2009 Israeli legislative election

Background[edit]

On 17 September 2008, Kadima held a leadership election, which was won by Tzipi Livni. Following Livni's victory, former party leader Ehud Olmert (who did not run in the contest) resigned as Prime Minister. Livni was given six weeks to form a coalition,^[2] but set a deadline of 26 October for parties to agree to join the new government.


Although the Labor Party agreed to join, current coalition member Shas rejected the opportunity; Livni claimed that it had made "economically and diplomatically illegitimate" demands (including a reluctance to increase child benefits, and rejection of the possible division of Jerusalem in a deal with the Palestinians).^[3] It was reported that Shas had rejected almost one billion shekels in child allowances offered to it as part of the coalition negotiations.^[4] Gil and United Torah Judaism had both rejected offers to join, while negotiations with Meretz-Yachad were still ongoing.^[5] On 26 October, Livni recommended to President Shimon Peres that early elections be held.^[3]


President Peres had three days to consult on the recommendation, after which there was a period of three weeks in which other Knesset members could have offered to form an alternative coalition, but no such alternative was brought.^[3]


The election would have to be held within 90 days after the end of that period.^[2] Although Kadima submitted a bill to the Knesset on 27 October to call early elections and bypass the three-week period,^[6] Peres' announcement to the Knesset that there was no chance of forming a government meant that the full waiting period stood.^[6] Ehud Olmert was to remain the caretaker Prime Minister until a new government was formed after the elections.^[2]


The traditional distinction between the Israeli left and the right had become blurred, with both the voters and the main candidates gravitating toward the center. Israelis, who had always been highly politicized, were switching affiliations more easily. On the Palestinian front, stark differences among the parties still remained. Kadima was committed to continuing talks for a two-state solution. Labor did not believe that bilateral Israeli–Palestinian negotiations could succeed under the current circumstances, and advocated a more comprehensive, regional approach to peace. Likud said it would promote an "economic peace" with the Palestinians and also hold political negotiations, although it was not clear about what.^[7][8]