After three disastrous years, Israel needs to rethink itself. A new government would be a start | Dahlia Scheindlin

Israel’s 27 October election is approaching without a clear projected winner. Benjamin Netanyahu appears vulnerable because his polling is poor. The election matters because it could end his leadership and open a new political direction after years of institutional and social strain.

The main alternative is not one unified opposition party. It is a potential coalition of fractious parties. They would need to overcome major differences and agree on enough common policies to form a government. Their public promises so far include good governance and national unity.

That outcome remains uncertain. The opposition may find a way to govern, but the article does not identify a guaranteed coalition or successor. A change of leader alone would not solve Israel’s deeper problems, including weakened democratic institutions, social damage from war, and the unresolved future of Palestinians.

Israel’s opposition parties are presenting two especially concrete reforms. They want a state commission of inquiry into the government’s failures surrounding the 7 October 2023 attacks. They also want to end the exemption from military service enjoyed by most ultra-Orthodox Jewish men.

The inquiry would provide accountability after the attack and the subsequent two-year hostage crisis. Ending the exemption would address what many Israelis see as an unfair system. Some citizens serve and die in wars, while others are systematically excused from service. Other opposition parties use broader promises about good governance and unifying the country.

The article treats these proposals as important but incomplete. Israel also needs stronger social services, democratic renewal, and a serious confrontation with the conditions behind repeated wars. More funding and broader conscription could help the country cope, but would not by themselves create a better future.

The war’s internal burden is measured not only in military operations but also in the lives disrupted at home. Hundreds of thousands of reservists have served for months. Their service has interrupted education, family life, and income across Israeli society.

The human cost is also reflected in injuries. Israel’s ministry of defence says up to 30,000 people have been wounded. The article places this figure alongside the wider social damage caused by long mobilisation and the continuing war.

This burden weakens social solidarity and increases pressure on already strained public systems. Reservists and their families need financial, medical, and psychological support. Yet the government has reduced social-service budgets while increasing defence spending. Without deeper change, stronger services may only help Israel endure another round of seemingly endless wars.

Long military service, reduced social spending, and inadequate mental-health care reinforce one another. Reservists lose time, income, and family stability, while the wider population absorbs the emotional shock of war. The result is a society with less capacity to support people who are already carrying heavy burdens.

The government has shifted budgets toward defence, even as the psychological toll grows. Israel already had too few psychiatrists before the war. Dr Graciela Cors describes the mental-health situation as catastrophic, while outpatient clinics and state-mandated health funds are also struggling.

These pressures damage social solidarity and turn urgent care into damage limitation. Better-funded services could help injured people, families, and reservists. Greater conscription could distribute military obligations more fairly. But without confronting the political and social conditions behind repeated wars, Israel may only become better equipped to cope with the next crisis.

Judicial independence means courts can interpret and apply the law without being controlled by the government or governing majority. It matters because courts can check abuses of power and protect rights when elected officials act improperly. In a democracy, elections do not give a majority unlimited authority.

In 2023, Netanyahu’s government planned to drastically weaken judicial independence. The article describes this as the culmination of attacks on the judiciary by top governing officials. Such a plan could reduce the courts’ ability to review government decisions and protect minorities or democratic institutions.

The article does not describe the mass protests themselves, but the plans’ political significance explains why they triggered intense public opposition. They appeared to many Israelis as an assault on democracy, not merely a technical legal reform. Reversing that damage would require restoring independent checks, not only changing the government’s personnel.

The article presents democracy, education, and the Palestinian question as connected parts of one crisis. Israel historically avoided a constitution and lacks a law explicitly guaranteeing equality for all citizens. In recent years, attacks on democratic institutions have intensified, especially against the judiciary.

Education helps explain why this could happen. Or Kashti says the 2016 civics textbook shifted toward what he calls indoctrination, with greater emphasis on Jewish identity and state power. History exams focus heavily on the Holocaust, Israeli wars, Zionism, and state formation. Human rights, civil liberties, and equality receive little attention.

That narrow framework makes majority rule seem more important than democratic limits and equal citizenship. It also helps explain why Palestinian self-determination disappeared from much of the Israeli agenda. The article argues that democratic renewal therefore requires educational change, not only new laws or political leaders.

A modern liberal democracy is more than elections or majority rule. It normally includes equal citizenship, human rights, civil liberties, independent courts, accountable government, and protections for minorities. These principles limit what a temporary majority can do and give every citizen meaningful legal and political status.

The article identifies several tensions in Israel. The country avoided writing a constitution and has no law explicitly guaranteeing equality to all citizens. Its civics curriculum increasingly emphasizes Jewish identity and state power. History teaching gives little space to wider world history, while human rights and equality receive limited attention.

These principles challenge a system that treats state power or majority will as sufficient. Equal citizenship requires Palestinians within Israel to receive equal status and rights. Human rights and Palestinian self-determination also force attention to Palestinians’ political future, which the article says has largely disappeared from the Israeli agenda. The article therefore calls for foundational democratic change.