The Media Line: Will the Bennett-Lapid Alliance Reshape the US-Israel Relationship? 

Will the Bennett-Lapid Alliance Reshape the US-Israel Relationship? 

As elections near, the opposition alliance clarifies leadership in Israel while raising questions about how a new government would manage ties with Washington. 

By Gabriel Colodro / The Media Line  

Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Former Prime Minister Yair Lapid will run together in Israel’s next election, a move that reshapes the opposition camp and places Bennett at its center, at least for now.  

“I think that ship has sailed,” said Ofir Dayan, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies, speaking with The Media Line, when asked whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is still seen in Washington as irreplaceable. “When Bennett and Lapid replaced Netanyahu in 2021, I think it became clear that Netanyahu is not irreplaceable.”  

Michael Koplow, chief policy officer at Israel Policy Forum and a senior research fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute of North America, said the picture looks different depending on where one looks.  

“At the institutional level, under this administration, it’s very stable, and I don’t think that will change no matter who’s leading the Israeli government,” he told The Media Line. “But when you get past the level of the president and the administration, there are definitely warning signs in Congress … and that’s where it probably makes a difference who the prime minister is.”  

The framework, known as Beyachad, brings back the same two leaders who headed Israel’s short-lived unity government in 2021–2022. The arrangement now is more defined. Bennett is expected to lead the list. Lapid, who heads Yesh Atid, moves into a secondary role.  

At first glance, the move looks straightforward. In practice, it raises a different set of questions—both inside Israel and in Washington—about how such a partnership would function and how a different government would approach relations with President Donald Trump. It gives the opposition a clear front-runner, but Israel’s system is not built around a single candidate. Governments are formed through blocs that must assemble a majority after the election.  

Dr. Assaf Shapira of the Israel Democracy Institute told The Media Line that, from the narrow perspective of Bennett and Lapid, the alliance is a success. “If we are talking about the particular interests of Lapid and Bennett and their parties, then it is a success,” he said. “It will bring them only gains.”  

For Lapid, Shapira said, the deal protects Yesh Atid from a steep decline. “The party, according to the polls, was about to crash,” he said, adding that some polls had placed Lapid’s party near the electoral threshold. “Now, Lapid secures his place in the next Knesset. He secures the fact that he will be the deputy of a list that will certainly be a large list.”  

Shapira said Lapid could also return to the foreign policy role most naturally associated with him. “If Bennett forms a government, I think there is a good chance that we will see Lapid as foreign minister,” he said. “You cannot know, but that seems a little like his natural role in the next government, and that may also be relevant to the United States.”  

For Bennett, the gain is different. Before the merger, Bennett was not the undisputed leader of the opposition camp, Shapira said. He was still competing for that position, including with Gadi Eisenkot, the former army chief who has moved into politics with a strong security profile.  

The joint list, at least for now, seems to settle that question. “Now, with this union, Bennett is the leader of the bloc,” Shapira said. “There are still six months until the election, but at the moment it looks like Bennett is completely the leader of the bloc, and he positions himself as the main, almost the only, competitor to Netanyahu.”  

Shapira pushed back on the idea that the move reshapes the electorate itself. “I don’t see how this union can bring additional voters from Likud,” he said. “There is probably no one who was debating whether to vote Bennett or Likud and now says, after Bennett united with Lapid, I will definitely vote Bennett.”  

In his view, the impact is mostly internal. The alliance may consolidate support within the camp but not necessarily expand it. Some voters from Lapid’s side could drift toward Yair Golan and the Democrats. On Bennett’s right, some could move toward Avigdor Liberman or back toward Eisenkot.  

“From the point of view of the bloc, I don’t think it changes very much,” Shapira said. “It does not bring voters. It does not scare voters away. That is how it looks now, at least.”  

The larger effect, he said, may be psychological. If Israelis see the Bennett-Lapid list polling near Likud, or even ahead of it, that could create enthusiasm. “The very fact that people will suddenly see in the polls a list, the Beyachad list, that is like Likud, maybe even in some polls bigger than Likud, that is something that can create enthusiasm,” Shapira said. “And that enthusiasm is important. It has importance in itself.”  

Beyond Bennett and Lapid, much remains unresolved. “We don’t know what will happen, for example, with Gantz—whether he runs separately, whether he unites,” Shapira said, pointing to the open questions surrounding Benny Gantz, the former defense minister and IDF chief of staff who leads National Unity.  

He added that other configurations remain possible, including moves involving Yoaz Hendel, a former communications minister, or Avigdor Liberman, who continues to operate independently. “There is still uncertainty,” Shapira said. Eisenkot’s next move could also affect the map.  

Part of the difficulty is understanding what “center” means in the Israeli context. Yesh Atid defines itself as a centrist party, but Shapira said the term no longer functions in Israel the way it might in other political systems. “Lapid defines himself as a center party. That is nice. It is not a center party,” he said. “There is almost no center today in Israel.”  

Since 2022, Shapira said, Israeli politics has been divided less by classic left-right debates and more by the fault line around Netanyahu, the judiciary, liberal democracy, and the role of legal institutions. “You can call it the Bibi bloc and the anti-Bibi bloc,” he said. “You can call it a bloc that supports the Supreme Court and a bloc that opposes the Supreme Court. You can call it a bloc that supports liberal democracy and a bloc that supports ethnic democracy, or electoral democracy.”  

In that division, Shapira said, Lapid is not really in the middle. “Lapid is on a specific side of this political map,” he said. “There is nothing to do about it.”  

The question for Washington is whether a Bennett-led government would change the substance of US-Israel relations or mainly the tone. Dayan said the relationship with President Trump is currently shaped by the unusually close bond between Netanyahu and the American president.  

“You can’t underestimate the value of personal connection,” Dayan said. “President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu are good friends. They have been working together for many years, so it has influence.”  

That does not mean Bennett could not work with President Trump, Dayan said. But it would not be the same. “Even if future Prime Minister Bennett will have great relations with President Trump, still he doesn’t have that advantage of working with President Trump and being friends with him for so many years,” she said. “So, obviously, that’s going to change.”  

Dayan said the current Israeli opposition is viewed in Washington with “some sort of an ambivalency.” The Trump administration is close to Netanyahu, especially his inner circle, leaving little room for the opposition to build direct channels. “There is no light between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Donald Trump,” she said. “So, the opposition is not really very much in touch with the American administration.”  

At the same time, she said, Washington knows Bennett and Lapid. President Trump has publicly praised Lapid, and the opposition is not unknown in Republican circles. “They are aware of them and have some sort of relations with them, even if not working directly together,” Dayan said.  

Koplow also pointed to the unusual nature of the relationship between President Trump and Netanyahu, describing it as distinct from past US-Israel dynamics. “I don’t think there’s ever been a president and a prime minister who were so tightly linked … and who went out of their way to also give each other such high levels of political support,” he said.  

That dynamic, he added, may be difficult to replicate under a different Israeli leader. “They seem to have this bond that I don’t think you’ll see with Trump and a different Israeli prime minister.”  

On security, Dayan argued, the relationship is more institutional and less dependent on any single leader. The war with Iran strengthened already close ties between the Israeli and American security establishments, she said. “In terms of security, the relationship is super close, super intimate,” she added . “And I think it will stay this way for the near future, again, unless something drastic changes in the administration.”  

But politics is different. Dayan said Bennett and Lapid would likely be less confrontational toward a future Democratic administration than Netanyahu, especially because Netanyahu’s image has become deeply polarizing in parts of the United States. “Netanyahu’s image became toxic in certain American circles,” she said. “Not necessarily just the policies of the Netanyahu government, but Netanyahu himself. He is portrayed as the prototype of an illiberal leader.”  

Koplow noted that while a change in leadership could affect perceptions, it would not necessarily transform policy outcomes. “On a policy level, any Israeli government is going to have to listen to the US government,” he said. “If Trump says that there has to be a ceasefire … it doesn’t matter who the Israeli prime minister is.”  

With President Trump, however, the issue would be more delicate. Dayan said Bennett’s policies are not necessarily far from Netanyahu’s on core issues. “Let’s face it, Bennett and Netanyahu agree on most policy issues,” she said. “The issue is going to be what is the approach with which the prime minister’s office is approaching the American presidency and the American administration.”  

Dayan also raised another possibility: Bennett might be better placed than Netanyahu to resist some American pressure. “Netanyahu has a soft spot with Trump,” she said. “Trump knows he can pressure Netanyahu, and there are many things that Bennett might be better positioned to refuse Trump than Netanyahu is, because Netanyahu feels like he owes Trump for things they did together in the past.”  

Asked whether President Trump could intervene politically in Israel’s election, Dayan said it is possible. “I think it is likely,” she said. “I don’t know that it will happen.” At a minimum, she said, “we will see Trump saying that he wants Netanyahu to remain in office.”  

For now, the Bennett-Lapid alliance has clarified the leadership of the opposition but not the outcome of the election. For now, the move mainly gives the opposition a clearer structure, with Bennett at the top. Whether that turns into a majority is still an open question.  

“It’s good for both Bennett and Lapid,” Shapira said. “In terms of the blocs, I don’t think it changes very much.”