Israeli President Isaac Herzog announced Saturday that Gadi Eisenkot, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s principal rival, would receive the first opportunity to form a government after an election that left both competing blocs short of a parliamentary majority. The decision gives the former military chief a route toward replacing Netanyahu, but it does not establish that he has the votes to take office.

The formal handover of the mandate is scheduled for Sunday, November 8, at 5 p.m. in Jerusalem, according to the presidential announcement reported by The Times of Israel. Eisenkot will then have 28 days to negotiate, with a possible extension of up to 14 days. Netanyahu remains prime minister while the government-formation process proceeds.

Recommendations are not a governing coalition

Herzog’s November 5 official statement recorded recommendations for Eisenkot from factions representing 67 lawmakers, against 46 for Netanyahu. Those figures describe the consultations, rather than the membership of an agreed government. Herzog explicitly distinguished the apparent numerical advantage from the unresolved question of who could overcome competing parties’ vetoes and assemble an administration.

The distinction is central to understanding Saturday’s choice. A recommendation identifies the politician a faction wants to negotiate first; it is not a completed bargain over ministers, policy or parliamentary support. Herzog said he would hold further personal discussions with party leaders, and Saturday’s announcement followed additional talks with both Eisenkot and Netanyahu. The president’s choice moves the process into negotiations without resolving the disagreements he identified.

The election arithmetic creates difficult choices

The October 27 election gave Netanyahu’s bloc 53 seats in the 120-member Knesset and the parties aligned against him, excluding the Arab lists, 48. The two Arab lists won 19 between them, Anadolu reported. Netanyahu’s Likud was the largest individual party with 27 seats; Eisenkot’s Yashar won 21. Neither leading party can govern by simply relying on its own election result.

Eisenkot therefore faces a political problem that the combined recommendations obscure. Several major parties in his camp oppose a government that includes Arab parties. An arrangement relying on those parties’ support from outside the cabinet would be different from inviting them into a coalition, but would still require a workable parliamentary understanding. Saturday’s announcement did not supply one, and the 67 recommendations should not be described as 67 committed government votes.

The seven-member ultra-Orthodox United Torah Judaism faction recommended neither candidate, amid disagreements over military-service exemptions, according to Anadolu. That explains why Netanyahu’s 53-seat electoral bloc produced only 46 recommendations during consultations. It also shows why the consultation tally and the election’s bloc totals answer different questions: one measures the seats won by aligned parties, while the other records their stated preferences at a particular stage.

Israel’s Basic Law on the government establishes the first candidate’s 28-day period and permits presidential extensions totaling no more than 14 days. Receiving that mandate is an opportunity to negotiate an administration, rather than an appointment as prime minister. A proposed government must present its policy guidelines, membership and ministerial responsibilities to the Knesset and obtain its confidence before ministers assume office.

The same law provides for continuity: the outgoing government continues performing its functions until a new one is formed. If the first candidate fails, the president can assign another lawmaker the task or inform the parliamentary speaker that he sees no possibility of forming a government. Further procedures can give lawmakers another opportunity to nominate a candidate before the process leads to a new election. Failure at the first stage therefore would not itself settle who governs next.

Political commitments will determine the outcome

An independent explainer by Israel Democracy Institute researchers Ofer Kenig and Dana Blander emphasizes that the president need not choose the leader of the largest party or the candidate with the most recommendations. The purpose is to identify someone capable of winning parliamentary confidence. The researchers also explain that an incoming government can win that vote with a simple majority of votes cast, making minority-government arrangements legally possible without a 61-member coalition.

The institute points to 2009 as a precedent: Tzipi Livni’s Kadima won 28 seats to Likud’s 27, but President Shimon Peres chose Netanyahu to try to form a government, and he succeeded. The example illustrates why leading the largest party and securing a governing arrangement are different achievements.

That legal possibility is not evidence that such an arrangement has been agreed. The relevant question is whether enough parties will support or permit an administration to take office, and then sustain workable cooperation. Coalition membership, outside parliamentary support and recommendations to the president are distinct commitments; treating them as interchangeable would overstate Eisenkot’s position.

Both rivals are publicly invoking national unity in different ways. The Associated Press reported that Eisenkot called for a national emergency government after the announcement, while Netanyahu advocated a national unity government shortly beforehand. Those appeals have not yet produced a shared governing agreement. Sunday’s planned mandate will give Eisenkot the first negotiating window; an actual transfer of power still depends on an arrangement that survives the Knesset’s confidence vote.