It is clear that we are facing a summer that is getting hotter day by day, and recently, the leader of the Israeli opposition and head of the “Yesh Atid” party, Yair Lapid, the head of the “Yisrael Beiteinu” party, Avigdor Lieberman, and the head of the “National Unity” party, Gideon Sa'ar, met and agreed to form an alliance and set a plan of action to overthrow the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Opposition Parties

The opposition party leaders announced that they expect Gantz to resign from the government and join the forum to replace the current government and held the tripartite meeting after Knesset member Lieberman addressed during the press conference held in the Knesset last Monday with the aim of overthrowing the government: “Let us form a joint coalition so we can bring down this government and form another one.”
Zeev Elkin, one of the leaders of Sa'ar's party, said that “the only way to bring down Netanyahu's government is to present a strong right-wing force against it; the left will not benefit in this battle, and therefore no leftist party was invited to participate (not even the Arab parties).
What stands out is what Lapid described regarding the two-state solution as “the best for the security of Israelis.” Without mentioning the alternative option, which is a bi-national state, this has led more than one Israeli commentator to question his actual motives?
At that time, it was discussed for electoral considerations, aimed at attracting the attention of Labor Party and Meretz voters or voters with leftist inclinations.
It can also be assumed that he wanted to send a message to the whole world that he is a dove of peace.

More Hardline Policy

Specifically, regarding Avigdor Lieberman, he does not share the same approach concerning the Palestinian issue, as Lieberman and Sa'ar want a policy that is more hardline than Netanyahu's policy, issuing statements against the international community and the two Hague courts, calling for the war to be expanded to include an invasion of Lebanon, and rejecting any understandings with the Palestinian Authority. Gideon Sa'ar also talks about the two-state solution but follows this deferred solution first, and secondly, if that happens, their view of the Palestinian state does not meet Palestinian aspirations based on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital.
So, we are faced with a shift in the narrative between a right-wing government that wants everything and a secular left-right proposal that wants to make timid concessions at the expense of extreme religious ideology. The world agrees with this secular left-right proposal and aligns closely with what the world proposes for resolving the Palestinian issue, which is a consensus between Palestinians and Israelis with the consent of both sides, meaning that they want both parties to reach a state as they agree on how it should look, and what it is—this does not matter to the rulers of the world. However, what the world opposes today is what is happening in Gaza with the killing of civilians and the destruction of homes.

Resistance Movement

No one knows what the situation will be like the day after the war if Netanyahu's government is overthrown and a government from this trio is formed?
From their statements, it is understood that they are in favor of eliminating Hamas as a resistance movement, and the idea of getting rid of Hamas is also not on Netanyahu and his rivals' agenda, but the complete extermination of Hamas is what the extremist religious movement in Israel calls for with all its branches.
What all parties in Israel, except the right-wing as previously mentioned, aspire to is the existence of Hamas as a disarmed political movement, and they go further than that—recognizing Israel as a state existing on the map and entitled to Palestine. Here lies the deep conflict that the far-right in Israel cannot accept in any case.
In all cases, Israeli society today does not represent its vast majority as a religious right according to Israeli statistics; the demographic of religious Zionist parties makes up about 35 percent of the total population of Israel. With this statistic, we cannot say that the majority of Israeli society is religious; in other words, the annexation of the West Bank and the establishment of settlements in Gaza will never be achieved in the foreseeable future, except in one case if the equation were turned upside down.
The dangerous indicator of the challenges for any upcoming Israeli government if the tripartite alliance takes control is whether the state's prestige will return as it was before October 7?

Exchange Deal

In the current context, the coalition aspires to reposition itself in the countries of the world and erase the bad image left by Ben Gvir and Smotrich in the previous period about Israel. So, they face tough days to exit Gaza with the least losses and return Israeli prisoners in an exchange deal, even if it is painful in their view.
As for Netanyahu's fate afterwards outside the political arena, his allies remain on the sidelines indefinitely. The real scene differs between doctrinal parties and political parties in that they always keep a compass whose function is to put the formula for dealing with the current political moment in service of their historical principles, and whenever those parties lose this important compass, they often turn into a political party unrelated to doctrine.
This is the situation that Israel will look like if the coalition achieves victory over Netanyahu’s government and sits in the seat of power, but the fox of Israeli politics is on the watch, as all the cards are in his hand, and he maneuvers and fights until the last breath.
By inference, it can be said that the solution that the Palestinian people strive for is at critical junctures, and looking at the reality of political parties in Israel, those parties do not possess what to offer to resolve the negotiations file with the Palestinians.
The difference between one party and another is only the type of treatment, nothing more, some provide anesthetics, and some do not heal our wounds until we are completely healed, and in between these two treatments, our case has been lost, as it would be a grave injustice and unfairness if there is no definitive statement from all Arabs; we will remain at the mercy of the wind.