On October 27, Israelis will vote in a pivotal election following a period marked by significant national trauma and political upheaval. The election comes nearly two years after the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks, which resulted in the deadliest assault in Israel’s history, and amid ongoing debates over judicial reforms and democratic governance. The incoming government faces the dual challenge of addressing both external security threats and the internal strains that have placed Israel’s democratic institutions under considerable stress.
The aftermath of the October 7 assault and the longest concurrent conflicts Israel has encountered in modern times have underscored the intricate link between national security and democratic governance. Efforts to impose changes on Israel’s judicial system and governance structure have intensified public division while raising questions about the balance between effective security measures and maintaining democratic accountability.
A key issue is the status of Israel’s military ethos, especially the role of reservists and the unresolved challenge of conscripting members of the haredi community. These factors have triggered debates over the IDF’s identity as a people’s army that represents all sectors of society. Furthermore, years of combat have forced Israeli military personnel to confront complex ethical dilemmas, with disagreements over military conduct and the handling of related investigations emerging as contentious political issues, particularly involving the Military Advocate-General’s office.
In the wake of the October 7 failures, Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi resigned, accepting responsibility for the IDF’s response. A political and institutional crisis followed, including a government attempt to remove Ronen Bar as head of the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency); Bar later resigned amid the turmoil. Additionally, the appointments of David Zini as Shin Bet chief and Roman Gofman as Mossad director were challenged in Israel’s High Court of Justice, reflecting broader tensions within the security establishment.
These developments have highlighted a critical test for the next government: not merely how Israel wields its security capabilities but who controls these decisions, by what mechanisms, and with what level of transparency and accountability. Central to this is restoring functional coherence to Israel’s national-security decision-making framework.
Israel’s formal system designates the full cabinet as the IDF’s commander-in-chief, with authority to delegate many security decisions to a smaller security cabinet. Pre-existing concerns about the coordination between the security cabinet, the National Security Council—which mediates among the cabinet and various security agencies—and other bodies have been magnified during the crisis. Restoring and clarifying these institutional relationships is expected to be among the government’s top priorities as it seeks to safeguard both the country's security and its democratic foundations.