Aa
  • Read, Watch, Listen
  • TJI Series
  • Community Action
  • Events
  • Zedi
Follow us and continue the conversation
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • FaceBook
  • X
  • YouTube
Test yourself with the TJI Quiz!

Adjust size of text

Aa

Follow us and continue the conversation

  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • FaceBook
  • X
  • YouTube

Your saved articles

You haven't saved any articles

What are you looking for?

Original reporting, insightful analysis and diverse views, delivered straight to your inbox

  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • FaceBook
  • X
  • YouTube
Your support fuels our mission to inform, entertain and inspire.

The Jewish Independent is bound by the Standards of Practice of the Australian Press Council. If you believe the Standards may have been breached, you may approach The Jewish Independent or make a complaint to the Australian Press Council in writing at www.presscouncil.org.au. The Council may also be contacted on 1800 025 712.

  • Our Story
  • Contact us
  • Our Team
  • Support us
  • Guidelines
  • Pitch your idea
  • Republishing us
  • Community Action
  • Our Awards
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • FaceBook
  • X
  • YouTube
Aboriginal FlagTorres Strait Islanders Flag

The Jewish Independent acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the Traditional Owners and Custodians of Country throughout Australia. We pay our respects to Elders past and present, and strive to honour their rich history of storytelling in our work and mission.

© The Jewish Independent 2026All Rights Reserved
Website design and development by Your Creative, MelbourneTerms & ConditionsPrivacy Policy
HomeRead, Watch, ListenIsrael
Israel Votes 2026AnalysisIsrael

Bennett’s balancing act: can he win over the right without losing the centre?

To unseat Netanyahu and head off other potential prime ministers, Naftali Bennett is pursuing a complex strategy that requires contradictory pitches
Shahar Burla
Print this
ISRAEL-TRANSPORT-AVIATION-STRIKE

Naftali Bennett speaks to the press amid disruptions caused by a surprise staff strike at Ben Gurion Airport on August 20, 2026 (Jack GUEZ / AFP via Getty Images)

Published: 27 August 2026

Last updated: 27 August 2026

In recent weeks, former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett has adopted the jeans-and-black-T-shirt uniform of his high-tech past. The casual appearance is more than a response to the August heat. It is part of a campaign designed to portray Bennett as younger, more accessible and less establishment-minded than Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

But Bennett’s campaign is built around a much more complicated political balancing act. He is trying to approach disillusioned Netanyahu voters, listen to their criticism and persuade them that they can remain on the right without continuing to support Likud. At the same time, he must retain the centrist voters attracted to his partnership with Yair Lapid and his record leading the diverse “change government” between 2021 and 2022.

That strategy may make Bennett one of the most politically intriguing candidates in the election, but it also leaves him open to criticism from both directions. Some voters on the right still regard him as a traitor who used their votes to remove Netanyahu. Some on the centre-left, meanwhile, question whether his moderate tone conceals the same hard-right opposition to Palestinian statehood that has defined his political career.

The Jewish Independent

Taking the campaign into Likud territory

Since Bennett’s new faction joined with Lapid’s Yesh Atid to form Together in April, the party has struggled to establish itself as the leading force in the anti-Netanyahu bloc. Recent polls have shown some improvement, but Together continues to trail Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar party.

Bennett’s immediate target is a group of mostly secular and traditional Likud voters who are disappointed with Netanyahu but have not necessarily abandoned the political right. Together, strategists reportedly believe this constituency could represent around five Knesset seats. Winning them may strengthen Bennett, but would not necessarily be enough for him to overtake Eisenkot.

To reach these voters, Bennett has been travelling to traditional Likud strongholds, including Ashdod, Ashkelon, Holon, Hadera and Kiryat Shmona. These are not comfortable campaign appearances. Participants frequently confront him over his decision to form a government with Lapid and Ra’am leader Mansour Abbas after entering the 2021 election as a right-wing candidate.

Bennett’s response is not to avoid the anger but to engage with it. He speaks plainly, acknowledges mistakes and accepts responsibility for poor political appointments, including his selection of Idit Silman. Her defection deprived his coalition of its parliamentary majority and contributed to its eventual collapse. Silman later joined Likud and became environmental protection minister.

His broader defence is that Netanyahu also considered forming a government dependent on Abbas, but was prevented from doing so by his far-right partners. Bennett argues that cooperation with Abbas became an unforgivable act only when he, rather than Netanyahu, pursued it.

Bennett’s previous government demonstrated that a politician can retain right-wing views while participating in a broad coalition

This direct engagement with Likud voters is central to Bennett’s strategy. He is not asking them to become centrists. He is telling them that they can remain right-wing while choosing a different prime minister.

At the same time, his partnership with Lapid is intended to reassure voters in the centre that he can again lead a broad coalition. This is the essential tension of Together: Bennett must sound sufficiently right-wing to win Netanyahu voters, but sufficiently pragmatic and inclusive to prevent centrist voters from moving to Eisenkot.

The Jewish Independent

The West Bank question Bennett cannot avoid

Nowhere is this balancing act more apparent than in Bennett’s approach to the Palestinians. Bennett recently attracted criticism from the right after saying that unauthorised West Bank outposts built illegally or on privately owned Palestinian land should be dismantled. He distinguished those outposts from legal settlement construction on state land in Area C, which he strongly supports.

At first glance, the comments could appear to mark a move towards the centre. Bennett presented himself as a right-wing politician who supports settlements but also respects the law and opposes ideological recklessness.

Yet his underlying position has changed very little. Bennett remains opposed to establishing a Palestinian state and to territorial concessions. His stated vision is for Area C, which constitutes more than 60 per cent of the West Bank, to become part of Israel. At the same time, Palestinians in Areas A and B would receive a form of autonomy rather than sovereignty.

Political analyst Dahlia Scheindlin argued in Haaretz that the attention given to Bennett’s willingness to dismantle illegal outposts obscured the more consequential element of his proposal: it remains, in effect, an annexation plan intended to prevent Palestinian statehood.

Scheindlin noted that Bennett has promoted versions of this position since entering national politics. His earlier “stabilisation plan” proposed applying Israeli sovereignty to Area C, rejecting Palestinian statehood and maintaining limited Palestinian autonomy in the fragmented areas left outside Israeli control.

This creates a fundamental question for centre and centre-left voters considering Together. Is Bennett a pragmatic right-wing leader capable of compromise in government, or a committed annexationist who has learned to present a hard-right territorial program in more moderate language?

His relaxed appearance, willingness to work with Lapid and previous partnership with an Arab party may suggest political flexibility. But on the defining question of Palestinian sovereignty, Bennett has remained remarkably consistent. His tone may be less incendiary than that of Israel’s far right, but his desired outcome is not necessarily more moderate.

Qatar and experience separate Bennett from Eisenkot

Bennett’s principal competitor inside the anti-Netanyahu bloc is Eisenkot, a former IDF chief of staff who also projects a restrained, grounded style. Like Bennett, Eisenkot often avoids the formal suit-and-tie appearance associated with Netanyahu. Both are attempting to offer an image of leadership based on competence, responsibility and national service.

Bennett’s point of difference is not simply ideological. It rests on two central claims: that he has already demonstrated his ability to serve as prime minister, and that he is prepared to take a much harder position on Qatar.

Bennett argues that Israel’s security doctrine failed catastrophically on October 7, 2023, and has not been adequately replaced. He accuses the current government of remaining captive to the assumptions of October 6, 2023, despite the consequences of the Hamas attack and the war that followed.

Bennett wants Israelis to see a different kind of right-wing leader: less theatrical than Netanyahu, less extreme than the settler right and more politically experienced than Eisenkot

He has promised to establish a state commission of inquiry into the failures surrounding October 7. He has also linked that demand to the Qatargate allegations involving Netanyahu’s advisers, saying an inquiry should examine possible assistance to an enemy state during wartime.

Bennett has pledged to formally designate Qatar an enemy state, accusing Doha of financing Hamas, influencing Western institutions and attempting to penetrate Israel’s political system. He wants Qatar and Turkey excluded from Gaza’s future administration and argues that Egypt should play a greater role.

This campaign gives Bennett a sharp line of attack against Netanyahu. It allows him to approach right-wing voters not by questioning their security concerns, but by arguing that Netanyahu failed to act on them.

Bennett can claim something Eisenkot cannot: experience in the prime minister’s office. His government survived for only a year, but Bennett argues that it proved a deeply divided coalition could function, pass a budget and govern without Netanyahu. Whether voters view that period as evidence of competence or betrayal will be decisive.

A campaign based on two versions of Bennett

Bennett is effectively offering two versions of himself at once. To former Netanyahu voters, he is the authentic right-wing candidate who will confront Qatar, oppose Palestinian statehood, demand ultra-Orthodox military service and restore Israeli deterrence. To centrist voters, he is the experienced and pragmatic former prime minister who worked with Lapid and Abbas, governed through compromise and offers an alternative to Netanyahu’s divisive political style.

The two versions are not necessarily incompatible. Bennett’s previous government demonstrated that a politician can retain right-wing views while participating in a broad coalition. However, the contradictions become harder to overlook when the discussion turns from political conduct to the future of the West Bank.

The election may therefore hinge not only on whether Bennett can persuade Likud voters to forgive him, but also on whether centrist voters believe his pragmatism is substantive. Bennett wants Israelis to see a different kind of right-wing leader: less theatrical than Netanyahu, less extreme than the settler right and more politically experienced than Eisenkot.

The unresolved question is whether he represents a more responsible right, or simply an old annexationist vision delivered in a black T-shirt and sold with the language of moderation.

You might also like
  • New evidence Netanyahu was warned about October 7
    Shahar Burla
  • Fear of Netanyahu victory may drive big surge in Palestinian voter turnout
    Ben Lynfield
  • The Altalena should be a warning, not a political weapon
    Shahar Burla
logomark.67a07ee3
We believe in the free flow of information

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, by using our Creative Commons licence

You might also like

    Protest against settler violence in Jerusalem
    DebateAustralia

    Sanctioning settlements is a defence of Israel, not an attack

    Elisheva Madar 2
    Yoav Segalovitz Mansour Abbas
    Israel Votes 2026OpinionIsrael

    Because of my Zionist values, I’m joining an Arab party

    Yoav Segalovitz 1
    Penny Wong
    DebateAustralia

    Sanctions must influence, not just perform disapproval

    Adam Slonim

About the author

Shahar Burla

Shahar Burla

Dr Shahar Burla is a Sydney-based researcher, lecturer and Contributing Editor of TJI. Shahar holds a Master’s degree in political science from Hebrew University and a PhD in political science from Bar-Ilan University. He is the author of Political Imagination in the Diaspora: The Construction of a Pro-Israeli Narrative (2013) and co-editor of Australia and Israel: A Diasporic, Cultural and Political Relationship (2015).

More from the author

FeatureIsrael

New evidence Netanyahu was warned about October 7

OpinionIsrael

The Altalena should be a warning, not a political weapon

AnalysisIsrael

Who is Ofer Winter and could he upset Netanyahu’s election?

Comments1

  • Avatar of Mark Ian

    Mark Ian27 August at 03:31 am

    Eisenkot Yashar Bennett and Lapid Yachad and Netanyahu Likud in a Rotating Coalition are likely to be close to a majority of 61 and with this and other Zionist Parties a SuperMajority of Eighty is possible .
    Tough on Security against Iran Hezbollah and Hamas Against a Palestine State in the next Decade but for Social Justice Equal Military Service and Humane Treatment of Civilians will strengthen Israel and its Supporters World Wide .
    There will have to be a Rotation of Prime Ministers Defence Ministers and Foreign Ministers but all have Experience.