As Israelis cast their ballots in the first national election since the October 7, 2023 Hamas-led attacks, the contest between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his main challenger, Gadi Eisenkot, reveals more convergence than divergence on key national security issues. While the candidates differ significantly in style and background, their positions on the future of Gaza, Iran's threat, and the question of a Palestinian state show substantial overlap.
Netanyahu, leader of the right-wing Likud party, has framed the election as a choice between his unwavering security stance and an opposition perceived as weaker on these matters. His tenure, which spans nearly two decades on and off, has faced intensified scrutiny following the devastating Hamas assault and the ensuing conflict in Gaza. Critics accuse him of eroding democratic institutions, empowering extremist factions within his government, and prolonging conflict for political advantage, all of which have strained Israel's international relationships. Nevertheless, Netanyahu maintains that his aggressive approach defends Israel's security uncompromisingly.
His challenger, Gadi Eisenkot, a 66-year-old former military chief who lost his youngest son in Gaza, presents himself as a centrist offering measured leadership. Having founded the Yashar party last year, Eisenkot adopts a tough security platform but signals some differences in tone and approach. He advocates ending Hamas’s control of Gaza within 18 months, whether through the U.S.-sponsored peace plan or military action, supports expansion of West Bank settlements, yet condemns violence by settlers and opposes establishing a Palestinian state. Eisenkot insists there should be no foreign military presence between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
Despite these distinctions, analysts note Eisenkot’s security agenda largely aligns with Netanyahu’s hardline positions. Tamar Hermann, a senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute, said the opposition’s messaging “is not substantially different from that of the right” aside from disagreements over West Bank policies.
On domestic affairs, Eisenkot diverges more clearly by denouncing extremist settler violence as “Jewish terror” and advocating for drafting ultrahorthodox Israelis into military service. He has expressed caution about expanding settlements in the West Bank areas recently opened for bidding by Netanyahu’s coalition, citing potential international fallout.
Polling ahead of the election showed a near tie between Likud and Yashar, with neither party positioned to easily form a governing coalition in the 120-seat Knesset. Voters express concern over increased settler extremism and institutional threats, yet remain largely united in supporting robust security measures. An October survey indicated that 60 percent of Jewish Israelis favored a new prime minister, underscoring public dissatisfaction with Netanyahu, though the close race leaves the outcome—and subsequent coalition negotiations—uncertain.
Observers suggest that if elected, Eisenkot might pursue a more diplomatic approach in transforming military gains into political solutions and might temper ambitions, such as Netanyahu’s goal of regime change in Iran amid ongoing U.S.-Israeli military actions. However, public sentiment currently favors maintaining Israel’s military presence in Gaza and Lebanon to prevent another attack similar to that of October 7.
As Israel chooses its leadership amid heightened security concerns and domestic tensions, the election outcome will shape the country’s trajectory on some of its most pressing challenges.