With the next election in Israel now only two months away, the desire of the far right to remain in power has become more explicit and more bizarre. The Minister for National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, recently proposed that 30 to 40 Palestinians in Gaza be “eliminated” every night. While this is expected from Ben-Gvir, the vaudeville Kahanist, less attention has been paid to the warm welcome that the Likud has offered to defecting members of his party.
Almog Cohen represented Ben-Gvir’s party in the Knesset until 2025 before falling out with him. He was noted for supporting the Russian invasion of Ukraine and opposing gay pride parades. He argued that the protective Iron Dome against missile attacks encouraged containment of the enemy rather than direct confrontation. In a deleted social media post, he wrote about “the streets of Gaza being washed by rivers of blood”.
In mid-August, Netanyahu granted him an exemption from Likud’s seniority regulations so that he could run in the party’s internal elections two weeks ago. He came eighth in the election and thereby gained a safe seat in the next Knesset.
In general, the far right within the Likud did exceedingly well in these internal elections, as did the proposers and architects of the “judicial reform” in 2023 who wished to remove the oversight of the Israeli judiciary and the checks and balances in political life.
Today the Likud styles itself as a populist party rather than the centre-right one of a decade ago. Netanyahu has facilitated this radicalisation of his party and clearly sees the function of Almog Cohen as a bridge to the other parties of the far right. The entry of these peripheral parties into Netanyahu’s coalition in 2022 did not take place simply out of necessity but also out of design.
Yet the “judicial reform”, the Gaza war and the embrace of the politically untouchable have left an indelible mark on the next generation of Diaspora Jewry.
No doubt, growing antisemitism in the Diaspora and the shunning of Jews will strengthen “the idea of Israel” for many. There will be those who will emigrate to Israel for reasons of sanctuary and those out of the desire to continue a Diaspora lifestyle.
However, Netanyahu’s coalition has challenged both Jewish values and Zionist beliefs in the Diaspora. The first Zionists in the Jewish settlement in Palestine not only wished to build a new state but also a new society – different from the ones they had left behind. The pioneers showed what Jews could do, working together collectively and believed in breaking the chain of Jewish persecution. Today’s generation of young Diaspora Jews, however, expresses a profound ambivalence about the Zionist experiment.
In the JPR survey of 4,800 Jews in the UK a year ago, 24 per cent of 20-29-year-olds identified as anti-Zionist and another 20 per cent as non-Zionist. The June 2026 AP-NORC survey of 1,022 American Jews found that those under 50 were more critical and unfavourable towards Israel than older people.
The Jim Joseph Foundation in San Francisco commissioned a recent study which found that “the clearest negative theme … was disillusionment around Israel and Zionism and the way it was presented in Jewish education and community spaces”.
It is clear that many are repulsed by the ongoing duplicity of Netanyahu’s extremist coalition. Others in the Diaspora simply drop out – the burden of Zionism in 2026 is just too much and the albatross of Israel just too heavy.
None of this should come as a surprise. As governments in both the UK and Australia react with irritation to political utterances and actions during the Israeli election campaign, Jewish leaders often remain silent. Their fear is that any criticism of Netanyahu’s government will assist in the delegitimisation of the state.
Many Diaspora Jews believe that Netanyahu simply does not care about the Diaspora except when the charge of antisemitism in the Diaspora can be used to aid the Likud in its election campaign. Netanyahu’s reference on August 13 to “the Islamic Republic of Britain” will not impress many young British Jews, but it may draw votes from the far right in Israel to vote for the Likud.
All this provides veracity to Henry Kissinger’s claim that “Israel has no foreign policy, only domestic politics”. If the sacrifice of the succeeding generation of Diaspora Jews is the price to pay to stay in power, Netanyahu probably reasons, then “so be it!”
Netanyahu has also marginalised seven million American Jews and their organisations because he has a direct line to Trump and needs them less. And after all, American Jews are liberals who mostly vote Democrat. The caveat to all this is whether Netanyahu and his American acolytes still have the ability to raise sufficient funds for the Likud for the forthcoming Israeli election.
For those who remain committed to the Zionist cause, the liberal advocacy organisation J-Street has increasingly become a rival to AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee). J-Street seems to reflect the concerns of American Jews while AIPAC closes its eyes to reality. While money matters in American politics, many young American Jews believe that principle matters more. Many see clearly through a transparent hasbara where no difference between state and government is recognised.
Yet despite these tactics, the Likud seems to be stuck in the electoral doldrums. The Midgam polls for Israel’s Channel 13 ask over 1,200 respondents each week – and not the usual 500 as practised by other organisations. The nine polls between mid-June and mid-August consistently indicate the Netanyahu coalition attaining some 50-51 seats – clearly still far short of the magic figure of 61 necessary to form a government.
According to the polls, Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit and Smotrich’s Religious Zionism will remarkably retain their full complement of seats. Clearly, support for these parties in 2022 was no flash in the pan and another reason why they matter to Netanyahu. If another Netanyahu coalition is formed, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich will occupy senior positions.
Now is undoubtedly the Diaspora’s winter of discontent. Remaining silent or impartial in the deliberations of this forthcoming election is not in the communal interests of Diaspora Jews. Only a change in Israel’s leadership will restore the relationship between Israel and the Diaspora.
As we approach the New Year 5787, the leadership of Jewish organisations in the Diaspora should represent the interests of their communities. They should clearly state that the return of Netanyahu and his allies to power would do irreparable damage to the relationship between the Diaspora and Israel – and that only a change of government offers the possibility to staunch the loss of the succeeding generation.
Jewish Independent 26 August 2026