If all goes to plan, in the early hours of Thursday morning, the members of the Knesset, after a long filibustered debate, will have pressed the voting buttons in front of them and Israel’s state budget for 2021-22 will have passed its final readings. For the first time in nearly two years, the Israeli government will no longer be working on fiscal auto-pilot, and a long period of political and financial instability will finally be over. That is if all goes to plan and the leaders of the eight parties in government can ensure that all their members are present and voting according to the coalition agreement.

Near the end of this week, they seemed reasonably confident all the clauses of the 885 billion shekel (£200 billion) budget for the year which is nearly over and for the next 12 months were agreed. Not every spending item was easily palatable to the coalition partners. The left had to swallow funding for West Bank settlements and the right agreed to allocating money to illegally constructed Bedouin townships in the Negev which they believe are eroding the state’s authority. But that is the nature of this polyglot coalition.

Naftali Bennett’s government will have reached the closest thing it has to a safe haven; 143 days after it was inaugurated, it has defied the expectations of many by making it this far. In the last four and a half months, despite a majority of only two MKs, it has lost only three votes, passed most legislation it planned and with a budget passed before the deadline on 14 November, which would have triggered a new election, will be reasonably secure. The next budget deadline is June 2023. Even opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu, who promised on the day he was forced out of office “we will be back soon,” admitted last week it could take “two weeks or three and a half years,” until Likud make it back.

Going round in circles

When coalition members are asked who may prove to be the source of future discord, the name most often mentioned is that of Defence Minister Benny Gantz.

If, ten months ago, Benjamin Netanyahu had stood by the coalition agreement he signed with Mr Gantz and allowed the budget to pass then, it may still have been in existence and in just a couple of weeks the “rotation” would have taken place. All that is by now distant history. Many would have doubted Mr Netanyahu was going to honour the agreement but that doesn’t change the fact that Mr Gantz still has 17 November in his diary as the day he was to become Israel’s prime minister.

In interviews Mr Gantz says he hasn’t given up on his ambition to be prime minister, but it can’t happen in this government. Instead it will be Yair Lapid, who was once his junior partner in the leadership of Blue and White, who will replace Mr Bennett in August 2023.

It clearly rankles and Gantz barely hides the fact that he has little respect for either of the younger men. When he talks of his decisions as defence minister, he refers to “my policy” and what is perceived as his independent actions anger both sides of the coalition, right and left.

That was the case back in August when he travelled to Ramallah for the first high-level ministerial meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. And this week again, when he authorised the building of 3,000 new homes on the settlements.

It’s not just the decisions themselves. It’s the way Mr Gantz seems to carry them out, without heed of his government colleagues.

Last week, when as defence minister he signed orders designating six Palestinian NGOs as terror organisations, there were those who once again interpreted it as Mr Gantz’s way of showing his disdain for the other ministers. He certainly didn’t consult with any of them on it and when Labour leader Merav Michaeli asked him for explanations, he rudely responded that “Michaeli who doesn’t know the details shouldn’t disrupt the fight against terror”.

There was another interpretation of Mr Gantz’s actions from the supporters of the Palestinians NGOs, who claimed that it was a “targeted assault” on Palestinian “civil society” and that proscribed organisations had posed a “major challenge” to Israel.

Both interpretations are far from accurate. Gantz’s original motive in signing the designations had nothing to do with his feelings for the government and he had never heard of any the six NGOs before their files were presented to him, much less seen them as a challenge to Israel. The actual explanation is mundanely bureaucratic.

Every few months, a pile of intelligence dossiers are placed before the defence minister. In them are the details of various organisations which are linked to one of the main Palestinian movements already designated by Israel as terrorist organisations. The dossiers have already been vetted by the Justice Ministry and on the base of their recommendation, the minister signs the terror designation. It’s a routine procedure that very rarely attracts any attention in the media or warrants the involvement of other cabinet ministers. So why was it different this time?

In recent decades, most of the proscribed organisations were fundraising “Islamic charity” groups which were operated by members of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. No one bats an eyelid when such groups are designated. But over the past few years, especially since the murder of 17 year-old Rina Shnerb near Jerusalem, Israeli intelligence has re-focused resources on the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a Marxist offshoot of the PLO which until recently had been regarded by many as generally moribund.

The new focus had led to the arrest of PFLP cells and also to the detection of financial ties between the PFLP and various organisations, including the six NGOs. As far as Mr Gantz was concerned, he was just tidying up some loose ends when he signed their designations. He wasn’t aware that, unlike the Hamas-related organisations which interest no one in the west, those operating in the PFLP orbit are much more cosmopolitan, nor did any of his advisors draw his attention to this fact.

The six NGOs have developed strong ties with western and Israeli human-rights organisations, progressive left-wing activists, think-tanks and journalists and even some European governments, who have used them as resources and even helped fund them. It didn’t take a genius to work out that their designation would cause an outcry, but such a prediction doesn’t seem to have reached the minister and no one around him thought that in this instance, the case may have to be made in public.

Mr Gantz had never imagined that even some members of Meretz, the coalition’s most left-wing partner, had worked with the NGOs. His indignation at being asked to provide explanations is largely due to the fact neither he nor his predecessors have ever been questioned on similar matters. But he isn’t going to back down and certainly won’t provide the intelligence dossiers to his cabinet colleagues. He’s not intervening in the way they run their ministries, so why are they?

Enter the government’s peace-maker. Naftali Bennett doesn’t want to stand on Mr Gantz’s toes but he has a way of working around him. While it’s the defence minister who signs terror designations, the Shin Bet security service answer directly to the prime minister. It’s his prerogative to order Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar to personally brief ministers. Whether or not Ms Michaeli and Meretz leader Nitzan Horowitz are satisfied by his explanations, this won’t bring down the government. But it’s a reminder of how the personal relationships between the partners, and their egos, could do so in the future.

Flying the flag

If anyone had any concern that the diplomatic fallout from Mr Gantz’s decision to designate the Palestinian NGOs as terror organisations, or for that matter any other controversial decision by the Israeli government, would impact its relations with western governments, the runways of Ovda Air Base were a sobering sight this week.

Fighter-jets of eight different nations lined up for take-off, streaking across the Negev Desert skies on their way to simulated air-strikes and interceptions against the fictional “Dragonland” enemy. This is the fifth time that the Israeli Air-Force has staged its biannual Exercise Blue Flag and the largest one yet, with eight nations taking part. In addition to the aircraft of the United States, Germany, France, India, Italy and Greece, who have all flown in previous Blue Flags, there was a newcomer.

For the first time since Israel’s establishment, the Royal Air Force deployed fighter-jets to Israel. Six Typhoon FGR4s from No.1 Squadron in Lossiemouth took part, in what is the highest-profile cooperation between the Israeli and British militaries since the Suez Campaign of 1956. While the pilots from the different nations were eager to talk about the professional side of the exercise and how they were learning from each other’s doctrines of air operations, one Israeli general took a broader view.

“Ultimately,” he said, “this is about diplomacy. Not just military diplomacy but diplomacy in general. The fact that all these countries are sending their planes and personnel to fly here, in Israel, emphasises Israel’s legitimacy.”