Israel Election: Is Netanyahu facing defeat?

A political shift appears to be taking shape in Israel, with exit polls suggesting a setback for the coalition led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has dominated the country’s politics for much of the past two decades. Although the opposition appears to have gained ground, whether it can secure the numbers needed to form a government remains uncertain. Led by former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, the opposition has staked its claim to power, but its path to a parliamentary majority may depend on support from Arab parties. The preliminary figures suggest growing discontent with Netanyahu but offer no definitive verdict on his political future.

The election has unfolded against the backdrop of the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023, the ensuing war in Gaza, the widening regional confrontation involving Lebanon and Iran, deepening domestic divisions and mounting questions about Netanyahu’s long tenure. At stake is not simply who leads Israel but what kind of country its citizens want it to become.

Netanyahu has served as prime minister for roughly 17 years across several terms. To his supporters, he remains an experienced leader capable of safeguarding Israel’s security in an exceptionally dangerous neighbourhood. His opponents accuse him of deepening political and social divisions, undermining democratic institutions and prolonging the war in Gaza. The contest between these competing visions has been central to the election.

Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, has 120 seats and a government requires the support of at least 61 members. According to preliminary exit-poll projections, neither Netanyahu’s coalition nor the opposition bloc led by Eisenkot has secured a clear majority on its own.

The initial estimates suggest that Netanyahu’s Likud party could win around 27 seats, while parties opposed to him could collectively secure approximately 51. Arab-led parties are projected to win around 18 seats. These figures are provisional and the final distribution may change as the remaining votes are counted.

The numbers point to a weakening of Netanyahu’s political position, but removing him from office will be no straightforward task. The opposition comprises parties with differing ideological commitments and competing political priorities. Their shared determination to end Netanyahu’s rule may bring them together during the election, but governing together would require compromises on questions that have long divided them.

Eisenkot has interpreted the exit-poll projections as evidence that Israelis are ready for a change in leadership. He has expressed confidence in his ability to form a new government and promised a fresh sense of hope for the country. Yet translating that momentum into power will require more than favourable electoral arithmetic. He must assemble a coalition capable of commanding a majority in the Knesset and sustaining it once in office.

The election is also a referendum of sorts on Netanyahu’s years in power. The Hamas-led attacks of October 7 exposed grave failures in Israel’s security apparatus. Around 1,200 people were killed and 251 were taken hostage. Israel subsequently launched its military campaign in Gaza, and the conflict expanded into a wider regional confrontation. The wars and tensions involving Gaza, Lebanon and Iran have since compounded the pressures on Israel’s domestic politics.

Netanyahu’s supporters argue that a country facing such threats needs an experienced leader who can protect its security. They maintain that he has defended Israeli interests despite mounting international pressure. For them, he represents a commitment to national security and Jewish identity at a time of profound uncertainty.

His opponents see a very different record. They accuse him of evading responsibility for the security failures of October 7 and question his government’s handling of the war in Gaza and efforts to secure the hostages’ release. Some argue that Netanyahu has prolonged the conflict to preserve his political position, a charge his supporters reject. The corruption cases against him have added another contentious dimension to the campaign.

Another issue weighing heavily on the election is compulsory military service. Most eligible Israeli citizens are required to serve in the armed forces, but exemptions for ultra-Orthodox Jewish men have long been controversial.

Opposition parties argue that these exemptions are increasingly difficult to justify while Israel remains embroiled in prolonged military confrontations and the burden of service falls disproportionately on other sections of society. Eisenkot’s camp has pledged to reform the system. It has also called for safeguarding judicial independence and improving Israel’s international standing.

These debates reflect a deeper struggle over the character of Israeli society. Religious conservative parties are determined to preserve their social and political influence, while sections of the opposition insist that civic obligations and rights must be distributed more equitably. Whether the opposition can agree on meaningful reforms remains uncertain. Even if Netanyahu loses power, the extent of any change will depend on the composition of the new coalition and its strength in parliament.

The Arab vote could prove decisive

The votes of Israel’s Arab citizens have assumed particular significance in this election. They make up approximately 20 per cent of the country’s population. Many are descendants of Palestinians who remained within the territory that became Israel in 1948. Although they hold Israeli citizenship, their political representation has long been shaped by allegations of discrimination, questions of equal rights and debates over solidarity with the Palestinian people. Distrust surrounding these questions has deepened since October 7.

Exit polls suggest that Arab-led parties could win around 18 seats, potentially placing them in a pivotal position in negotiations over the next government. For Eisenkot’s opposition bloc, an agreement with these parties could offer one of the few viable routes to a parliamentary majority.

But the prospect raises difficult political questions. Not every party in the opposition camp may be willing to enter a governing arrangement that depends on Arab parties. Netanyahu has opposed forming a government reliant on their support, and his allies may portray such an arrangement as contrary to Israel’s national interests.

Arab political leaders, however, are increasingly unwilling to accept a marginal role in determining the country’s future. Mansour Abbas, leader of the United Arab List, has argued that his party does not intend to remain permanently on the fringes of Israeli politics. By translating electoral support into parliamentary influence, Arab parties hope to secure a more consequential role in shaping policy.

The question is whether Netanyahu’s opponents can overcome their ideological differences and negotiate a workable arrangement with Arab parties. If mutual suspicion proves stronger than their shared opposition to Netanyahu, the opposition’s electoral gains may fail to produce a change of government.

International isolation and the Palestinian question

Israel’s military campaign in Gaza has intensified international scrutiny. Public support for Israel has declined in the United States, while several European countries have taken restrictive measures in response to its conduct of the war. Netanyahu is also subject to an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court over alleged crimes connected with the Gaza conflict. He has rejected the allegations against him.

Opposition figures argue that Netanyahu’s policies have left Israel increasingly isolated on the world stage. A change of government, they contend, could create an opportunity to repair international relationships and strengthen the country’s democratic institutions. Yet a new administration would not automatically resolve the war in Gaza, determine the future of the Palestinians or settle the long-standing conflicts that continue to destabilise the Middle East.

There is also a striking limitation to the electoral debate. Although security and domestic political divisions have figured prominently in the campaign, the establishment of a Palestinian state and the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza have received comparatively less attention. Even if Netanyahu’s opponents succeed in taking power, it remains unclear how substantially their approach to the Palestinian question would differ from that of the current government.

A majority is not the same as a mandate to govern

Under Israel’s parliamentary system, the president consults political leaders and entrusts the task of forming a government to the candidate considered most likely to command a majority in the Knesset. The leader of the largest party is often well placed to receive that mandate, but the process ultimately depends on securing sufficient parliamentary support.

Even if Likud emerges as the largest party, Netanyahu cannot assume that he will be able to assemble a governing coalition. Equally, a strong showing by the opposition will mean little unless Eisenkot can bring together enough parties to reach the 61-seat threshold.

Failure to do so could plunge Israel into another period of political deadlock, potentially leading to a fresh election early next year. The country has experienced such instability before: between April 2019 and November 2022, Israelis went to the polls five times. That history shows how prolonged political uncertainty can follow when coalition negotiations fail.

The exit polls point to discontent with Netanyahu’s leadership, but converting that discontent into a change of government will be a formidable challenge. The position taken by Arab parties, the calculations of religious conservative factions and the divisions within the opposition will ultimately determine whether a new governing coalition can emerge.

The implications extend beyond Netanyahu’s political future. Whether Israel continues towards a more nationalist and religiously conservative political order or moves towards greater emphasis on democratic institutions, civil rights and international engagement will depend on the government that emerges from the election. The immediate test, however, is more concrete: can Netanyahu’s opponents turn their electoral gains into a parliamentary majority, or will the divisions within their own ranks allow him to remain in power?