Deeply divided Israel braces for pivotal election

Israel's general election chooses members of the Knesset through a nationwide parliamentary vote. Voters select party lists rather than casting a direct ballot for prime minister. The system matters because no single party usually governs alone, so election results determine which blocs can work together.

After the votes are counted, the president normally asks the politician most likely to form a majority to build a government. That politician negotiates with parties over policies and ministerial posts. If the coalition wins parliamentary confidence, its leader becomes prime minister. The article captures this mechanism by describing Israeli politics as the art of coalition-building.

In this election, Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud and Gadi Eisenkot's Yashar were near the top of the polls. Neither side was certain to command a majority. The result could therefore produce lengthy bargaining, with smaller parties holding the balance and shaping the next government.

Benjamin Netanyahu leads Likud and is campaigning as the candidate who can keep Israel safe. He is Israel's longest-serving prime minister and has made security the centre of his message. Gadi Eisenkot leads the centrist Yashar party and is a relatively new political figure. His calm style contrasts with Netanyahu's more aggressive, media-focused approach.

Eisenkot's background has strengthened his appeal. He is a former military chief of staff, has a working-class Moroccan background, and is known for a low-drama manner. His son was killed during the Gaza War. Supporters describe him as someone who listens and comes from Israel's periphery rather than its wealthy urban elite.

The two figures became central because their parties repeatedly appeared near the top of polls. Netanyahu warns that opponents are soft on security. Eisenkot promises a state inquiry into the 7 October attacks and a more liberal, democratic Israel, sharpening the election's stakes.

Several large or politically important groups could influence this election. About 500,000 first-time voters are due to cast ballots. Another 70,000 Israelis are reportedly flying in from abroad specifically to vote. Their turnout could affect a contest that polls place almost neck-and-neck.

Israel's Arab population is also significant. Arabs make up around one-fifth of the country's population, and many describe themselves as Palestinian citizens of Israel. Netanyahu is warning right-wing voters that Jewish opposition parties could ally with Arab parties to form a majority. That message makes Arab participation part of the wider security and coalition debate.

The article does not provide the total number of eligible voters or turnout forecasts. Still, the figures show why mobilising particular groups matters. First-time voters, overseas voters, and Arab citizens could change party seat totals, coalition arithmetic, and the identity of Israel's next government.

Security is the most immediate dividing line. Netanyahu's slogan is “No Surrender,” and he presents himself as the only leader able to protect Israel. Opponents argue that his government threatens democracy by trying to curb judicial powers. They also criticise his refusal to create a state commission of inquiry into the 7 October attacks.

Other disputes reach into daily life and national identity. Opposition voters want corruption ended and religious extremists removed from government. Eisenkot promises to enforce court rulings requiring ultra-Orthodox Jews to serve in national military service. He also describes the desired Israel as Jewish, democratic, liberal, tolerant, and egalitarian.

These issues overlap rather than stand separately. Security shapes coalition choices, while judicial independence shapes trust in government. Military service raises questions about equal obligations. The election therefore asks not only who should govern, but what kind of state Israel should be after the attacks and years of war.

Israel's parliamentary system rewards a governing bloc, not simply the party that finishes first. A party may win more seats than any rival but still fall short of a majority. It must then persuade other parties to join a coalition and support a government. That is why the article calls Israeli politics the art of coalition-building.

The mechanism is especially important in a close contest. If Likud and Yashar end with similar strength, neither Netanyahu nor Eisenkot can rely on victory alone. Religious, Arab, centrist, or other parties may become essential partners. Their seats can determine which leader has the best chance of forming a government.

This makes the result harder to predict than a simple first-place finish. Coalition partners can demand policy commitments, including positions on security, judicial reform, military service, or an inquiry into 7 October. A narrow result could therefore shift power to smaller parties and prolong negotiations.

The 7 October attacks transformed the election's central argument. Hamas-led gunmen crossed from Gaza, killed almost 1,200 people, and took 251 hostages. The article calls it Israel's worst security failure. Yet three years later, Netanyahu is again presenting himself as the only leader who can keep the country safe.

His campaign uses fear of further danger. He attacks opponents as soft on security and warns that alliances with Arab parties could compromise national safety. Supporters still defend him, with one saying the attack would not have happened if the army had woken Netanyahu in time. That shows how responsibility and protection are being argued together.

Opponents use the same crisis differently. They demand a state commission of inquiry into what happened, while Netanyahu refuses, saying the Supreme Court would be biased. They also promise stronger judicial accountability. The first post-attack election therefore tests both security credibility and demands for explanation.

Proportional representation is a voting system in which parties receive parliamentary seats roughly in proportion to their share of the vote. It allows multiple parties to enter parliament instead of forcing politics into only two large camps. Israel's election operates through party lists, which is why coalition-building is central to the result.

The key mechanism is parliamentary arithmetic. A major party may lead the vote but lack enough seats for a majority. It then negotiates with smaller parties. Religious parties may seek influence over military service or social policy. Arab parties may become relevant to an opposition bloc. Other centrist or ideological parties can also provide the seats needed to cross the governing threshold.

This gives smaller parties leverage beyond their size. They can support one leader rather than another, demand policy concessions, or refuse to join. In the article's close race, that leverage could determine whether Netanyahu or Eisenkot can form a government.