Who will succeed Netanyahu as Israel's Prime Minister, and when?

[Hnv1]

Well he's more likely to be out of office due to "corruption" allegations that are now knocking at his house door in a bundle (unsurprisingly all having to do with his wife). Intensive investigations opened in recent months.
Likud doesn't topple reigning leaders, and the centre-centre\left has no one to offer, Herzog is unelectable and Lapid will never gather the required number of hands for a coalition (his ego is also far to big to be someone's number 2).
If they don't charge him then for now he stays put, if they do want to charge him he'll call a snap election to put pressure against that. What happens if they charge him and he's out? the picture is not clear enough atm to determine

[Hnv1]

Well he's more likely to be out of office due to "corruption" allegations that are now knocking at his house door in a bundle (unsurprisingly all having to do with his wife). Intensive investigations opened in recent months.
Likud doesn't topple reigning leaders, and the centre-centre\left has no one to offer, Herzog is unelectable and Lapid will never gather the required number of hands for a coalition (his ego is also far to big to be someone's number 2).
If they don't charge him then for now he stays put, if they do want to charge him he'll call a snap election to put pressure against that. What happens if they charge him and he's out? the picture is not clear enough atm to determine

Out of curiosity--would a different Labor leader be more electable than Herzog is?

Might be, but no such person is in sight

[Hnv1]

Anyway, while I certainly cannot vote in Israeli elections due to the fact that I live in the U.S., I would think that I would vote for either Kulanu or Yesh Atid if I actually lived in Israel. Indeed, the fact that Israel's lax response to terrorism back in the 1990s paved the way for the Second Intifada to break out at the start of the 2000s makes me hesitant to support Labor.

Well this is far from being historically accurate, it wasn't lax response to terrorism so much as the inherent problems of the Oslo accords (the left talked about them from the start) and if there are 3 individuals that could be blamed really for this outburst that Bibi (for his 96-9 tenure), Barak (for so many thing) and Arfaat. But this is not the place to start debating this

[Hnv1]

Hnv1, I'm curious, which party do you support (I'm assuming somewhere on the left lol).

I was and still am a Meretz member for years but I don't quite the direction the party is heading but will probably still vote them next cycle.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

worthy to note that usually that after losing leadership it take's the right a whole cycle to get back on it's feet. Erdan is nowhere near qualified enough in general public eyes. Sa'ar is touted by Yediot but I doubt the traction this glass snake actually has. Ashkenazi has no platform to run as number 1. Yechimovic and Peretz could win a labour election but not carry a GE.
If Bennett and Lieberman want to be PMs (more likely in the case of the first) they need to merge with Likud

[Hnv1]

Didn't read this, but the answer's Nir Barkat.

David I'm disappointed, despite our ideological difference you usually have sharp political senses...let put a wager? I'm that certain Barakat is not going to be Likud's leader let alone PM (and his flip flops about the LGBTQ parade in Jerusalem surely didn't help). But he simply doesn't have the ground forces to take Likud and he's not liked enough to carry enough weight by his own.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Elevation of Oslo process to a religious sacrament by Galon, take the box burn it and think outside of it.
The crappy crony-socialism of the days of the worker federation by Gilon and his militant youth supporters. Oh and how could I forget the post-modernist identity politics kids with delusional reading of reality (the Zandberg, whom i personally like, branch).

I guess I would like a joint Jewish-Arab, fiscally SD but not too whack, with an emphasis on individual liberty and secular identity, and very mellow on Zionism and militarist fetishism. A list of the likes of Borg, Hanin, Odeh, Raz with some new young radical figures.

[Hnv1]

Well he's more likely to be out of office due to "corruption" allegations that are now knocking at his house door in a bundle (unsurprisingly all having to do with his wife). Intensive investigations opened in recent months.
Likud doesn't topple reigning leaders, and the centre-centre\left has no one to offer, Herzog is unelectable and Lapid will never gather the required number of hands for a coalition (his ego is also far to big to be someone's number 2).
If they don't charge him then for now he stays put, if they do want to charge him he'll call a snap election to put pressure against that. What happens if they charge him and he's out? the picture is not clear enough atm to determine

Out of curiosity--would a different Labor leader be more electable than Herzog is?

Might be, but no such person is in sight

What about Erel Margalit, though?

That would be something, I remember someone predicting in 2009 that Margalit vs Barakat will be the PM contest of 2020... (I blush to confess I once thought it would be Pelsner vs Ardan)
Well he might have more appeal than Herzog but still can't get the number of seats he needs to: first be given a chance to form a government, and then actually forming one. As long as Lapid is in he's like a pain in the ass to any Labour centrist's hopes of beating Likud in seat count.

But if Bibi is out of the picture...well things become unpredictable, a moderate hero preferably with some retired stars on his shoulder could cash in.

[Hnv1]

Anyway, while I certainly cannot vote in Israeli elections due to the fact that I live in the U.S., I would think that I would vote for either Kulanu or Yesh Atid if I actually lived in Israel. Indeed, the fact that Israel's lax response to terrorism back in the 1990s paved the way for the Second Intifada to break out at the start of the 2000s makes me hesitant to support Labor.

Well this is far from being historically accurate, it wasn't lax response to terrorism so much as the inherent problems of the Oslo accords (the left talked about them from the start) and if there are 3 individuals that could be blamed really for this outburst that Bibi (for his 96-9 tenure), Barak (for so many thing) and Arfaat. But this is not the place to start debating this

What exactly is the place to start debating this, though? After all, I am certainly interested in hearing you elaborate on what you wrote here.

Can you please respond to this question of mine, Hnv1?

Well basically no as it could (and is) feed whole books on the topic but in a very concise yet not exhaustive way:
-The Oslo accords had their intrinsic flaws as they weren't drafted with the real aim of a 2-state solution but more as a remedy for problems on the ground Labour leadership saw (even Peres came around the idea of a Palestinian state later). The structure of the agreement was flawed, the time table was instantly dropped by the Israeli side (like 1979 peace accords section regarding the autonomy), the PLO men from Tunis were corrupt and inept in taking charge of situation on the ground. Labour did not want to go all guns blazing against the settlers, the PLO did not want to go all guns blazing against all the militias, and IDF's presence was as suffocating after the agreement as before which was a cause for an outcry in the Palestinian streets.
-Bibi's first government did all it could to tear this process down anyway (forced by Clinton to "give away" Hebron), the time table according to the agreement was stuck, Palestinian economy deteriorated as the accords segregated the Palestinian work force from the Israeli market where they mostly made a living and kept Israelis out from shopping in Palestine. This rage toward the situation between 96-9 was boiling underground and by 2000 intelligence sources thought a second intifida will come at some point in the near future.
-Arafat had traits of border line personality and other psychological problematic syndromes. The fact that he was also a pathological liar surely didn't help (or the bellend he made Abbas look after he and Beilin drafted a blueprint for a final settlement and Arafat pretty much wiped his arse with it)
-Barak was a terrible politician and a terrible person who always thought he was smarter than everyone. With his government in shambles he went to camp david and dropped a take it or leave it offer on Arfat everybody told him he couldn't accept and certainly not on the spot. It was a barrel of gunpowder waiting to explode afterwards, Sharon went on the Temple Mount and things just started rolling from there.

[Hnv1]

Well he's more likely to be out of office due to "corruption" allegations that are now knocking at his house door in a bundle (unsurprisingly all having to do with his wife). Intensive investigations opened in recent months.
Likud doesn't topple reigning leaders, and the centre-centre\left has no one to offer, Herzog is unelectable and Lapid will never gather the required number of hands for a coalition (his ego is also far to big to be someone's number 2).
If they don't charge him then for now he stays put, if they do want to charge him he'll call a snap election to put pressure against that. What happens if they charge him and he's out? the picture is not clear enough atm to determine

Out of curiosity--would a different Labor leader be more electable than Herzog is?

Might be, but no such person is in sight

What about Erel Margalit, though?

That would be something, I remember someone predicting in 2009 that Margalit vs Barakat will be the PM contest of 2020... (I blush to confess I once thought it would be Pelsner vs Ardan)

OK.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Technically speaking, though, left-wing parties (including the Arab parties, who don't participate in coalitions) almost won a majority of the seats in the 2013 Israeli Knesset elections. Indeed, if left-wing parties (including the Arab parties) will control a majority of the seats in the Knesset, they might very well be able to prevent Likud from forming a government and thus might create their own coalition which (obviously) excludes the Arab parties but includes Kulanu, Yaalon's party, and/or one or more of the ultra-Orthodox parties (who, admittedly, have a rivalry with Lapid).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I am sorry, but what exactly do you mean by "Lapid is in"? Indeed, I don't quite understand what you mean by this part of your statement here.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You mean someone like Yaalon or Ashkenazi?

Hell would freeze, melt, and become a Spanish resort for Essex girls before Labour or Lapid will create a bloc with the Arab party to prevent a Likud government. The math for a centre-left led coalition is just not there ATM.

I meant Lapid is in as in the political game, as long as his party plays a role (and getting backed by the biggest media body in Israel) Labour are screwed.
 
As to the post Bibi future well the Talmud already said "Since the Temple was destroyed, prophecy was taken away from the prophets and was given to lunatics and small children"

[Hnv1]

Anyway, while I certainly cannot vote in Israeli elections due to the fact that I live in the U.S., I would think that I would vote for either Kulanu or Yesh Atid if I actually lived in Israel. Indeed, the fact that Israel's lax response to terrorism back in the 1990s paved the way for the Second Intifada to break out at the start of the 2000s makes me hesitant to support Labor.

Well this is far from being historically accurate, it wasn't lax response to terrorism so much as the inherent problems of the Oslo accords (the left talked about them from the start) and if there are 3 individuals that could be blamed really for this outburst that Bibi (for his 96-9 tenure), Barak (for so many thing) and Arfaat. But this is not the place to start debating this

What exactly is the place to start debating this, though? After all, I am certainly interested in hearing you elaborate on what you wrote here.

Can you please respond to this question of mine, Hnv1?

Well basically no as it could (and is) feed whole books on the topic but in a very concise yet not exhaustive way:
-The Oslo accords had their intrinsic flaws as they weren't drafted with the real aim of a 2-state solution but more as a remedy for problems on the ground Labour leadership saw (even Peres came around the idea of a Palestinian state later). The structure of the agreement was flawed,

How was the structure of the agreement flawed, though?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You mean in 1996 or even earlier than that?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes; correct!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes; correct!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Labor/Israel could have done this part, though. Indeed, Ariel Sharon ultimately ended up doing exactly this between 2001 and 2005.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Care to please elaborate on this part?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Weren't Bibi's moves at least in part a response to Palestinian terrorism, though?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Weren't Palestinians still allowed to work in Israel after the Oslo Accords were signed, though?

Also, exactly how many Israelis actually shopped in Palestine before the Oslo Accords?

In addition to this, what exactly did Israelis want to buy in Palestine? Fruits? Vegetables? Something else? Indeed, why exactly could Israelis no longer shop in Palestine after the Oslo Accords?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do you have a source for this, please?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Completely agreed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Didn't Arafat refuse to make a counteroffer, though?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes; correct! Also, though, didn't Arafat promise to control any protests and violence that will occur after Sharon's Temple Mount visit and yet ended up being unwilling and/or unable to actually do this when push came to shove?

I have to say your way of breaking down a message and replying is really inconvenient when trying to reply. I will not answer everything as I don't have time and there are numerous books and articles on the topic.

Israel started dropping the time tables earlier than 96 but completely dropped it afterwards. Both parties are now in violation of the original accords.
IDF still had strong military control after Oslo and had regular incursion into the so called autonomous A areas. The civilian population hated the curfews and such and thought they would end with Oslo.
I think Bibi's move were more internal political maneuvering than a response to Hamas terrorism.

After Oslo the number of Palestinians working in Israel decreased dramatically, there are still those with work permits but you can't compare it to the 70s and 80s where they were cheep labour for all sorts of industry and brought back money to the west bank. As to commerce, if I'll upload a picture of my living room in 92 you'll notice ugly brown furniture, they were all bought by mom in Nablus at 86 this sort of commerce completely stopped like car, fruits, vegetables, eggs commerce stopped. Why it stopped? first Israelis didn't trust PA security agencies and well it was a part of a more general trend of segregation. This 2 trends dealt a terrible blow to Palestinian Economy

On camp David they were numerous books and different versions I tend to take Ron Pundak's version as very reliable    

[Hnv1]

Also, @Hnv1: What exactly would your ideal final Israeli-Palestinian peace treaty look like?

Something more-or-less along the lines of the 2003 Geneva Initiative?

As I told Beilin in person that ship had sailed, 2 states is either impossible ATM or if applied will cause more harm in the long run (inherent problems of a small dependent weak economy and other problems arising from Israeli invisible sovereignty). I think a confederation of Israel and Palestine (with both decentralized to other smaller units) would be a more tenable rational solution. But people here are not rational and social myths of liberation are too strong on both sides.
I would vote for a 2 state solution if brought but I don't think it really addresses all the problems.   

[Hnv1]

Also, @Hnv1: What exactly would your ideal final Israeli-Palestinian peace treaty look like?

Something more-or-less along the lines of the 2003 Geneva Initiative?

As I told Beilin in person that ship had sailed,

How did you manage to meet Yossi Beilin in person?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why exactly, though? After all, 70+% of the Israeli settler population can peacefully be put into Israel using land swaps.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Can't the Palestinian economy significantly grow with the help of large-scale foreign investment, though?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What exactly do you mean by "invisible sovereignty" here, though? Also, exactly which other problems are you thinking of here?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Based on the data here, it appears that a whopping 59% of Palestinian Muslims support the death penalty for apostasy:

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/map-death-for-apostasy/

Indeed, are those the kind of people whom you want to live in a confederation with?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Can't these problems be addressed in other ways after a two-state solution is implemented, though?

I know Beilin from his Meretz days and some Geneva Initiative conferences I go to every now and then, and I know his aides very well for quite some time. I think the notion of land swap exists more in the mind of Israelis than in practice, unless we're talking about 2-3% of the territory tops, but as most Israelis think Ariel and other large settlements that in no way can practically remain under Israeli sovereignty due to the place and way they were built will remain in Israel - this solution ultimately is untenable. Lesson number 1: on paper solutions are non solutions in the real world. Furthermore, there isn't nor will there be an Israeli government with the political power to take down the settlements needed for an agreement.

Palestinian economy is completely dependent on Israeli air and sea ports, as to access to the Israeli market and currency (the later will at least be necessary in first few years of independence). Any agreement would see demands of Israel still controlling land passes from afar (i.e. "invisible sovereignty"). Can't see the Palestinian economy sustaining itself for long like this, and considering the amount of young people there with skilled qualification I can't see them going to pick cucumbers in Israeli fields as a solution for employment. The 80's are gone this are not the same Palestinians.

I hardly want to be in the same state with religious Jews let alone religious Muslims. But that's the point of deep confederation compared to shallow one. Secular cantons where they are wanted (coastal plain, Ramallah etc.) and religious ones for the nutters. With freedom of movement and some basic constitutional rights applied throughout the space.

And I'm not even talking about problems on the Palestinian side as the refugees and the reimbursement mechanism for them. The Geneva Initiative proposal is unacceptable to the Palestinian diaspora.

[Hnv1]

Hopefully Yair Lapid.

If that happens I'm requesting asylum in Austria so Tender could get nice refugees to talk politics with

[Hnv1]

Great. Someone to occupy the middle ground between me and David\Danny!

Anyway as I said BB will not be replaced through electoral means (that hardly ever happens in Israeli politics), but his criminal investigations might be his downfall. SCoJ gave a writ nisi to the 'attorney general' to come and explain why despite the mounting evidence (one of the Panama bank accounts was traced to BB jr. with millions in it) he decided not to conduct a criminal investigation.
This will play out real fast, as the evidence are quite strong we might see a snap election soon.

[Hnv1]

Great. Someone to occupy the middle ground between me and David\Danny!

Anyway as I said BB will not be replaced through electoral means (that hardly ever happens in Israeli politics), but his criminal investigations might be his downfall. SCoJ gave a writ nisi to the 'attorney general' to come and explain why despite the mounting evidence (one of the Panama bank accounts was traced to BB jr. with millions in it) he decided not to conduct a criminal investigation.
This will play out real fast, as the evidence are quite strong we might see a snap election soon.

Hm. Interesting, didn't think that it was that severe. And we should probably change the term "snap elections" to "normal elections" and the once in four years elections to "finished-term elections".
I'm not sure who will I vote for in these elections. If there will be no viable alternative to the Likud which isn't named "Yair Lapid" I may just vote for Meretz purely because of the fact that they're the only ones actively fighting for secularism and lgbt rights.

Out of curiousity, what do you think would be the official reason for the snap elections? Maybe the Sabbath train business will re-emerge?

Reason de dicto or de re? Probably some PR crisis to blow the government (might be Amona right now), the honest reason is to put pressure on the legal system not to prosecute a reelected PM.

[Hnv1]

Great. Someone to occupy the middle ground between me and David\Danny!

Anyway as I said BB will not be replaced through electoral means (that hardly ever happens in Israeli politics), but his criminal investigations might be his downfall. SCoJ gave a writ nisi to the 'attorney general' to come and explain why despite the mounting evidence (one of the Panama bank accounts was traced to BB jr. with millions in it) he decided not to conduct a criminal investigation.
This will play out real fast, as the evidence are quite strong we might see a snap election soon.

Hm. Interesting, didn't think that it was that severe. And we should probably change the term "snap elections" to "normal elections" and the once in four years elections to "finished-term elections".
I'm not sure who will I vote for in these elections. If there will be no viable alternative to the Likud which isn't named "Yair Lapid" I may just vote for Meretz purely because of the fact that they're the only ones actively fighting for secularism and lgbt rights.

Out of curiousity, what do you think would be the official reason for the snap elections? Maybe the Sabbath train business will re-emerge?

Reason de dicto or de re? Probably some PR crisis to blow the government (might be Amona right now), the honest reason is to put pressure on the legal system not to prosecute a reelected PM.

Yeah, the official reason. Amona could be a good way to get the Jewish Home to quit, yeah. But this government served for less than two years- maybe I'm placing too much faith in the Israeli public, but wouldn't people just lose faith in Bibi after three consecutive elections in less than 5 years?

A. Israeli voters have strong psychological status quo bias
B. His base does not share the general opinion of him, and they don't care much for rule-of-law or dodgy public doing. "So he took some money big deal, look how he's defending Israel"
C. He's a master of PR thus creating an amazing framing bias as the only "real security candidate"
D. The Israeli voter is apathic to democratic proceduralism, frequent elections are frowned upon but bottom line that doesn't matter to anyone who would vote Likud anyway
E. No alternative. Labour are in shambles and Lapid couldn't get a coalition even if he started wearing black suits and walking with Hasidic papers. Bennet nor Lieberman could do so until they commit "patricide" and dispose of him (it is interesting Bennet, Lieberman, Shaked, Livni and such all owe their political career to him)

[Hnv1]

Welcome to the forum, parrotguy, and quite an interesting back-and-forth between you guys here.

I totally agree with hnv1's analysis on this and think that as long as a) the left is deeply distrusted by most and in shambles, b) the idea that Benjamin Netanyahu stands for security isn't dispelled, c) the right has the haredim's back on their pet issues, and d) no major status quo changes occur, Netanyahu will be able to continue to govern, even in the event that the Likud would lose seats. The numbers simply aren't there for the left/"center". Within Likud, Bibi is simply too strong right now.

His leadership will only be ended through a) a big change in the status quo (a badly managed war, a sudden huge boycott causing the costs of living to skyrocket and become even more insane) in combination with a perfect storm for a centrist alternative, b) judicial charges, or c) by his own decision. Option a) seems very unlikely, especially so because events that radically alter the status-quo can (and are, in fact, often likely to) lead to a rally-around-the-flag effect too. I'd place my money on b) or c).

After reading the recent writ nisi and some of alleged facts of the case I'm actually going to place my money on b) with some bookie. Even if he's not found guilty (but that will mean his son will have to take the bullet) he will still be indicted and cannot act as a minister while the trial is on going.

And I'm not even starting with his wife legal problems

[Hnv1]

On another note, do you think that there is any chance of the Haredim and Jewish Home not being part of a functioning government? In my opinion, it can only happen 1. Without Bibi and 2. With one of the major parties (Likud and Labour or Likud and Yesh Atid) weaker than the winner's party but still strong enough to form a unity government with centrist parties. It seems to me, increasingly, that a majority of Israelis want the Rabbinate out of their lives, supports gay rights, etc. It's just not the main issue for people yet, but that train business got close.

It's possible to form governments without the haredi, but they are very easy going partners. Problem for Labour that unlike previous times the haredi voters don't want to form coalitions with them.
JH became a right win lg coalition only party, unlike the Mafdal which was a coalition partner for everybody. I suppose if herzog were to crawl in we'll see the JH out.

Israelis don't care enough for civic issues and soft Likud voters don't go voting according to them. Those who really dislike the orthodox gripe are already voting left of Likud.