Final remarks on the eve of the Israeli elections

Writer: Dr. Jamal Zahalka

There are only a few days left until the Israeli elections are held, and it is widely expected that they will not resolve the power struggle between the Netanyahu camp and the Change camp, which is currently headed by Gadi Eisenkot. The percentage of hesitant voters between the two camps is constantly shrinking, and competition for votes is taking place in each camp separately, as the two major parties, Likud led by Netanyahu and the Yashar Party led by Eisenkot, are trying to attract more voters from their allies as part of the competition over who will be the largest party after the elections, which may have an impact on obtaining, after the elections, a mandate to form the government from the President of Israel. The largest party's campaign sparked great anger among the other parties, which launched a counterattack aimed at preventing the leakage of votes at the last minute.

The current Israeli political map took shape after the coup campaigns against the judiciary and the protests against it, and the power of Likud at that time fell by a third. The initial reaction after October 7 led to a further decline in Likud's power. But with the passage of time and due to the strong shift to the right in Israeli society and the permanent state of war, Netanyahu's camp returned to the strength it had before the war and after the coup campaign against the judiciary, to an average of 52 seats in the Knesset (compared to 68 currently), and he will not be able to form a government, but the change camp also does not have enough polls to win a parliamentary majority.

What is interesting is that the effect of the coup on eliminating political balances in Israel exceeds the effect of October 7 and the wars that followed it. This appears to be due to the fact that the issue of the courts and judiciary affects the identity of the state and the identity of the middle class specifically, while the issue of security and war is, in essence, a matter of consensus, not a matter of disagreement, and what Yair Lapid said this week about Israel’s security goals is no different from what Netanyahu is repeating: eliminating Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian regime. The difference between Netanyahu and his opponents regarding the war is about mismanagement and political exploitation and not about the crimes and goals of the war. On the other hand, the party alignments on the eve of the upcoming elections do not reflect the sweeping shift toward right-wing extremism in Israeli society, due to the division around Netanyahu the person, which prevents the emergence of “natural” alliances between the right-wing forces in the opposition and the coalition.

Eisenkot

This week, there was a huge uproar over what Yanon Magal, an Israeli journalist close to Netanyahu and one of his most important mouthpieces, said when he insulted Eisenkot, saying: “He is a monkey... Behind him are Ashkenazi elites who manage and direct him. He is a monkey, and his name is Mizrahi Moroccan.” The statement was intended to make Eisenkot appear as a weak person subject to the influence of the Ashkenazi elites, but the result was the opposite, as Magal and his successor, Netanyahu, were accused of fueling racist tendencies against Eastern Jews, which forced even Netanyahu to say that the statement was “inappropriate.”

Eisenkot's electoral campaign is based on his personal characteristics, which have an impact on the hearts of Israelis: First, he is an Easterner, and for the first time there is a competitor of Eastern-Moroccan origins who has a chance of winning, and attempts are being made to convince Eastern Jews, the overwhelming majority of whom support Netanyahu, to move to vote for a candidate who resembles them; Secondly, he is a general and a soldier who served as chief of staff, and had a central role in formulating the Israeli security strategy in the last decade, and the Eisenkot campaign is trying to market him as no less than Netanyahu in security matters. Third, he made a personal sacrifice, as his son was killed in the war on Gaza, and two of his nephews were also killed, and this is presented in exchange for Netanyahu, who does not sacrifice anything and whose children do not participate in the army; Fourth, Eisenkot's election campaign presents its candidate as a humble and upright person, not looking for wealth and personal interests, as opposed to Netanyahu, who is accused of corruption, extravagance, and accumulating wealth that no one knows where he got it from.

Eisenkot was able to outperform Netanyahu on the question of who is better as prime minister, and he received an average of 47% in the polls, compared to 37% for the prime minister.Currently, this is a huge and unprecedented difference in terms of a candidate outperforming a prime minister. But the biggest question is: Can Eisenkot exploit this popularity to break the tie on election day? This does not seem possible, because his election campaign was calm, disciplined, and even boring, and the goal was a slow accumulation of power, without making mistakes, and this approach does not produce electoral coups at the last minute.

Netanyahu

Netanyahu himself runs the election campaign, and almost appears in it alone, believing that the rest of the candidates are alienating the votes of the undecided. In his campaign, he focuses on the security agenda and the continuation of wars, and that the upcoming military confrontations require an experienced leader like him, and not someone with little political experience like Eisenkot. Netanyahu appears in recorded tapes speaking from Israeli Air Force bases, and from field meetings with soldiers to emphasize security, then security, then security, believing that it is his trump card. Netanyahu faces two problems that may weaken him in the elections. The first is a relatively low voter turnout in the electoral bases of his party and camp, and the second is the possibility of losing hundreds of thousands of votes due to right-wing lists not crossing the electoral threshold. There are two parties on the brink: “Amcha Yisrael” led by Ofer Winter and the “Reserves” party headed by Yoaz Hendel and Yeron Zelekha, which exposes Netanyahu’s camp to the risk of losing at least five seats and losing any possibility of forming a government. However, it must be noted that Netanyahu was able in the past to avoid losing the elections, at the last minute, by taking unexpected steps that were not taken into account, and although this is very difficult this time, it is not impossible.

Trump

Trump's support for Netanyahu did not affect public opinion polls, and this is due to everyone knowing his volatile personality, and because he no longer enjoys the popularity he enjoyed when launching the joint war on Iran, especially since the majority of Israelis believe that he ended the war on Iran and Lebanon "prematurely." A number of analysts said that even if Trump's statement had some effect, it would fade away until Election Day. Trump has supported Netanyahu on previous occasions by offering significant electoral “gifts,” including recognizing the annexation of the Golan, recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, moving the embassy there, stopping support for UNRWA, granting legitimacy to the settlements, and many others. These gifts contributed to Netanyahu not losing the elections, but it does not seem that Trump’s support will save him this time. Trump has supported candidates in other positions who did not win the elections, including supporting the right-wing Orban in Hungary.

It is clear that the Israeli elections are not an internal Israeli matter, as their results will affect Palestine and the region in one way or another. If the Israeli opposition wins, it will enjoy more international support and legitimacy than the Netanyahu government, which will give it greater power in its attempts to impose Israeli dictates in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, and Iran. But Netanyahu's survival is very dangerous, because his government intends to proceed with annexation and deportation projects. In both cases, wars will not end, even if they take different forms. The goals agreed upon between the two camps mean the continuation of the war. Whoever wants to completely eliminate Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian regime will not achieve this by peaceful means and will resort to violence and more violence, war and destruction.