As well as Iran and Trump, the election in Israel highlights the demographic shift in the Middle East

It is by no means an exaggeration to describe the election result of the outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu as a victory. That the elections would be a referendum on him – even more so than on his government – was clear from the dramatic days following the start of military operations in Gaza and, even more so, from the onset of the confrontation with Iran. Although the figures paint a picture of a dead heat between the coalitions – and thus, in terms of governability, a stalemate – the Prime Minister’s political influence is far from waning. Evidently, his ability to assert himself as a bulwark against chaos, his security-focused vision and his nod to the Haredim, the ultra-Orthodox who are key players in the growth of a ‘parallel state’, characterised by permits and regulations, has prevailed over fears of the country’s growing international isolation and the persistence of a state of tension and permanent mobilisation.

It is certainly true that, at certain points in history, politics proves more stubborn than the facts. And so a delicate phase is now beginning in Israel, characterised by attempts to strike a balance in parliament and to form a new government as quickly as possible. The solution of a government of national unity, aimed at sidelining the extremist factions, seems unlikely, given that it would require guaranteeing a leading role for Netanyahu, with all the implications and safeguards – including legal ones – that this entails, as well as divisions on key issues of security and foreign policy.

It is likely that nothing will change on the Middle Eastern chessboard until this impasse has been resolved. Donald Trump in the United States is well aware of this, as he prepares to face a deadline that is as important as it is symbolic. Important because it is, in effect, the first test of his popularity since his re-election. Symbolic because, even if ‘Make America Great Again’ (MAGA) candidates are defeated in the elections for the House of Representatives and a third of the Senate, the conditions will not be in place for a policy to counter the Administration’s future decisions. For this reason, the US President has entrusted his Vice-President J.D. Vance with the task of managing a new round of secret negotiations with Tehran. In recent days, American and Iranian envoys have been hosted by Emirati diplomats in Abu Dhabi to resume talks on the issue of freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, sanctions and the nuclear programme. Once again, the threats made by Trump in recent weeks and the possibility of resuming military attacks against Iran served only to raise the stakes in the negotiations.

Any time gained as a result of the political deadlock in Israel and the possible strengthening of the parliamentary counterweight in the United States will be useful precisely for continuing to negotiate and discuss matters with Tehran.

There is a tradition whereby no President of the United States continues or starts a war during the final part of their term of office. This has happened in the past to avoid causing difficulties for the party machinery, which is busy with the election campaign. Trump is, of course, different and certainly does not subscribe to this party-political logic. But he will nevertheless be careful not to let the Israeli Prime Minister dictate his line, assuming we have one soon.