Israel’s currency weakened 2%, and its stock market tumbled 3% after Tuesday’s parliamentary elections produced inconclusive results. On Wednesday, no one knew who would be Israel’s next prime minister, nor which coalition of parties would control the parliament (Knesset). The problem is not that Israel counts its ballots at the inexplicably glacial pace of California. The problem is that it did count its ballots (the vast majority), but it remains unclear whether anyone can wield control.

As of 2:30 p.m. Israeli time on Wednesday (8:30 Eastern time), Israel had counted an estimated 85.6% of the votes from 92.9% of the ballot boxes. And while three parties failed to meet the minimum 3.25% threshold to obtain seats in the Knesset, a total of 11 parties had qualified.

Results remain unofficial, but Israeli media estimates that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition has secured 53 seats. Netanyahu’s Likud party is projected to win 26 of those seats, with the remainder divided among coalition allies: United Torah Judaism (seven seats), Shas (seven seats), Otzma Yehudit (seven seats), and Religious Zionist (six seats). This represents a sharp setback since the 2022 election, when Netanyahu’s coalition won 64 seats.

An anti-Netanyahu coalition is projected to hold 48 seats. The opposition parties include Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar (21 seats), B’Yachad (12 seats), Democrats (eight seats), and Yisrael Beytenu (seven seats). Each of these parties has ruled out participating in a government led by Netanyahu. Eisenkot, for instance, has ruled out even a unity government with rotating leadership.

However, neither coalition has made it past the post. A total of 61 seats are required for a majority in the 120-seat Knesset. Two spoiler parties belong to neither coalition: Joint List (12 seats) and Ra’am (seven seats). These parties represent the roughly 20% of Israel’s population that is Arab.

The other simple possibility is that the anti-Netanyahu coalition may attempt to form a coalition government with at least one of the Arab parties. Yair Golan, chairman of the Democrats, already suggested as much. “Netanyahu lost. I know how to count to 120. Sixty-five is more than 55. That’s how Israeli democracy works. Period,” he argued. “Change comes through Jewish-Arab partnership, a true and equal partnership. No less than that, and no more than that.” But Golan only controls eight seats, and three other parties in the center-left coalition would have to reach the same conclusion.

If no two of the three camps can find a way to work together, that leaves three other possibilities. First, the leader of one coalition could try to siphon off one or more of the minor parties in the other coalition. Perhaps they could induce a minor party to switch with promises of cabinet posts or certain legislation. Second, a minority government could try to rule without the ability to pass anything through Parliament on its own.

If neither option can work, then Israel must simply hold new elections, and the parties must simply gamble on a better performance. (Turnout reached 77.7% in this election compared to 70% in 2022; Arab turnout was especially elevated, and many Jews living overseas flew to Israel to vote. These factors increase the likelihood that another election might have a different outcome.)

Israel has been here before. The country held five elections in three-and-a-half years between April 2019 and November 2022. For much of that time, the country languished with virtually no government at all, as the various leaders repeatedly tried and failed to negotiate a majority.

Thus, Israeli democracy has proven that it can survive such a political crisis. But such a crisis inevitably weakens the government, damaging its ability to respond to events (like COVID). Three years of uncertain leadership certainly did not prepare Israel well to counter the terrorist onslaught of October 7, 2023. “We must do everything we can, certainly after yesterday, to avoid another round of elections,” Israeli President Isaac Herzog pleaded Wednesday.

It deserves passing mention that the political struggles of other democracies make America’s electoral system look sound by comparison. Sometimes, Americans can grow hyper-fixated on our own problems. It’s always useful to remember that it could be much worse.

More importantly, the current political headache facing Israel also serves to exonerate the country against one of its detractors’ most baseless smears: that Israel is an apartheid state. Consider the reason why Israel finds itself in the predicament of having no faction strong enough to field a government: 20% of Israelis are Arabs who voted for Arab parties, and those parties won 15% of the parliamentary seats. Those who accuse Israel of apartheid ignore this fact and focus solely on the Gaza Strip.

Under South African apartheid, most black Africans could not vote, and apartheid collapsed in the first election where they were widely allowed to do so. Disenfranchising its Arab minority would solve much of Israel’s domestic political chaos. But Israel has not done so because it respects human rights, regardless of ethnicity or religion. Allowing everyone the freedom to vote their conscience often creates rowdy, chaotic, and sometimes dysfunctional political situations. But those very byproducts of freedom create a favorable contrast between Israel and the despotic Islamist terrorists who oppress Gaza.

Even the European Union — with opinions on Israel that have chilled dramatically since October 7 — found it in its heart to congratulate Israel’s “vibrant democracy” — the only one in the entire Middle East. Perhaps the EU merely looks forward to the possibility of working with any Israeli prime minister not named Netanyahu. But the fact remains that even Netanyahu’s administration conducted an election where his triumph was not (and still isn’t) a foregone conclusion.

Israel has true democracy, not apartheid. Whatever else comes of Tuesday’s ambivalent electoral results, they at least made that contrast in values loud and clear.