Israel's Coalition Crisis + G7's Strategic Divide
Explore how Israel’s collapsing government and G7’s deepening divisions are destabilizing alliances, shifting wartime strategy, and redrawing geopolitical lines.
Geopolitics Daily provides clear, contextual analysis of emerging geopolitical developments around the world. Designed to distill the complexity of global events into a concise and accessible format, it is delivered to subscribers' inboxes every business day.
Executive Summary
Israel’s ruling coalition faces imminent collapse as the ultra-Orthodox Shas party withdraws support over military conscription demands, threatening Prime Minister Netanyahu’s majority and pushing the Knesset toward dissolution.
Strategic ambiguity looms over Israel’s next moves, with potential de-escalation in Gaza counterbalanced by possible military escalation in the north (each calibrated to offset political fallout and recalibrate electoral optics).
A potential post-Netanyahu coalition would be ideologically fractured, unstable by design, and ill-equipped to navigate Israel’s cascading security and societal crises.
The G7 is fracturing beneath the surface, as Trump’s unilateral tariff regime shatters the bloc’s economic consensus and forces allies into fragmented, defensive negotiations over trade and industrial protectionism.
Divergent strategies on Russia’s war economy (Europe seeking escalation, Trump demanding diplomacy) signal a crumbling of Western unity, eroding the G7’s role in global security coordination.
The Alberta summit reveals a post-multilateral world, where symbolism masks systemic disintegration, and institutional cohesion gives way to transactional nationalism, leaving global governance at a historic inflection point.
Political Instability in Israel
What Happened
On June 9, 2025, the ultra-Orthodox political party Shas formally declared its intention to exit Israel’s governing coalition and support a parliamentary vote to dissolve the Knesset. This announcement came just days before the scheduled vote on June 11 and was prompted by a political impasse over the conscription of Yeshiva students (young men enrolled in full-time religious study) into the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Shas, which holds 11 seats in the 67-member coalition, possesses the pivotal leverage to deprive Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration of the absolute majority required to govern, namely the 61-seat threshhold.
The trigger for this development was the failure of Netanyahu to meet a deadline imposed by Shas to secure a mutually acceptable compromise on the conscription issue. This followed months of growing disillusionment within the ultra-Orthodox political bloc, which has long insisted that religious students should remain exempt from mandatory military service. United Torah Judaism (UTJ), another ultra-Orthodox faction in the coalition, had already expressed similar dissatisfaction and signaled its intent to defect over the same dispute.
Underlying this political rupture is a major shift in Israel’s security posture. In response to protracted military operations in Gaza and a widening personnel shortage (estimated at 12,000 troops, particularly in frontline combat roles), the IDF annouced plans to issue 50,000 draft notices to members of the ultra-Orthodox community starting in July 2025. This marked a significant acceleration of conscription enforcement and ended what had been a de facto exemption regime for a growing segment of the population.
In parallel, opposition leader Benny Gantz removed his party’s legislative proposals from the June 11 session, eliminating procedural hurdles and effectively clearing the way for a dissolution vote. However, the legislative process for dissolving the Knesset involves three separate readings of a bill. During that time, political realignment or concessions could still prevent the government’s collapse. The possibility of last-minute negotiations or defections introduces uncertainty, especially as the Knesset aproaches its summer recess at the end of July.
If the government falls, a new election must be held within 90 days. During that interim period, Netanyahu’s administration would assume a caretaker status, legally restricted in its decision-making authority but still operational. Current polling suggests a sharp drop in support for Netanyahu’s Likud party. That decline (from 32 to as few as 23 seats) raises the likelihood that a new coalition would emerge, possibly excluding Likud from power altogether.
Why It Matters
The pending collapse of Israel’s coalition government does not merely signal a routine episode of political turbulence. Rather, it strikes at the structural integrity of Israeli governance during a period of sustained military conflict and regional instability. This crisis is unfolding against the backdrop of a prolonged war in Gaza, mounting tensions with Hezbollah on Israel’s northern border, and the enduring strategic challenge posed by Iran’s regional network of proxies and advancing nuclear capabilities.
Three interrelated dynamics underscore the significance of this moment:
Prospect of Tactical De-escalation in Gaza: Mounting public frustration with the government’s handling of the hostage crisis and military campaign in Gaza is shifting the political calculus. Recent polling indicates that nearly 70% of Israelis would support a ceasefire in exchange for the return of hostages. Facing electoral pressure and internal dissent, Netanyahu may pursue a temporary de-escalation to rebuild public trust. Such a move would not reflect a strategic reorientation; instead, it would serve as a short-term political maneuver aimed at stabilizing the electorate ahead of a potential snap election.
Calculated Escalation Against Northern Adversaries: In contrast to the potential softening in Gaza, Netanyahu may intensify military activity against Hezbollah or Iranian-affiliated targets in Lebanon, Syria, or Iraq. This dual-track approach (restraint in one theater, coupled with assertiveness in another) would be designed to project strength and divert attention from domestic political fragility. Past operations, such as targeted airstrikes and sabotage missions, have yielded modest but tangible boosts in Netanyahu’s approval ratings. These precedents suggest the utility of such tactics in an electoral context.
Inherent Instability of a Post-Netanyahu Coalition: Should elections result in Netanyahu’s ouster, the most likely outcome is a broad, ideologically incoherent coalition united by little more than opposition to his continued rule. Such a coalition would likely include secular centrists, religious conservatives, leftist parties, and Arab factions. Each of these groups holds fundamentally conflicting views on security, religion, and governance. The durability of such a government would be limited, increasing the risk of renewed electoral cycles, policy paralysis, and governance breakdowns at a time when Israel faces existential external threats and internal social fractures.
At its core, the dispute over Yeshiva student conscription is emblematic of a deeper national reckoning: the need to reconcile Israel’s evolving demographic and security realities with its foundational political bargains. As military necessity converges with political instability, the state’s ability to maintain a coherent defense strategy (particularly in multi-front scenarios) is placed under acute strain.
Strategic Fracturing at the G7 Leaders’ Summit
What Happened
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Horizon Geopolitics to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.