For Palestinians watching Israel’s election unfold, the question is not simply whether Benjamin Netanyahu will remain prime minister. It is whether replacing him would make any meaningful difference to the people living under Israeli occupation, bombardment and expanding settlements.
Across Gaza and the occupied West Bank, expectations are strikingly low. While Israelis debate the political future of Netanyahu and his main rival, former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, Palestinians are confronting a different reality: Israeli air strikes continue in Gaza despite a ceasefire announced a year ago, while settler violence and settlement expansion threaten communities across the West Bank.
The possibility of a new Israeli government has therefore offered little reassurance to Palestinians who fear that a change in political leadership may leave the policies governing their lives largely untouched.
Some believe the situation could become even worse.
In Gaza, the Fear Is Not Who Wins, but What Comes Next
For Huda al-Houli, a Palestinian woman displaced from Khan Younis in southern Gaza, the Israeli election raises fears of another period of destruction rather than hopes of political change.
“We fear that the elections will produce something worse, someone even more violent and bloodthirsty,” she told Agence France-Presse (AFP).
“These are our fears, and they would mean more destruction and devastation for Gaza.”
Her concerns reflect the uncertainty facing Palestinians in a territory already devastated by war.
Despite the ceasefire announced a year ago, Israeli air strikes have continued, leaving residents fearful that the next government could prolong or intensify military operations.
Al-Houli nevertheless expressed hope that voices within Israeli society might emerge to demand an end to the war, regardless of which political leader ultimately takes power.
In the occupied West Bank, the outlook is similarly pessimistic.
Ahmed Awad, a 67-year-old resident of Ramallah, believes Israeli society’s shift towards the political right has become too deeply established for an election to produce meaningful changes in policy towards Palestinians.
“Whatever the election results, and even if the faces change, I do not believe there will be a fundamental or dramatic change in policies concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” Awad told AFP.
For Palestinians who have spent decades living under occupation, the distinction between Israel’s competing political leaders does not necessarily translate into a difference in their treatment.
Netanyahu Is Ahead, but Israel Has No Clear Majority
The election has produced an uncertain parliamentary outcome, with neither Netanyahu nor Eisenkot securing the majority needed to form a government.
Preliminary results show Netanyahu’s political bloc winning 53 seats in the 120-member Knesset, compared with 48 seats for the opposition camp led by Eisenkot.
The two Arab electoral lists secured a combined 19 seats.
With 61 seats required to establish a governing majority, neither main bloc can form a government independently on the basis of these results.
The outcome leaves Israel facing complicated coalition negotiations, with several possible scenarios for the formation of its next government.
These are the first Israeli elections since 7 October 2023, taking place against the backdrop of the war in Gaza, continuing military tensions and escalating violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.
For Netanyahu, remaining in office could require renewing his alliance with far-right parties, pursuing a broader coalition or navigating a political deadlock that prevents the establishment of a stable government.
For Palestinians, each possibility carries different risks, but none guarantees a meaningful departure from the policies of recent years.
Ben-Gvir Wants the Defence Ministry and the Expulsion of Gazans
One of the most alarming scenarios for Palestinians involves Netanyahu renewing his alliance with Israel’s far-right political leadership.
National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has already declared that, should the existing alliance be renewed, he would demand control of the Defence Ministry.
Among his stated priorities is the expulsion of Gaza’s Palestinian population.
Such demands have reinforced concerns that another Netanyahu-led government could pursue even more extreme policies towards Palestinians, particularly in Gaza.
Abdullah Abu Rahma, 54, believes Netanyahu’s continued leadership would be harmful to Palestinians because it would mean the continuation of his existing approach, regardless of the composition of his next coalition.
Yet Abu Rahma has not entirely abandoned hope that conditions could improve.
Despite his concerns about Netanyahu, he believes that whatever the election produces, the outcome could prove better than what Palestinians have endured in recent years.
His cautious optimism contrasts with the concerns of other Palestinians who see little reason to expect meaningful change from either political camp.
Could Eisenkot Offer Palestinians Anything Different?
A government led by Eisenkot could produce some changes, particularly in areas where Netanyahu’s far-right allies have exercised considerable influence.
Beth Oppenheim, a researcher at the European Council on Foreign Relations, believes an Eisenkot government could reduce the political influence of far-right parties that support Israeli settlement expansion.
Such a government might also ease pressure on the Palestinian Authority and adopt a more flexible approach to humanitarian assistance and the ceasefire in Gaza.
These potential changes could have practical consequences for Palestinians, particularly in relation to humanitarian access and the activities of Israeli settlers.
However, Oppenheim cautioned against interpreting an Eisenkot victory as the beginning of a fundamental transformation in Israeli policy.
She does not expect a new government to produce a dramatic shift towards recognising Palestinian statehood or reviving the peace process.
Both issues have largely disappeared from Israel’s domestic political debate since the attacks of 7 October 2023.
In other words, removing Netanyahu could weaken the influence of some of Israel’s most extreme political figures without necessarily changing the broader political position towards Palestinian rights and statehood.
Oppenheim also warned that Netanyahu’s continued leadership, supported by far-right allies, would likely mean the continuation of settlement expansion and the lack of accountability for settlers involved in violence against Palestinians.
Nevertheless, she stressed that the prospects for major policy changes would remain limited even under an alternative government.
Eisenkot’s Role in the Gaza War Complicates Hopes for Change
For Palestinian political analyst Yousef Munayyer, the differences between Netanyahu and Eisenkot should not obscure the military and political record of the opposition leader himself.
Munayyer, director of the Palestine-Israel Programme at the Arab Center Washington, argues that Netanyahu’s electoral defeat would not necessarily improve conditions for Palestinians.
In fact, he believes the situation could deteriorate in the short term.
One of the reasons is Eisenkot’s own involvement in Israel’s military campaign against Gaza.
Although he now leads the opposition, Eisenkot previously served as a member of Israel’s war cabinet during the assault on the Palestinian territory.
That record, Munayyer argues, limits expectations that an Eisenkot-led government would fundamentally change Israel’s military or political approach towards Palestinians.
The issue is not simply whether Eisenkot would pursue a different political strategy from Netanyahu, but how much that strategy would depart from policies he previously helped oversee.
Munayyer also identifies another potential danger: a new government could face intense political pressure from Israel’s right-wing opposition.
Far-right politicians seeking to expose the weaknesses of a new administration could accuse it of being insufficiently tough towards Palestinians.
In response, an Eisenkot government might adopt more hardline positions to demonstrate its political strength and avoid appearing vulnerable to its opponents.
This raises the possibility that even an electoral defeat for Netanyahu could produce greater pressure on Palestinians rather than immediate relief.
Why Settler Violence Could Escalate Even if the Far Right Loses
The danger of further escalation is not confined to Gaza.
Across the occupied West Bank, Palestinian communities have faced increasing attacks by Israeli settlers, accompanied by concerns about settlement expansion and the lack of accountability for violence.
Munayyer warns that these attacks could intensify even if Netanyahu’s far-right allies lose their positions in government.
Rather than retreating following an electoral defeat, extremist settlers could become more confrontational, potentially escalating their activities in defiance of a new administration.
This presents a difficult scenario for Palestinians.
A Netanyahu government backed by the far right could continue policies that facilitate settlement expansion and allow settler violence to go unpunished.
An alternative government, meanwhile, could still face increased settler aggression from groups attempting to challenge its authority.
In either scenario, a change in government would not automatically translate into greater protection for Palestinians living under occupation.
For Palestinians, the Problem Goes Beyond Netanyahu
Back in Gaza, Adnan al-Assar sees little reason to place his hopes in the outcome of an Israeli election.
For him, political disagreements between Netanyahu, Eisenkot and their respective allies do not necessarily represent meaningful differences in their treatment of Palestinians.
Al-Assar believes Israeli politicians across the political spectrum pursue policies directed against the Palestinian people.
His position reflects a broader sense of distrust among Palestinians who have watched successive Israeli governments come and go without witnessing fundamental improvements in their political rights or living conditions.
The election may determine whether Netanyahu retains power, whether Eisenkot forms an alternative coalition or whether Israel enters another period of political deadlock.
Yet for Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, the immediate concerns remain Israeli military operations, settlement expansion, settler violence and the absence of a credible political process addressing their future.
The outcome could alter the balance of power inside Israel. Whether it changes the reality Palestinians face is an entirely different question.
