The Israeli elections are at the forefront of the global media scene and raise questions about Netanyahu and Israeli policies

Tel Aviv - Ofoq News - The elections in Israel are presented in mainstream media around the world as a decision that goes beyond the issue of Benjamin Netanyahu’s political survival.

Media coverage in the United States, Europe, India, China, Turkey, and the Arab world reveals a clear common denominator: This is a very important vote, but even a victory for Netanyahu’s opponents does not guarantee the formation of a new government or a fundamental change in security policy.

CNN put voters' first opportunity to evaluate the leadership that took charge during the Hamas attack at the center of its coverage.

Besides assigning responsibility for the failure, the network presented the wars that have not yet ended, the mobilization of religious extremists, and the ability to form a government coalition as issues that will determine the country's future.

The Associated Press described the vote as a referendum not only on Netanyahu's long rule, but on the nature of Israel: Is it a state dominated by religious and nationalist influences, or a state more rooted in liberal and secular values?

The agency also highlighted the division between his supporters, who see him as a veteran statesman, and his opponents, who accuse him of undermining the judicial system and favoring his political survival.

While the Wall Street Journal confirmed that despite the fundamental differences between Netanyahu and Gadi Eisenkot in style, background, and internal issues, the gaps between them regarding issues that concern the world, the future of Gaza, the war in Iran, and the establishment of a Palestinian state, have become narrower.

The newspaper explained that strengthening the positions of the extreme right among voters on security issues limits the margin of maneuver available to the candidates.

In another article, journalist Anat Peled described the election as a struggle that many Israelis see as determining the country's future, through the stories of Israelis returning from abroad to cast their votes.

Europe: historical importance, and doubts about change

The British newspaper The Guardian chose an unusually strong headline: “The most important elections in Israel’s history.”

Euronews focused on the personal dispute surrounding Netanyahu. Elon Levy, a former government spokesman, told the channel that the issue of his remaining in office “contaminated, froze, and poisoned Israeli politics for a decade.”

According to him, his upcoming departure may provide an opportunity to reorganize political life. The channel also linked the elections to responsibility for the October attack, the continued rule of Hamas, and the social and economic costs of the war.

In an editorial, the French newspaper Le Monde took a more critical stance on the extent of possible change.

The newspaper estimated that Eisenkot's victory might curb anti-liberal tendencies and reduce his international isolation, but it stressed that his program on the Palestinian issue does not fundamentally conflict with government policy.

She pointed to his opposition to the establishment of a Palestinian state, in addition to his opposition to settler violence and the construction plan in the E1 area.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) described the Israeli elections as "one of the most decisive electoral campaigns in the country's history," stressing that security and democracy are at its heart.

Reporter Tom Bennett described the conflict between Netanyahu's attempt to re-present himself as a "security man", highlighting his military achievements and his ties to Donald Trump, and the opposition's demand for an independent investigation into the failures of the October 7 events and its criticism of the changes he is promoting in the judicial system.

In addition to the issue of Haredi mobilization, the network emphasized that the differences between Netanyahu and Eisenkot over Gaza are not major, and that the two-state solution has almost disappeared from the Israeli political scene.

According to the report, about 70,000 Israelis have returned from abroad to cast their votes, and about half a million will vote for the first time, but the decision may be delayed for weeks or months: opinion polls do not show a majority for either camp, and the reluctance of most Jewish parties to cooperate with Arab parties may lead to a deadlock and additional elections, with Netanyahu remaining head of a caretaker government.

The Times of India newspaper posed the central question in its headline: Can Netanyahu turn security achievements into political victory? The coverage addressed the tension between his responsibility for the events of October 7 and his attempt to present the campaigns against Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran as evidence of his leadership ability.

China's Xinhua News Agency has published a detailed guide to the parties, opinion polls and major areas of contention. The agency stressed that "winning the largest number of seats does not necessarily mean winning the government," and drew attention to the Arab parties and small lists that may determine the outcome of the coalition.

In the Arab world and Iran: war and stalemate

Al Jazeera Arabic titled its coverage “The Israeli Elections: The War on Iran and the Specter of Stalemate.”

It focused on reports on the controversy over the possibility of action against Iran, Trump's support for Netanyahu, and the possibility that the prime minister will remain in office even if his opponents become stronger. The channel also reported that Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz denied any intention to launch an attack before the elections.

Turkey's Anadolu news agency published a comprehensive map of the parties, highlighting the challenge posed by Eisenkot's party to Likud's dominance.

Another report emphasized the importance of voter turnout in Arab society, as both camps struggle to achieve a majority and are reluctant to form a coalition with Arab parties.

Iran's Tasnim News Agency used overtly hostile language, with its headline describing the elections as being held in the "Zionist entity" after "the destruction of Gaza."

In addition to this framework, the agency also addressed the high cost of living, the recruitment of ultra-Orthodox Jews, the repercussions of the election results on the Palestinians, and Israel’s relations with the United States and Europe. Rather, this coverage highlighted the contradiction between the importance of the elections and the ambiguity surrounding the government that will be formed in its aftermath.