minister Miki Zohar, and other discussions surrounding Eisenkot’s possible inclusion in a future coalition as indications that Netanyahu’s plans may differ from his public assurances.
“I hope Netanyahu is right,” Ben Gvir said, while observing that Netanyahu has never explicitly promised to reject a coalition arrangement involving Eisenkot.
Ben Gvir suggested that Netanyahu may be looking toward a less contentious term as prime minister, one in which he would face fewer demands from coalition partners seeking major changes in security and government policy.
“Netanyahu may want his next term to be calmer and quieter,” he said. “If we’re strong, if we’re big, we’ll make sure it’s a term filled with challenges.”
The Otzma Yehudit leader was particularly adamant that he would refuse to participate in a government that placed Eisenkot in a powerful security position.
“A government with Gadi Eisenkot is a government of paralysis. It’s a government I cannot be part of,” he said.
According to Ben Gvir, bringing Eisenkot into the government would effectively halt efforts to reform the judiciary and prevent the adoption of the policies he favors in Gaza and Yehuda and Shomron.
Nevertheless, Ben Gvir insisted that his political concerns should not be mistaken for personal hostility toward Netanyahu, whom he said he continues to support as prime minister.
“I love you, I want you to remain Prime Minister, but the right-wing standard-bearer must, must, must be Otzma Yehudit,” he declared in a direct message to Netanyahu.
Ben Gvir pointed to the coalition negotiations following the 2013 elections as a warning about relying on political assurances. Recalling his time as a parliamentary aide to former MK Michael Ben Ari, he said he witnessed the National Union being excluded from the government despite promises that had led its members to expect otherwise.
“I love him, I respect him, I appreciate him. And I know that if I’m not strong, he’ll leave us out,” Ben Gvir said of Netanyahu.
He also emphasized that Otzma Yehudit was instrumental in assembling the parliamentary majority that allowed the current government to take office following the previous election. His objective now, he said, is to substantially increase the party’s strength and ensure that its demands cannot be disregarded.
A major portion of the interview focused on Ben Gvir’s dissatisfaction with Israeli policy toward Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, despite what he acknowledged were substantial military accomplishments during the war.
“This government has done many good things,” he said, referring to the elimination of large numbers of terrorists and Israel’s control over extensive territory in Gaza.
However, Ben Gvir maintained that these military gains fall short of the decisive outcome he believes Israel must achieve. He called for Hamas to be completely destroyed, the Gaza Strip to be conquered, and emigration from the territory to be encouraged.
He also reiterated his determination to dismantle the Palestinian Authority and fundamentally change Israel’s approach toward Yehuda and Shomron.
Ben Gvir was sharply critical of the continued movement of humanitarian aid into Gaza and financial arrangements that benefit the Palestinian Authority, policies he said he has consistently opposed.
Confronted with the question of why these measures have continued while he serves as both national security minister and a member of the Security Cabinet, Ben Gvir argued that he has fought against them from within the government.
“I’m the only one in the Cabinet who voted against the aid trucks. That was me,” he said.
He further maintained that he opposed proposals designed to preserve Palestinian Arab banking operations and shield them from economic measures that could disrupt their activities.
Turning to his record at the National Security Ministry, Ben Gvir argued that even a relatively small parliamentary faction can bring about far-reaching changes when its representatives are determined to use their political influence.
He highlighted tougher conditions for security prisoners, the expansion of civilian emergency response squads, demolitions of unauthorized structures in the Negev, and changes concerning Jewish activity on Har Habayis.
“With five or six seats, look at the changes I made in the prisons. With five or six seats, look at the changes I made with the emergency response squads, on the Temple Mount, and with demolishing houses in the Negev,” he said.
Ben Gvir said a larger Otzma Yehudit faction would allow him to pursue additional objectives, including confiscating weapons held by Palestinian Authority forces, providing free land to soldiers in the Negev and Galilee, and revising the IDF’s rules of engagement.
“I want to dismantle the Palestinian Authority. Yes, I want to take away their weapons. Yes, I want to give soldiers free land in the Negev and Galilee,” he said.
He also repeated his support for encouraging voluntary emigration from Gaza and Yehuda and Shomron, presenting the policy as an essential component of his broader security agenda.
Another issue raised during the interview was former senior IDF officer Ofer Winter’s decision to remain in the Knesset election contest rather than withdraw his candidacy.
Ben Gvir warned that Winter’s continued participation could divide right-wing voters and potentially damage the bloc’s chances of securing a parliamentary majority.
“A big mistake. Winter must demonstrate responsibility for the sake of the right-wing bloc,” Ben Gvir said.
He argued that political leaders sometimes have an obligation to abandon their individual ambitions when doing so is necessary to protect the broader ideological camp.
Recalling previous election campaigns, Ben Gvir said he had repeatedly sought agreements with the Religious Zionist Party, even during periods when polling suggested that Otzma Yehudit was in a stronger electoral position.
“I always tried to unite. I always tried to join forces,” he said.
Asked why he had not at least reached a surplus-vote agreement with Winter, Ben Gvir said he would not enter an arrangement that might ultimately benefit a candidate willing to join a government with Naftali Bennett, Eisenkot, or Avigdor Liberman.
“What do you think, that people will vote for me and end up getting someone who goes and sits with Eisenkot, or Bennett, or Liberman? Absolutely not,” he said.
The interview also addressed criticism from Zehut chairman Moshe Feiglin, who had appeared earlier in the Arutz Sheva studio and questioned Ben Gvir’s decision to wear a noose-shaped lapel pin symbolizing his campaign to impose the death penalty on terrorists.
Feiglin argued that a noose does not convey a positive national vision, contrasting it with the aspiration to rebuild the Bais Hamikdosh.
Ben Gvir responded by expressing personal respect for Feiglin while questioning whether his years in the Knesset had produced meaningful accomplishments.
“First of all, I have tremendous respect for my friend Moshe Feiglin,” he began.
He then challenged Feiglin’s political record.
“Moshe was a Knesset member for four years. He talked about a vision, talked about the Holy Temple. Did he do even one thing that actually moved things forward?”
Ben Gvir contrasted Feiglin’s emphasis on ideological aspirations with his own efforts to change longstanding practices on Har Habayis, including expanding opportunities for Jewish prayer and permitting worshippers to bring prayer sheets onto the site.
He claimed that implementing these measures required him to overcome objections from the police, the Shin Bet, and, on certain occasions, Netanyahu himself.
“I appreciate Feiglin, but I suggest to him that if we’re talking about the world of action and politics, this is the world of action,” he said.
Ben Gvir also pointed to changes in prison administration, the easing of civilian firearms licensing requirements, the creation of additional emergency response squads, the development of the National Guard, and salary increases for police officers as examples of the practical results he believes distinguish his political approach.
Relations with the Religious Zionist Party were another subject of discussion. Ben Gvir praised Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich for his activities on behalf of Jewish communities in Yehuda and Shomron but objected to suggestions from within Smotrich’s party that its representatives achieve results quietly while Ben Gvir merely attracts publicity.
He argued that such characterizations dismiss substantial policy changes that he has worked to implement.
“What, making all those changes on the Temple Mount is just making noise? What, bringing forward the death penalty law for terrorists is just making noise? What, making life hell for terrorists in prison is just making noise?” he asked.
Ben Gvir again cited the civilian emergency response squads and firearms licensing changes, insisting that these initiatives have produced tangible results rather than simply generating headlines.
He was also asked about criticism from Likud MK Moshe Saada, who had described him as a TikTok artist. Ben Gvir responded that although he respects Saada, politicians should ultimately be evaluated according to their accomplishments rather than their public image.
The conversation subsequently turned to criticism from Rav Yitzchak Yosef, who had issued a ruling instructing voters not to support Otzma Yehudit.
Rather than engage in a public confrontation with the former Sephardic chief rabbi, Ben Gvir emphasized his respect for rabbonim and declined to challenge the ruling directly.
“I have tremendous respect for rabbis. I don’t speak against rabbis, whatever they may say,” he said.
Ben Gvir explained that he grew up in a family where rabbonim were treated with respect even when their statements were at odds with the family’s views. He indicated that he would maintain that approach while continuing his political work.
The minister also weighed in on the controversy surrounding television personality Yinon Magal, who had referred to Eisenkot using the word “monkey.”
Ben Gvir acknowledged that the expression was offensive and should not have been used, but rejected accusations that Magal’s comment demonstrated racial prejudice.
“I didn’t like the use of the word ‘monkey’ either. It’s inappropriate. But, and this is the big ‘but,’ Yinon Magal is not a racist,” he said.
Drawing on his own family background and his longstanding personal acquaintance with Magal, Ben Gvir said he had visited Magal’s home on numerous occasions and had never encountered discriminatory behavior.
“Yes, he made a mistake in his wording. You don’t speak that way,” he said.
At the same time, Ben Gvir defended the broader political criticism of Eisenkot, accusing him of attempting to cultivate a right-wing image while maintaining positions that Ben Gvir considers inconsistent with right-wing policies.
He further alleged that wealthy individuals associated with Israel’s political left were backing Eisenkot.
Referring to discussions held by the Security Cabinet during the war, Ben Gvir claimed that Eisenkot had opposed certain military operations in Gaza. His remarks represented his own account of those deliberations, and no cabinet transcripts were presented during the interview to substantiate the claims.
Toward the conclusion of the interview, Ben Gvir was asked about posters reportedly displayed in northern Tel Aviv that depicted him with a mustache resembling Adolf Hitler’s.
Ben Gvir said that although he frequently encounters hostile demonstrations and personal attacks, he also receives considerable public support.
He recalled incidents at Tel Aviv University in which, according to his account, activists attempted to disrupt his appearances and prevent him from speaking.
The minister accused his political opponents of applying a double standard, arguing that Arab politicians are treated differently while his own appearances are met with shouting and efforts to silence him.
“It won’t help them. They’ll keep shouting, and I’ll keep getting things done,” he said.
Ben Gvir ended the interview by reaffirming his intention to continue pursuing changes through the National Security Ministry while working to increase Otzma Yehudit’s Knesset representation, which he believes will determine how much influence the party can exercise over Israel’s next government.
The dispute has intensified in the final days before Israel’s October 27 election. At a press conference in Yerushalayim on Sunday, Ben Gvir went further than his previous warnings, alleging that Netanyahu’s office had privately assured European officials that Otzma Yehudit would be excluded from the next coalition. Ben Gvir said he had received information about such communications and expressed shock at the possibility that Netanyahu was preparing to abandon his existing coalition partner.
Likud rejected the accusation, describing it as a political maneuver and reiterating Netanyahu’s commitment to preserving the current coalition’s core partners. The party also indicated that additional Zionist factions could be invited to join a government if they accepted its policy guidelines.
The possibility of Netanyahu joining forces with Eisenkot has also been discussed by political commentator Amit Segal, who recently outlined scenarios in which the two leaders could establish a unity government, including a possible rotation arrangement if neither political bloc emerges with a clear majority.
The tensions have been compounded by Netanyahu’s recent statements that Ben Gvir would not receive either the defense or police portfolio in the next government, positions the Otzma Yehudit chairman has sought. Netanyahu has also pressed Ben Gvir and Smotrich to unite their electoral lists, warning that a divided right-wing vote could ultimately benefit Eisenkot and his allies.
With the election approaching, Ben Gvir is seeking to turn the dispute into a central campaign argument: voters who want Netanyahu to remain prime minister while ensuring that Otzma Yehudit’s policies continue to shape the government must give his party sufficient parliamentary strength to make its participation indispensable.