In Israel, stakes are high, change has constraints

Israeli voters go to the polls on Tuesday, October 27, in a general election widely regarded as a referendum on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s handling of the war following the Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023. Opinion polls indicate that neither Netanyahu’s Likud party nor the Yashar party of his primary challenger, former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, will secure the 61-seat majority required to govern in the 120-member Knesset. Consequently, the outcome hinges on coalition building among smaller factions. While the vote offers a chance to end Netanyahu’s nearly two-decade hold on power, analysts suggest that fundamental shifts in Israel’s security doctrine regarding Iran, Gaza, and Palestinian statehood remain unlikely, regardless of who forms the next government. The election marks the first general vote since the October 7, 2023, attacks, which triggered a multi-front conflict involving Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran. Netanyahu, seeking a seventh term as prime minister, frames the contest as a choice between stability and chaos, warning that electing his rivals risks compromising national safety. His campaign emphasizes his military record and close ties with the United States. In contrast, Eisenkot, who served as Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Forces from 2015 to 2019, positions himself as a competent alternative capable of restoring discipline. Eisenkot, who lost his son and two nephews fighting in Gaza since 2023, accuses Netanyahu of failing to achieve the government’s war objectives. He resigned from Netanyahu’s war cabinet in June 2024, citing these failures. Despite the high stakes, the electoral landscape is fragmented. Pre-election estimates project that both major contenders will win approximately 20 seats each. This mirrors previous cycles, such as the five general elections held between 2019 and 2022, where no single party achieved a mandate. Under Israeli law, the president assigns the task of forming a government to the Knesset member with the best chance of securing a confidence vote. Therefore, the winner is determined not solely by seat count but by the ability to assemble a coalition. Netanyahu’s current coalition relies heavily on religious and far-right allies. Partners including Shas and United Torah Judaism campaign to preserve funding for religious institutions and maintain military service exemptions for ultra-Orthodox men. Far-right figures Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich advocate for expanded settlements in the West Bank and the initiation of Jewish settlement in Gaza. Their opponents include Eisenkot’s centrist Yashar party, which campaigns for judicial independence and broader national service obligations. Also vying for influence is Be-Yahad, a joint list featuring former prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, who share a platform focused on security reform, reducing living costs, and conscripting ultra-Orthodox men into the army. On the left, Yair Golan leads the Democrats, a party formed in 2024 by merging Labor and Meretz. Golan, a retired general, supports a two-state solution and increased public spending. All opposition parties have pledged an independent state inquiry into the October 7 security failures, a measure Netanyahu’s government has refused to establish. Policy differences between the camps exist primarily on domestic issues, such as the role of the judiciary and military exemptions. However, consensus remains strong on core security objectives. Eisenkot, despite his critique of Netanyahu’s conduct, opposes Palestinian statehood and insists on dismantling Hamas’s military capabilities. He views a nuclear-armed Iran as unacceptable and has supported retaining "security zones" in Lebanon and Syria. While he has criticized Netanyahu’s fitness to launch further operations against Iran, he has not ruled out future strikes to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Similarly, Netanyahu has stated that removing the Iranian regime is necessary to eliminate the threat permanently. The geopolitical context adds urgency to the vote. Reports indicate that the United States and Israeli militaries are preparing for fresh strikes against Iran following the US midterm elections scheduled for November 3. The ongoing conflict has triggered an energy crisis with global economic implications. Netanyahu’s relationship with US President Donald Trump, who has endorsed the Israeli premier, underscores the alignment between Israeli leadership and Washington’s regional strategy. Historical patterns suggest that former generals often emerge as political alternatives when public confidence in civilian leadership wanes. Figures such as Yitzhak Rabin, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon, and Benny Gantz have previously leveraged military credibility to challenge incumbent governments. Gantz, who led the 2014 Gaza war, won the most seats in the 2019 election but ultimately failed to displace Netanyahu, eventually joining his wartime cabinet. Eisenkot aims to replicate this trajectory, offering a narrative of competence and order. Yet, experts note that the shift in personnel may not translate to a shift in strategic direction. The "Dahiyeh doctrine," associated with Eisenkot during the 2006 war against Hezbollah, advocates for overwhelming military force in response to attacks, suggesting a continuation of aggressive tactical approaches. As the vote concludes, attention turns to the mechanics of coalition formation. The lack of a clear majority ensures that smaller parties will wield disproportionate influence over the final composition of the government. Whether the resulting administration pursues negotiations or escalates military operations depends largely on which blocs manage to bridge their ideological gaps. For now, the central uncertainty remains whether a change in leadership will alter the trajectory of Israel’s wars or merely replace the managers of existing strategies. The results of the October 27 vote will determine who holds the pen in the coming months of regional diplomacy and military planning.