Billionaire Trump backer says Ben-Gvir, Smotrich should not serve in next Israeli government

The public intervention by the prominent hedge fund manager, a vocal supporter of Israel and a member of the Jewish community, injected a significant, late-stage element into Israel’s highly charged political landscape, coming just two days before a pivotal general election. Polls indicated an exceptionally tight race, with the future composition of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition hanging in the balance against a determined opposition. Ackman’s remarks, disseminated via the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), underscored his concern that from the vantage point of someone deeply familiar with how Israel is perceived in the United States, "Ben-Gvir and Smotrich have caused Israel enormous reputational damage with their statements and actions."

This rare, direct commentary from a major international financial figure on the internal political makeup of a sovereign nation highlights the profound global implications of Israel’s domestic choices, particularly concerning its far-right elements. Ackman, the founder and CEO of Pershing Square Capital Management, one of the world’s most influential hedge funds, articulated a strategic vision for Israel’s future. He argued that a government formed without the inclusion of Ben-Gvir and Smotrich would convey a powerful message that Israel was "turning a new page." Such a shift, he posited, would be instrumental in allowing Israel to "rebuild lost credibility, increase the opportunity for an expansion of the Abraham Accords, and enjoy a better relationship with Democrats and Republicans and Americans at large."

The Abraham Accords, a landmark diplomatic achievement initiated by President Donald Trump’s first administration in 2020, normalized relations between Israel and several Arab nations, specifically the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, and later saw the reestablishment of official ties with Morocco. The potential for further expansion, notably with Saudi Arabia, has been a key strategic objective for both Washington and Jerusalem. Ackman’s contention implicitly suggests that the controversial figures of Ben-Gvir and Smotrich act as significant impediments to these broader diplomatic and strategic goals, due to their policies and rhetoric concerning Palestinians and the future of the West Bank.

Ministers’ Controversial Stances and International Repercussions

Itamar Ben-Gvir, leader of the Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) party, and Bezalel Smotrich, head of the Religious Zionism party, have emerged as highly polarizing figures within Israeli politics and on the international stage. As ministers in Netanyahu’s religious-nationalist coalition, their tenures have been marked by policies and statements widely perceived as discriminatory against Israel’s minority Arab population and Palestinians residing in the occupied West Bank. Ben-Gvir, serving as Minister of National Security, has advocated for a harder line against Palestinian resistance, promoted the expansion of Jewish settlements, and has been involved in numerous provocative actions, including visits to the Temple Mount/Al-Aqsa compound, which are seen as inflaming tensions. His background includes past convictions for incitement to racism and supporting a terrorist organization, rooted in his early activism with the outlawed Kach movement.

Smotrich, as Minister of Finance and a minister within the Defense Ministry responsible for civil administration in the West Bank, has wielded significant influence over settlement policy and Palestinian affairs. He has openly called for the annexation of the West Bank, denied the existence of a distinct Palestinian people, and has been a vocal proponent of Jewish supremacy in the land. His policies have included efforts to streamline settlement construction, restrict Palestinian building, and exert greater Israeli control over areas traditionally under Palestinian Authority jurisdiction. These actions have drawn sharp condemnation from international bodies and human rights organizations, who argue they systematically undermine the prospects for a two-state solution and exacerbate humanitarian conditions for Palestinians.

The international community’s response to their actions has been robust. Several key allies of Israel, including Britain, Canada, and Australia, have taken the unprecedented step of imposing sanctions on the two ministers and other associated individuals. These sanctions, typically involving travel bans and asset freezes, were levied over accusations that they have incited violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, contributed to the destabilization of the region, and violated human rights. The European Union and the United States have also expressed deep concern over their rhetoric and policies, with some U.S. officials privately suggesting that their inclusion in the government has strained the traditionally robust U.S.-Israel relationship, particularly with the Democratic Party.

The rising influence of these far-right factions is reflected in electoral projections. Ben-Gvir’s Jewish Power party was projected to significantly increase its parliamentary representation, potentially securing around 10 seats, up from 6 in the previous election. Smotrich’s Religious Zionism was also expected to gain, with projections suggesting 8 seats, an increase from 7. This upward trajectory underscores a notable shift within the Israeli electorate towards more nationalistic and religious ideologies, a trend that complicates any attempt by Netanyahu to form a government without their support, despite international pressure.

Ackman’s Broader Engagements and the Trump-Netanyahu Nexus

Ackman’s intervention is not an isolated statement but part of a broader pattern of engagement with Israeli affairs and U.S. politics. Having visited Israel recently, he is deeply invested in the country, literally and figuratively. Along with his wife, Neri Oxman, a renowned architect and designer, Ackman holds a significant 5 percent stake in the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange, demonstrating a substantial economic commitment to the nation. His vocal support for Israel intensified following the devastating Oct 7, 2023, Hamas attack, which tragically claimed the lives of approximately 1,200 people, prompting a major military response. Speaking at a Tel Aviv conference the previous Thursday, Ackman had praised Netanyahu, asserting that the Prime Minister had done a commendable job in protecting and defending Israel in the aftermath of the attack.

This praise for Netanyahu, coupled with Ackman’s public support for Donald Trump’s candidacy for president in 2024, creates a complex and intriguing political alignment. Trump, who had publicly endorsed Netanyahu for prime minister just last week, and Ackman, appear to share a strategic vision for Israel’s regional standing. Nimrod Goren, the president of the Israeli think tank Mitvim, offered an insightful analysis of Ackman’s statement. Goren suggested that Ackman’s remarks likely reflected a desire among circles close to former President Trump for Netanyahu to sideline his far-right allies after the election. The objective, Goren posited, would be to facilitate the formation of a broader "unity government" with opposition parties, which could then pursue a more pragmatic foreign policy, particularly regarding the expansion of the Abraham Accords. Such a move would align with Trump’s perceived legacy and potential future diplomatic efforts in the Middle East.

However, the path to a unity government appears fraught with significant obstacles. Gadi Eisenkot, a prominent figure and leading challenger to Netanyahu, along with other key opposition party leaders like Yair Lapid and Benny Gantz, have explicitly ruled out forming a government with Israel’s longest-serving prime minister. Their refusal stems from deep-seated distrust, particularly following Netanyahu’s controversial judicial overhaul proposals that sparked widespread protests, and increasingly, calls for accountability regarding the security failures leading up to the Oct 7 attack. Indeed, thousands of Israelis had rallied in Tel Aviv just the previous Saturday, demanding an independent inquiry into the devastating attack, signaling a profound public demand for introspection and change.

The Stakes for Israel’s Future

Ackman’s call therefore highlights a fundamental tension within Israeli politics: the imperative for coalition stability, which often necessitates aligning with ideologically driven far-right parties, versus the perceived need to maintain international legitimacy and strategic partnerships. The far-right’s growing electoral strength provides Netanyahu with a crucial, albeit problematic, bloc of votes to form a governing majority. However, their inclusion comes at a significant cost, alienating traditional allies, particularly liberal democracies and segments of the American Jewish community, and potentially jeopardizing key diplomatic initiatives like the Abraham Accords.

The election, therefore, was not merely about who would lead Israel, but what kind of Israel would emerge. Would it be one that prioritizes a religious-nationalist agenda, even at the expense of international standing, or one that seeks a more pragmatic path, balancing domestic concerns with global responsibilities? Ackman’s intervention, from his perch as a powerful financial and political voice, served as a stark reminder that Israel’s domestic political choices reverberate far beyond its borders, shaping its economic prospects, diplomatic relations, and its very identity on the world stage. The decision by Israeli voters on Tuesday would ultimately determine the direction the nation would take, and how it would seek to reconcile its internal divisions with its external aspirations amidst a tumultuous regional and global environment.