Elections are an uncertain game. Issues that take a turn for the worse may sometimes help the ruling party, especially if they are manipulated through external mediation. Israel’s election on October 27 is crucial and volatile, as current pre-election analysis points to an unclear verdict for either the ruling coalition led by Netanyahu or the opposition coalition led by former army chief Gadi Eisenkot. The future of the war-thirsty, genocidal architect Netanyahu hangs in the balance because of a variety of factors—regardless of how his imperialist partner Donald Trump foresees his victory, how Netanyahu wages war against Iran during a ceasefire, or how he pretends to prevent a unified Palestinian homeland by unleashing fresh attacks on the eve of elections.
On October 24, the IDF forced about 1,200 Palestinians to leave their homes in Hebron in the occupied West Bank. Yousef Zouhair Al-Jabari, head of the Hebron municipality, said about 1,300 more people faced losing their homes in addition to the 1,200 already displaced. This operation, characterized by the Palestinian Authority as “collective punishment,” is motivated by the Knesset election on Tuesday, in which Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition is likely to lose if opinion polls are any indication.
Israeli politics revolve around its party system. That system has undergone fundamental transformations: from one-party dominance to competitive rivalry between two parties, and then back to dominance by the former opposition party. Since the 2013 election, the right-wing bloc, with Likud at the core of governing coalitions, has dominated Israeli politics.The sharpness of Israel’s shift to the right is evident in the changing ideological complexion of Knesset members. Although the parties have differed on a variety of socio-economic questions, their political spectrum is still defined by the intensity of their commitment to an exclusivist Jewish mission for the state.
Benjamin Netanyahu rose to power in the 1990s not as a right-wing firebrand but as a silver-tongued defender of Israel against international criticism. His strong right-wing views, combined with opportunism and an aversion to making risky decisions, helped him climb the greasy pole of power in Likud. However, the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, dealt a severe blow to Israelis, and they blamed him for failing to take preemptive action to prevent it. Fearing public anger over his failure to protect the country, he transformed himself into the epitome of Israeli recklessness and unleashed a reign of terror against Gaza, Hezbollah, civilian neighborhoods in Lebanon, and war against Iran.
In their monumental work Israel’s Lobby, Eli Clifton and Ian Lustick quote the prominent Efraim Inbar, one of the most influential national security analysts, on Israel’s long-term goal as follows:
“Fortunately, Jewish history presents the Zionist movement another alternative: the Davidic option of building a Jewish Commonwealth in the midst of an idolatrous world. The House of David ruled the Land of Israel for over four hundred years, playing balance-of-power politics in our region.”
They further assert:
“From year to year, from problem to problem, from threat to threat, Inbar’s recommendation has almost always been the same: reject available compromises, accept international isolation, and use preemptive war to inflict more pain and damage on adversaries than they are willing to tolerate.”
Netanyahu has channeled Inbar’s thinking in his effort to become a twenty-first-century czar in West Asia. His focus has always been on imminent security threats and diplomatic challenges, and he has never entertained long-term goals. He craves recognition as a regional hegemon, possessing a nuclear arsenal in West Asia and huge conventional military power, and able to operate throughout the region at minimal risk.
The radicalization of Israeli politics under him is even more striking when he moves from the destruction of property to the assassination of activists, commanders, scientists, journalists, and political leaders. As a result, his operations of “liquidation, elimination, or neutralization” are defended by extending the label of “collateral damage” as an alibi for his actions. Israel under his rule has come to be viewed as reckless and dangerous. The intensity and prevalence of anti-Israel and anti-Zionist sentiment have increased enormously as a result of his policies in Gaza. In 2025, a Pew Research Center survey of opinion in 24 countries found that “international views of Israel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are much more negative than positive,” a finding that has intensified recently. Even in the United States, 59 percent of respondents to a Pew survey published in October 2025 said they held an “unfavorable opinion of the Israeli government.” Even before the Gaza war, the country’s Jewish population was in crisis, divided over his government’s attempts to “reform the judiciary” and to institutionalize authoritarian populism. Together, these domestic and international pressures explain why the October 27 election remains so volatile and why Netanyahu’s political future is so uncertain.
