United Torah Judaism (UTJ) has demanded that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu secure final Knesset approval of the haredi draft law before coalition negotiations begin, but has declined to clarify whether it would impose the same condition on Gadi Eisenkot, leader of the Yashar party, as the possibility of talks with him emerges.
Ahead of potential coalition negotiations between UTJ and Yashar, a central question has emerged: Will the haredi party also demand that Eisenkot pass the draft law in all three Knesset readings before talks begin, as it has demanded of Netanyahu?
The question has taken on added significance amid the party's continuing deliberations over whom to recommend to the president to form the next government. As previously reported by Maariv, UTJ is considering refraining from recommending either Netanyahu or Eisenkot, leaving the decision to its rabbinical leadership. The party is seeking to preserve political flexibility ahead of negotiations over the formation of the next government.
Political observers believe Eisenkot could offer the haredi parties generous terms regarding the conscription of yeshiva students, alongside funding and agreements on other issues important to them.
However, even an agreement in principle on a conscription framework would not guarantee that legislation would be completed after the government is formed, particularly given potential disagreements among coalition partners and legal obstacles that could arise.
UTJ risks losing its main bargaining chip
For UTJ, this represents a significant political risk. If it agrees to join an Eisenkot-led government before the draft law passes all three readings, and the legislation subsequently stalls because of internal coalition disagreements or legal difficulties, the party could discover that it has already surrendered its main bargaining chip.
Even withdrawing from the coalition would not necessarily bring down the government. Following the Arab parties' achievement of 19 seats in the election, they may have an interest in avoiding another round of elections. Under certain political circumstances, they could provide an Eisenkot government with a parliamentary safety net, allowing it to remain in office even without UTJ.
In such a scenario, the haredi parties could find themselves outside the government, without the draft law they sought to advance and with limited ability to influence the government's continued survival. Conversely, insisting that the law pass all three readings before coalition negotiations begin could complicate efforts to establish an Eisenkot-led government and narrow the options available to both sides.
Will UTJ demand payment upfront?
Thus, while UTJ maintains ambiguity regarding potential talks with Eisenkot, the timing of the draft law's passage could become one of the main obstacles to reaching an agreement.
If the haredi parties indeed intend to open negotiations with Yashar, it remains to be seen whether they will once again insist on receiving what they want upfront, or agree to provide their support first and settle for a promise that the legislation will be approved later.
The question is whether UTJ will demand payment in cash or, this time, agree to accept credit.