Since 1948, Israel has had 32 governments. Only three have completed the full four-year term in office. With this in mind, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition of 61 Knesset members will most likely collapse sooner rather than later. Just months after a contentious campaign, new elections could very well be on the horizon.

But why hold another election at all? Given that Israel continues to employ a proportional representation electoral system, change is not forthcoming. A new government coalition, much like the current one, would likely be unable to decide on major issues, while coalition partners will continue to threaten each other.

Israel’s proportional system counts all the votes submitted by the Israeli electorate and divides them based on the Knesset’s 120 seats. The result is that all Israeli political parties depend on forming coalitions with other parties to create a government. These coalitions require massive concessions and backroom pacts. 

Moreover, not a single member of Knesset is elected directly, and because of this, elected officials may not feel any obligation to the public. Their loyalties are solely to their parties, and the real decision-makers in Israeli politics are the merkazei miflagot (party centres) and vaadot mesadrot (organizing committees). The wheeling-dealing is so shameful that it keeps some of Israel’s best and most talented citizens out of politics. 

The cost of each national election in Israel is two billion shekels, money that could be more wisely spent to improve social-and health-related issues. For example, state-run medical centres are 500 million shekels short and running out of vital medicines. They have been forced to cut staff and delay surgeries as a budgetary crisis takes hold. Some hospitals are running low on intravenous drugs, antibiotics and certain cancer medicines, too. 

Of course, there are political costs related to Israel’s electoral system as well. For example, in the wake of the 1984 national elections, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Shamir entered into a unity government agreement that would see them share the top government positions. For the first two years of the mandate, the former was prime minister and the latter foreign minister for two years. After that, they switched places.

In 1987, then-foreign minister Peres and Jordan’s King Hussein reached several agreements, which later became known as the “London Accords.” The agreement made reference to three entities: the State of Israel and Jordan, which were to remain as they are, and a new entity that was supposed to include the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in the context of a Jordanian-Palestinian federation. By the terms of this agreement, Israelis living in the territories could have held on to their Israeli passports. Jerusalem would have remained united, with each religion taking responsibility for its own holy sites. 

Had they been implemented, the London Accords would have changed the face of the Middle East.

But Shamir, who was then prime minister, torpedoed the plan, arguing that the accord would not stand the test of time. It was arguably the biggest political mistake in the history of the State of Israel, the result of the rotating arrangement between Peres and Shamir, which was a byproduct of a lousy electoral system. 

A potential solution to the problems presented by proportional representation electoral systems has already been implemented in Greece, where the party that receives the largest number of votes receives a 50-seat premium in the parliament and does not require a coalition unless the designated prime minister wishes to enter into one. In Italy a guaranteed 55 per cent of seats in parliament goes to the party that gets the most votes in elections, ensuring that unstable coalitions made up of numerous, and often bickering, members does not come to pass. 

I suggest that Israelis strongly consider these and other, potential changes to their electoral system. Without such a change, peace will be impossible for the Jewish state.

Arie Raif is an Israeli political activist and former diplomat.