With less than two weeks remaining before Israel’s October 27 elections, the final stretch of campaigning is marked by intensified political theatrics and contentious allegations, underscoring the high stakes of this pivotal vote. Campaign rhetoric has shifted focus from substantive policy discussions to accusations and fears, while concerns mount over potential escalations in regional conflict that could impact the electoral process.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition has launched a series of billboards and online advertisements warning voters of a “Yamin or Falestine” scenario. The campaign suggests that if contender Gadi Eisenkot of the Yashar party were to become prime minister, he would form a coalition with Mansour Abbas’s Ra’am Party, a move portrayed as threatening by Netanyahu’s bloc. Critics have condemned the campaign for its racially charged messaging.
Meanwhile, the Shinui (Change) party has centered much of its campaign on Netanyahu’s handling of the October 7 massacre by Hamas, focusing less on detailed policy proposals. In contrast, the B’Yachad party stands out with published comprehensive platforms for each ministry, emphasizing the broader deficiency in substantive policy debate across parties.
Complicating the election environment is the prospect of renewed military action against Iran. Reports emerged this week that Netanyahu discussed with former U.S. President Donald Trump a possible military campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear and military facilities, citing concerns over Iran’s efforts to rebuild nuclear capabilities. Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir has cautioned that any outbreak of hostilities prior to the vote could necessitate postponing the elections. While Trump has indicated such decisions would await the conclusion of the U.S. midterm elections, Israeli voters are left uncertain about the immediacy of the Iranian threat.
The election battle also includes new controversies surrounding Netanyahu’s response to the October 7 Hamas attack. Former Netanyahu military secretary Avi Gil alleged last week that Netanyahu presented an inaccurate timeline of when he first received updates about the attack, with claims that Netanyahu’s chief of staff, Tzahi Braverman, attempted to alter official records. Adding to the scrutiny, former Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar filed a NIS 3 million defamation suit against Netanyahu, asserting that the prime minister falsely accused him of prior knowledge and withholding information about the attack.
Both Gil and Bar explained their decision to speak out now was to coincide with a hoped-for state commission of inquiry into the October 7 events, which Netanyahu has reportedly declined to establish. Critics argue that the timing of these disclosures, so close to the election date, risks manufacturing crises that overshadow substantive political discourse.
As the campaign moves into its closing days, some commentators urge parties and voters alike to focus on pressing domestic issues such as education, transportation, environmental policy, disparities in military conscription, emigration trends, the future status of the West Bank, and rising settler violence. With Israel facing significant challenges, the final phase of the election cycle highlights a tension between sensational political maneuvers and the need for policy-driven debate.