The Israeli occupation entity is heading toward what could be one of the most consequential elections in its history—not only because of the war and its conflict with the Palestinians but also because of a deeper question over the character of the state itself: Will “Israel” remain the “liberal” democracy envisioned by its founders in 1948, or will it continue its slide toward a more conservative and increasingly authoritarian political order?
That question, according to David Rosenberg in an analysis published by Foreign Policy, will be at the heart of the parliamentary elections scheduled for October 27.
Rosenberg argues that Benjamin Netanyahu’s return to the position of prime minister in 2022 marked a decisive turning point, as he formed a coalition with far-right and ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties.
Since then, the government has pursued two broad objectives. The first has been to reshape the balance of power between the judiciary and elected politicians by curbing the Supreme Court’s authority, expanding the government’s and Knesset’s role in judicial appointments, and tightening political control over legal institutions. The second has been to expand the role of Jewish religion in public life while providing settlers in the occupied West Bank with greater political, financial, and legal backing.
Judicial Overhaul
Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul was among the government’s defining projects. It triggered mass protests and faced court rulings that prevented its full implementation. The outbreak of the Gaza war following the October 7, 2023, attack subsequently pushed the issue into the background, according to Foreign Policy.
The government, however, did not abandon its effort to reshape the judiciary. It continued advancing parts of the plan while expanding privileges for the Zionist entity’s ultra-Orthodox, particularly over exemptions from military service—an issue that has become one of the country’s most divisive domestic disputes.
Meanwhile, settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank has intensified amid accusations that the government has tolerated such attacks or provided them with political cover.
Rosenberg also accuses the so-called National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir of seeking to turn the police into a political instrument for suppressing anti-government protests, while the so-called Defense Minister Israel Katz has sought to strengthen the government’s influence over the military establishment.
The author compares Netanyahu’s approach to that of US President Donald Trump, particularly their efforts to weaken institutions capable of constraining executive power and their tendency to portray political opponents as illegitimate adversaries.
A Fractured Opposition
Rosenberg argues that Netanyahu has not only managed to pressure the opposition but has also marginalized rivals within his own Likud party while exerting pressure on state institutions ranging from the judiciary to the military.
The opposition, meanwhile, remains weak and fragmented despite spanning the political spectrum from left and center to right, as well as including parties representing Palestinian citizens of the occupied territories.
Rosenberg faults the opposition for failing recently to present a coherent political alternative or effectively obstruct Netanyahu’s agenda in the Knesset. Yet despite their divisions, opposition forces share several core positions, including defending judicial independence, opposing the politicization of the military and police, challenging settler violence, and rejecting special privileges for the ultra-Orthodox.
The most dangerous scenario, the analysis warns, would be for Netanyahu and his allies to cast doubt on the election results if they lose.
Former Israeli army chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot has emerged as the opposition’s most prominent potential challenger to Netanyahu. But his rise does not guarantee a path to power. Some of his supporters come from the “moderate right” and could return to Likud if Netanyahu succeeds in rehabilitating the party’s image.
Excluding Arab parties
The opposition faces another, more complicated obstacle: Eisenkot’s position on Arab parties. He has pledged to form a government composed exclusively of Zionist parties, effectively excluding Arab parties from any coalition. According to polling cited in the analysis, that could make it difficult for him to secure a stable parliamentary majority.
Rosenberg also argues that Zionist voters have become increasingly entrenched in their political identities, reducing the likelihood of major shifts between the two blocs. Against this backdrop, he warns that the campaign could descend into an exceptionally bitter confrontation.
President Isaac Herzog has warned against violence and intimidation. Critics of the government, meanwhile, fear that the police or Shin Bet, the Zionist entity’s internal security service, could be used politically against the opposition.
The most troubling scenario, according to Rosenberg, would be for Netanyahu and his allies to challenge the legitimacy of the election itself if the results go against them—placing “Israel’s” democratic institutions before a potentially grave test.
Even if the opposition succeeds in exposing the failures of Netanyahu’s government, it may struggle to persuade voters to embrace a fundamental shift in security policy. An Eisenkot-led government, however, could still alter the way “Israel” manages its security challenges, particularly in Gaza.
An Eisenkot Government Could Change Course
According to the analysis, an Eisenkot-led government would be unlikely to embrace the far right’s agenda of displacing Palestinians or rebuilding Israeli settlements inside Gaza. It could also scale back military operations and potentially withdraw Israeli occupation forces while opening the way for reconstruction efforts if Hamas agreed to arrangements approaching disarmament.
In Lebanon, however, a new government would face an even more complicated dilemma. A full withdrawal from areas where Israeli enemy forces are deployed could, the analysis argues, give Hezbollah greater room to pressure northern occupied Palestine.
In the West Bank, a new government would likely seek to curb settler violence and the expansion of settlements but would be unable to eliminate either altogether.
As for a two-state solution, it remains more distant than ever. Rosenberg argues that the events of October 7 effectively buried the prospect of a Palestinian state in the foreseeable future, while the Israeli government and the United States under Trump appear unwilling to push seriously for such an outcome.
Ultimately, the analysis argues that the coming election is about far more than whether Netanyahu remains in power or Ultimately, the analysis contends that the upcoming election encompasses much more than just the question of Netanyahu’s continued leadership or removal.. It could determine the direction the Israeli occupation takes for years to come.
A Netanyahu victory, Rosenberg suggests, could be interpreted as a popular mandate to continue weakening institutional checks on government power while further consolidating the influence of the far right and the ultra-Orthodox.
Source: Agencies (translated and edited by Al-Manar)