EDITORIAL: Israel’s October 27 elections have dealt Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a significant blow, depriving his far-right coalition of its parliamentary majority after four years in power. Yet they have hardly delivered a resounding mandate for an alternative government either, exposing the deep divisions within Israeli politics.
The final results give Netanyahu’s bloc 53 seats in a 120-member Knesset against 48 for the main opposition alliance led by Gadi Eisenkot. The remaining 19 seats have gone to two Arab-led groupings, making them potentially decisive players in determining the next government. Their unprecedented performance marks a historic moment, with Palestinian citizens of Israel nearly doubling their representation from 10 seats in the outgoing Knesset to 19, demonstrating that Arab voters are no longer willing to accept political marginalisation. Yet the opposition faces a dilemma: it may need Arab support to form a government, but several of its constituent parties remain unwilling to cooperate with Arab representatives.
Netanyahu’s response has been revealing. Rather than accept the electoral verdict, he and his Likud party have alleged, without evidence, that Arab parties used foreign money to buy votes. His rhetoric has included portraying Arab voters as Muslim Brotherhood supporters and accusing them of raiding polling stations while his allies have called for Arab political leaders to be interrogated or arrested. Such attacks demonstrate the deeply entrenched racism that exists against Arabs in Israeli society and which Netanyahu has repeatedly exploited to mobilise his electoral base. Yet his departure would not necessarily bring a fundamental shift in Israeli policy, particularly towards Palestinians. Decades of hate-filled propaganda and hostility towards Palestinian aspirations, and espousal of a racist ideology have created a climate in which even the ostensibly moderate opposition remains deeply hawkish. The distinction between the two camps is often more about political temperament than any fundamental disagreement over Israel’s security priorities. Eisenkot, for instance, has rejected Palestinian statehood, while advocating continued Israeli security control over Palestinian territories. Naftali Bennett also opposes a Palestinian state while Avigdor Lieberman has called for dismantling the Palestinian Authority.
The same continuity is evident in their approach to the wider region. On Iran, the opposition has broadly aligned itself with Netanyahu. When Israel and the US launched joint strikes against Tehran, opposition parties collectively expressed support for the military campaign. A change of government, therefore, offers little reassurance to a region already battered by Israeli barbarity. Perhaps the clearest indication of how far Israeli political opinion has shifted is the reaction to President Donald Trump’s ceasefire agreement with Iran, signed on the sidelines of the G7 summit in France in June. Despite being arguably the most pro-Israel American president in recent history, a survey by the Jewish People Policy Institute found that 68 percent of Israelis considered the agreement bad for Israel, while another poll astoundingly found that 71 percent did not trust the Trump administration to protect Israeli interests in negotiations with Iran, demonstrating that even Washington’s largely unconditional support is insufficient if it does not accommodate Israel’s maximalist demands.
This is the fundamental problem confronting the region. A society so deeply shaped by racism and hostility towards Palestinians and Arabs, and by an entrenched belief in its own exceptionalism and right to regional supremacy is unlikely to embrace peace simply because its government changes hands. For Palestinians, particularly the people of Gaza, the outcome offers little reason for optimism. Without a fundamental reassessment of the occupation, Palestinian rights and Israel’s regional ambitions, the prospects for a lasting and just peace remain remote. Israel may have voted against Netanyahu’s government, but it has yet to demonstrate that it is ready to reject the politics that sustained it.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026