Israel's Political Crisis 2026: What Happens Next After an Inconclusive Election?
An in-depth international political analysis | 29 October 2026
Israel's latest election has produced a political deadlock, leaving Benjamin Netanyahu and opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot competing for the right to govern. With neither major bloc securing a parliamentary majority and Arab-led parties emerging as potential kingmakers, the country faces difficult coalition negotiations, uncertainty over its next government, and significant questions about the future of Middle East diplomacy.
Introduction: Israel Has Voted, but Who Will Govern?
Israel has entered another period of political uncertainty after its parliamentary election on 27 October 2026 failed to produce a clear winner. Millions of Israelis participated in a closely watched vote that was expected to determine the country's political direction after years of war, security challenges, domestic divisions, and growing international pressure.
Instead, the election has left the country confronting a familiar problem: political parties have won parliamentary seats, but neither major political bloc appears capable of assembling the majority required to govern.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains at the centre of the political struggle. His right-wing and religious allies have emerged ahead of the principal opposition bloc, but their projected parliamentary strength is insufficient to form a majority government.
His principal challenger, Gadi Eisenkot, has positioned himself as an alternative leader capable of restoring public confidence and offering a different political direction. However, his own coalition faces serious obstacles.
According to preliminary results reported on 28–29 October, Netanyahu's bloc was projected to secure approximately 53 seats, while the Eisenkot-led opposition bloc was expected to win 48 seats. Two Arab-led parties were projected to hold a combined 19 seats.
Israel's parliament, the Knesset, contains 120 members. A governing majority normally requires the support of at least 61 lawmakers.
These figures reveal the central political problem: neither Netanyahu nor Eisenkot has an independent parliamentary majority.
The election has therefore shifted from a competition for votes to a competition for political alliances.
Who will compromise? Which parties might reconsider their positions? Could Israel form a national unity government? And what happens if negotiations fail?
The answers will shape not only Israel's domestic politics but also its relations with the United States, the Palestinians, neighbouring Arab countries, Iran, and the wider international community.
Important election update: As of the latest reports available on 29 October 2026, the results remain preliminary. Additional ballots are being counted, and official final results are expected by 4 November. The figures discussed in this article should not be treated as the final certified outcome. Reuters
1. Israel Election Results 2026: What Do the Numbers Reveal?
The October 2026 election has produced an unusually complicated parliamentary situation.
Although Netanyahu's Likud party remains the largest individual party, its position does not automatically guarantee that Netanyahu will lead the next government.
Israel's electoral system distributes parliamentary seats among parties according to their share of the national vote. As a result, several parties usually need to cooperate to establish a governing majority.
Preliminary parliamentary projections
| Political bloc | Projected seats | Position |
|---|---|---|
| Netanyahu-led right-wing and religious bloc | 53 | Largest bloc, short of majority |
| Eisenkot-led opposition bloc | 48 | Requires additional parliamentary support |
| Arab-led parties | 19 | Potentially decisive |
| Total | 120 | 61 seats required for a majority |
These projections, reported after nearly 90% of ballots had been counted, demonstrate how closely divided Israel's political landscape has become.
Netanyahu's bloc is approximately eight seats short of the required majority.
Eisenkot's bloc is approximately thirteen seats short.
The combined representation of the Arab-led parties could therefore determine whether a new government becomes possible.
However, parliamentary arithmetic is only part of the problem.
Political parties may refuse to cooperate even when doing so would produce a numerical majority. Ideological differences, leadership disputes, security policies, and commitments made during election campaigns can make otherwise possible coalitions politically unacceptable.
The preliminary results also represent a significant setback for Netanyahu's existing coalition, which had held a considerably larger parliamentary majority.
At the same time, they do not represent a decisive victory for the opposition.
The result is a divided parliament in which several different governing arrangements remain mathematically possible but politically difficult. The Times of Israel
Why did the election produce such a complicated result?
Israel's political divisions extend beyond traditional disagreements between left-wing and right-wing parties.
Voters disagree over several fundamental questions:
- Who should lead Israel after the security failures surrounding the attacks of 7 October 2023?
- How should Israel manage its long-term security?
- What responsibilities should ultra-Orthodox communities have regarding military service?
- How should the government approach Palestinian political rights and the future of Gaza?
- What role should religious institutions play in public life?
- How should Israel balance judicial independence, executive authority, and parliamentary power?
- Should Netanyahu remain prime minister after years of political controversy?
These disagreements have created overlapping political divisions that cannot easily be resolved through a simple majority.
A voter may support a strong military response to security threats while opposing Netanyahu's leadership.
Another may support Netanyahu's foreign policy but disagree with his coalition partners on domestic issues.
Others may prioritise economic stability, democratic institutions, or greater political representation.
Consequently, the election has produced a fragmented parliament rather than a decisive national mandate for one political programme.
2. Benjamin Netanyahu's Political Position: A Victory, a Setback, or a Survival Opportunity?
Benjamin Netanyahu remains one of the most influential and controversial figures in Israeli politics.
His political career has been defined by his emphasis on national security, strategic relations with the United States, opposition to Iran's regional influence, and efforts to maintain support among conservative and religious voters.
The October election has placed him in a complicated position.
On one hand, Likud has emerged as the largest individual party, and Netanyahu's broader political bloc leads the opposition in projected seats.
On the other hand, his allies have lost their parliamentary majority.
Why Netanyahu remains politically powerful
Several factors continue to support Netanyahu's political influence.
First, his party remains a major electoral force.
Despite criticism of his leadership, Likud retains a substantial base of loyal voters.
For many supporters, Netanyahu represents experience, international recognition, and a strong approach to national security.
Second, he has established relationships with religious and nationalist parties.
These partnerships have helped him form governments in the past.
Third, he remains prime minister during the transition.
An inconclusive election does not immediately remove the sitting prime minister from office.
Netanyahu can continue leading a caretaker administration while the process of forming a new government proceeds.
Fourth, opposition parties are divided.
Although several parties oppose Netanyahu's continued leadership, they disagree over how to replace him and what policies a new government should adopt.
This division could work in his favour.
Netanyahu's biggest challenge: Finding eight more seats
With his bloc projected to hold 53 seats, Netanyahu needs additional parliamentary support to establish a majority.
The challenge is not merely finding lawmakers willing to support particular policies.
He must persuade political parties or individual lawmakers to participate in, or provide sufficient support for, a government under his leadership.
Possible approaches include attracting support from parties outside his existing bloc, negotiating a broader coalition, or exploring a national unity arrangement.
However, each option carries political costs.
Opposition parties have campaigned against his continued leadership, while his existing partners may oppose compromises necessary to attract additional allies.
The influence of Netanyahu's right-wing partners
Two particularly important figures are Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.
Their parties represent influential sections of Israel's nationalist right.
Their positions on Palestinian territories, security policy, and the country's political future may complicate attempts to form a broader coalition.
On 29 October, Israeli reporting indicated that Netanyahu had reaffirmed his commitment to maintaining unity with his existing right-wing partners.
That approach could preserve his political base but make negotiations with more moderate opposition parties difficult. The Times of Israel
Can Netanyahu remain prime minister without winning a majority?
Yes, at least temporarily.
Israel's outgoing government can continue functioning in a caretaker capacity while coalition negotiations take place.
This means Netanyahu could remain in office even if he cannot immediately assemble a new parliamentary majority.
However, caretaker status is not equivalent to receiving a fresh mandate to govern.
The administration continues to exercise governmental responsibilities, subject to legal and political constraints associated with the transitional period.
If negotiations become prolonged, Netanyahu could remain caretaker prime minister for weeks or potentially months.
That possibility makes the coalition-building process especially important.
3. Gadi Eisenkot: Can the Opposition Leader End Netanyahu's Political Dominance?
Gadi Eisenkot has emerged as Netanyahu's most significant political challenger in the October 2026 election.
Unlike politicians whose careers have developed primarily through party organisations, Eisenkot entered national politics after a distinguished military career.
He previously served as chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, giving him considerable experience in military strategy and national security.
His military background has become an important part of his political identity.
In a country where security policy plays a central role in elections, a former military chief can appeal to voters who want strong defence policies but are dissatisfied with the existing political leadership.
Eisenkot's political appeal
Eisenkot has attempted to present himself as a leader capable of combining national security experience with more responsible governance.
His campaign has emphasised political change, institutional accountability, and the need to restore public confidence.
His challenge to Netanyahu is not necessarily based on a fundamentally different assessment of every regional security threat.
Instead, important differences concern leadership, decision-making, democratic institutions, and the management of national security.
This distinction is crucial.
An Eisenkot government would not automatically abandon Israel's existing military priorities or adopt dramatically different positions on every Palestinian or regional issue.
His political approach remains strongly influenced by his military background.
However, his supporters hope that a change in leadership could improve government accountability and reduce domestic political confrontation.
The personal impact of the Gaza war
Eisenkot's political position has also been shaped by personal tragedy.
He lost his son and two nephews during the Gaza war.
These losses have given his public statements about military responsibility and national leadership particular significance.
Eisenkot joined Netanyahu's emergency war cabinet after the October 2023 Hamas-led attacks but later left the government amid disagreements over its leadership and strategy.
His experience allows him to criticise Netanyahu from a position of substantial national security knowledge rather than from an explicitly anti-military perspective. Investing.com
Why Eisenkot cannot easily form a government
The central problem facing Eisenkot is the composition of his prospective coalition.
His opposition bloc includes parties with different ideological traditions and priorities.
Some are relatively centrist.
Others are more conservative on security and national identity.
Still others place greater emphasis on democratic institutions, civil rights, and political reform.
Although these parties may agree that Netanyahu should leave office, agreement on that objective does not automatically translate into agreement on a governing programme.
The situation becomes even more complicated when the role of Arab-led parties is considered.
Without their support, Eisenkot's bloc appears unlikely to reach the parliamentary majority required to govern.
Yet several of his potential coalition partners have expressed opposition to relying on Arab-led parties.
This creates a difficult political choice.
Eisenkot could attempt to preserve unity among his existing partners by avoiding cooperation with Arab parties.
Alternatively, he could explore an agreement that would give him a realistic parliamentary majority but risk alienating important members of his opposition alliance.
Neither option guarantees success.
Could Eisenkot become prime minister despite winning fewer seats?
Yes.
Under Israel's parliamentary system, the leader of the largest party does not automatically become prime minister.
The decisive question is which politician can form a government capable of securing parliamentary confidence.
If Eisenkot can assemble sufficient support, he could become prime minister even though his individual party or political bloc finishes behind Netanyahu's.
However, the legal possibility of forming such a government should not be confused with its political feasibility.
He would need to negotiate agreements among parties that disagree on significant domestic and foreign policy questions.
His greatest challenge may therefore begin after the election rather than end with it.
4. The Unexpected Influence of Arab Parties: Israel's Potential Political Kingmakers
One of the most consequential developments in the 2026 Israeli election is the increased parliamentary representation of Arab-led political parties.
Preliminary results suggest that the Joint List and Ra'am could together secure approximately 19 seats.
That would represent a historic increase in their combined parliamentary strength.
The result is particularly significant because Arab citizens constitute roughly one-fifth of Israel's population.
Their political participation has long been influenced by debates over equality, discrimination, national identity, security policy, and the relationship between Israel and the Palestinians.
Why the Arab vote matters
The parliamentary numbers illustrate the importance of Arab-led parties.
Eisenkot's bloc is projected to hold 48 seats.
If all 19 Arab-party lawmakers supported a government led by Eisenkot, the combined total would be 67 seats.
That would exceed the 61-seat majority requirement.
However, this calculation assumes that every participating party and lawmaker would support the arrangement.
In reality, several political obstacles remain.
Some Jewish-led opposition parties oppose coalition arrangements involving Arab-led parties.
Meanwhile, the Arab parties themselves have different positions on whether they should join a government, support it from outside, or remain in opposition.
Ra'am and Mansour Abbas
Ra'am, led by Mansour Abbas, has previously demonstrated a willingness to participate in coalition politics.
The party joined the coalition formed by Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid in 2021.
That experience established an important precedent for cooperation between an Arab-led party and Jewish-led political parties.
Ra'am's political priorities have included issues affecting Arab communities, such as public safety, infrastructure, economic development, and local government services.
However, participating in a government also requires difficult compromises.
Supporters may expect improvements in everyday living conditions, while critics may question cooperation with governments whose security or Palestinian policies they oppose.
The Joint List's position
The Joint List represents another important political force.
Its leadership has expressed a desire to prevent Netanyahu and his allies from remaining in power.
However, opposition to Netanyahu does not necessarily imply support for all policies proposed by Eisenkot.
The Joint List has criticised Israeli military operations and policies affecting Palestinians.
These disagreements could make formal participation in an Eisenkot government difficult.
A party may nevertheless consider supporting particular parliamentary measures or helping prevent the formation of a government it strongly opposes.
According to Reuters reporting on 28 October, Joint List leader Yousef Jabareen indicated that his party wanted to help remove Netanyahu's government but did not envisage joining an Eisenkot administration because of fundamental policy disagreements. Reuters
A deeper question about political representation
The election raises a broader question about Israeli democracy.
If Arab citizens elect representatives in substantial numbers, to what extent should those representatives be considered legitimate partners in national government?
Some Israeli political leaders argue that coalition cooperation requires agreement on the country's Jewish national character and fundamental security principles.
Critics argue that excluding Arab-led parties from governing arrangements weakens political equality and limits the influence of a significant section of the electorate.
The debate therefore extends beyond coalition arithmetic.
It concerns political inclusion, national identity, and the practical meaning of equal democratic participation.
The election has increased the parliamentary influence of Arab-led parties, but whether that influence translates into governmental power remains uncertain.
5. How Israel's Political System Works: Why Winning an Election Does Not Guarantee Power
To understand Israel's current political crisis, it is necessary to understand its parliamentary system.
Unlike countries that directly elect a president with executive authority, Israel uses a parliamentary system in which the government depends on support in the Knesset.
The prime minister is not chosen directly by voters in the general election.
Instead, voters elect political parties, which receive seats in parliament.
The process of forming a government begins after the election.
Proportional representation
Israel uses a nationwide proportional representation system.
The entire country functions as one electoral constituency.
Political parties present lists of candidates, and voters select a party list rather than an individual constituency representative.
Parties must receive at least 3.25% of the national vote to qualify for parliamentary representation.
The 120 Knesset seats are then distributed among qualifying parties according to the electoral rules.
This system allows multiple political perspectives to gain representation.
However, it also makes single-party majority governments uncommon.
Consequently, coalition governments are a central feature of Israeli politics.
The role of President Isaac Herzog
Once official results are available, President Isaac Herzog consults representatives of the parties elected to parliament.
The president then assigns a member of the Knesset the responsibility of attempting to form a government.
Importantly, the president is not legally required to select the leader of the largest party.
The key consideration is which candidate appears most capable of assembling a viable government.
This means the process involves both constitutional procedures and political judgment.
How long does a candidate have to form a government?
The initial candidate generally receives 28 days to form a coalition.
The president may grant an extension of up to 14 additional days.
If that candidate fails, the president may assign the task to another lawmaker, who receives 28 days without an extension.
If these efforts fail, the parliamentary process provides a further opportunity for lawmakers to nominate another candidate.
At that stage, at least 61 members of the Knesset must support the request.
The nominated candidate then receives 14 days to form a government.
If the constitutional process is exhausted without success, another election follows.
These procedures are explained by the Israel Democracy Institute and the official Israeli presidency. Israeli Democracy Institute
Why coalition agreements are complicated
Coalition negotiations involve more than deciding who becomes prime minister.
Political parties negotiate ministerial positions, government priorities, legislation, public spending, and major policy commitments.
A potential coalition agreement may involve disagreements over:
National security: How should Israel approach Gaza, Lebanon, Iran, and other regional challenges?
Military service: Should ultra-Orthodox citizens face broader military-service obligations?
Religion and state: What influence should religious authorities have over public policy?
Judicial institutions: How should power be distributed among the government, parliament, and judiciary?
Economic policy: How should government resources be allocated?
Palestinian policy: What approach should the government take toward Gaza, the West Bank, settlements, and Palestinian political aspirations?
A party may agree with another on security while disagreeing strongly on religion or economic policy.
This makes negotiations particularly difficult when a coalition depends on parties with very different political identities.
6. Why Forming Israel's Next Government Could Prove Extremely Difficult
Israel's political deadlock is not simply the result of a close election.
It reflects several deeper disagreements that make coalition-building unusually challenging.
Political divisions over Netanyahu
The first obstacle is Netanyahu himself.
Some political parties strongly oppose his continued leadership.
Others regard him as essential to maintaining their preferred security and domestic policies.
For anti-Netanyahu parties, joining a government led by him could undermine their central campaign message.
For Netanyahu's existing allies, replacing him with another leader might threaten their influence.
The result is a political environment in which personal leadership questions have become inseparable from policy disagreements.
Disagreements over Arab-party participation
The second obstacle concerns cooperation with Arab-led parties.
Their projected parliamentary strength makes them potentially decisive.
However, several Jewish-led political parties remain unwilling to rely on their support.
This creates a situation in which a numerical majority may exist but cannot easily become a governing coalition.
The ultra-Orthodox military-service debate
Another major issue concerns military service.
Military service is a central institution in Israeli society, although obligations and exemptions differ among population groups.
Exemptions for many ultra-Orthodox religious students have become increasingly controversial.
Critics argue that military obligations should be distributed more equally, particularly after years of intensive military operations.
Ultra-Orthodox parties, meanwhile, seek to protect religious study arrangements and the interests of their communities.
Any coalition involving both secular parties demanding broader conscription and ultra-Orthodox parties opposing it could face serious internal tensions.
Differences over the judiciary
Israel has experienced significant controversy over proposals affecting the judiciary and the balance of institutional power.
Supporters of changes have argued that elected representatives should have greater authority over important public decisions.
Opponents have warned that weakening judicial oversight could undermine democratic safeguards.
A future coalition would need to determine whether to pursue further institutional changes, reverse previous measures, or seek a compromise.
The challenge of political trust
Coalition agreements depend on more than written commitments.
Parties must believe that their partners will honour agreements after entering government.
Years of political confrontation have weakened trust between several major political figures.
Even if a coalition can be assembled, maintaining it may prove difficult.
A government that depends on a very narrow majority could become vulnerable whenever one partner threatens to withdraw support.
This raises the possibility that Israel could form a government but still experience continued political instability.
7. What Happens to Israel While Coalition Negotiations Continue?
A political deadlock does not mean that Israel suddenly stops functioning.
Government ministries, security institutions, public services, and administrative bodies continue operating.
The outgoing administration remains responsible for managing state affairs.
However, the political uncertainty can affect major decisions.
Netanyahu as caretaker prime minister
Netanyahu is expected to remain caretaker prime minister while the government-formation process continues.
His administration would retain responsibility for national security, foreign relations, and other essential government functions.
Nevertheless, caretaker governments operate under legal principles that may restrict certain appointments and major discretionary decisions, depending on their urgency and circumstances.
They are not entirely powerless, especially when immediate security decisions are required.
Can Israel conduct military operations during a political deadlock?
Yes.
The absence of a newly formed coalition does not automatically prevent Israel from responding to security threats.
Military and security institutions continue functioning.
However, politically sensitive decisions may attract additional scrutiny.
Opposition leaders could question whether major security initiatives are justified by national interests or influenced by domestic political considerations.
This makes transparency and institutional accountability particularly important.
Economic consequences of uncertainty
Prolonged political instability can also complicate economic planning.
Businesses may become concerned about delays in legislation, budget decisions, and regulatory reforms.
Investors may monitor political developments for signs of policy continuity or change.
Government spending priorities could become subjects of prolonged negotiations.
However, an inconclusive election does not automatically produce an economic crisis.
The consequences depend on how long the deadlock lasts, how government institutions function during the transition, and whether wider regional conditions deteriorate.
8. The Impact on Middle East Diplomacy
Israel's political uncertainty has implications beyond its borders.
The country plays a central role in regional security, diplomacy, and international relations.
Its next government will inherit difficult questions involving Palestinians, neighbouring Arab states, Iran, and the United States.
Different coalition outcomes could affect diplomatic priorities, negotiating styles, and the willingness to make concessions.
However, changes in leadership do not necessarily produce fundamental changes in foreign policy.
Relations with the United States
The United States remains Israel's most important strategic partner.
The relationship includes military cooperation, intelligence sharing, diplomatic engagement, and substantial security assistance.
President Donald Trump's administration has maintained close involvement in Middle Eastern security affairs.
Netanyahu has emphasised his relationship with Trump and presented cooperation with Washington as central to Israel's strategic position.
An Eisenkot-led government would also be expected to prioritise relations with the United States.
However, differences could emerge in diplomatic language, coalition management, and approaches to regional negotiations.
Washington would have to consider whether a prolonged caretaker administration or a new coalition offered the more predictable partner for regional diplomacy.
The future of Gaza
Gaza remains one of the most difficult issues facing Israeli policymakers.
The consequences of the war that followed the October 2023 attacks have included extensive destruction, large-scale displacement, and severe humanitarian suffering.
Questions surrounding reconstruction, humanitarian access, governance, security arrangements, and Palestinian political representation remain central to international diplomacy.
A new Israeli government would face pressure to explain its long-term approach.
Would it support internationally negotiated governance arrangements?
How would it address the security concerns that Israeli leaders continue to emphasise?
What role would Palestinian institutions play?
How would humanitarian reconstruction proceed?
The answers would depend on the composition of the government and the broader diplomatic environment.
Could an Eisenkot government change Gaza policy?
Potentially, but the extent of change should not be exaggerated.
Eisenkot has criticised aspects of Netanyahu's leadership and decision-making.
However, he also maintains a strong security-oriented position.
His approach could differ in operational priorities, diplomatic engagement, and institutional management without representing a complete reversal of Israeli security objectives.
Regional analysts have suggested that an opposition-led government might offer greater scope for diplomatic adjustments while retaining many of Israel's established security positions. Carnegie Endowment
Relations with Egypt and Jordan
Egypt and Jordan maintain peace treaties with Israel.
Both countries have important interests in regional stability.
Egypt has played a significant role in diplomacy concerning Gaza.
Jordan remains closely affected by developments involving Palestinians and the West Bank.
Political uncertainty in Israel could complicate diplomatic planning.
A new government might create opportunities for renewed engagement, but substantial disagreements would remain.
The policies adopted toward Gaza, the West Bank, and Palestinian communities would be particularly important in shaping relations.
9. Israel, Iran and the Risk of Regional Escalation
Iran remains one of Israel's most significant strategic concerns.
The rivalry involves nuclear policy, military capabilities, regional alliances, intelligence operations, and competition for influence.
The wider confrontation has increased concern about the possibility of renewed military escalation.
Netanyahu's approach to Iran
Netanyahu has consistently portrayed Iran's nuclear ambitions and regional military capabilities as major threats to Israel.
He has supported strong deterrence and close strategic coordination with the United States.
His political message frequently emphasises the need to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Following the election, Netanyahu again highlighted the importance of cooperation with Washington in confronting Iran.
Would Eisenkot adopt a different approach?
Eisenkot also regards Iran as a major security challenge.
Therefore, a change in prime minister would not necessarily eliminate the possibility of military confrontation.
Differences could arise over the timing of operations, diplomatic engagement, the role of international partners, and the balance between military pressure and negotiations.
A government led by Eisenkot might place greater emphasis on institutional consultation or different strategic priorities.
However, predicting a substantially more peaceful regional environment solely because of a leadership change would be premature.
The wider regional implications
Any renewed confrontation involving Israel and Iran could affect several countries.
Potential consequences include disruptions to energy markets, increased military deployments, pressure on shipping routes, and diplomatic tensions involving major international powers.
Gulf countries would have particular reasons to monitor developments closely.
Many have sought to strengthen economic diversification and international investment while managing regional security risks.
A prolonged Israeli political deadlock could complicate regional diplomacy, especially if urgent decisions arise before a new government is formed.
10. Israel's Political Crisis and the Palestinian Question
One of the most consequential issues facing Israel's next government concerns the future of relations between Israelis and Palestinians.
The conflict involves questions of security, sovereignty, territory, national identity, human rights, and international law.
These questions cannot be resolved simply by changing the composition of Israel's governing coalition.
Nevertheless, government policy can influence conditions on the ground and the prospects for diplomatic progress.
The West Bank
The occupied West Bank remains a major source of international concern.
Israeli settlement activity, violence, movement restrictions, Palestinian political rights, and security operations are central issues.
International institutions and many governments regard Israeli settlements in occupied territory as contrary to international law.
Israeli political parties disagree over settlement policy and the future status of the territory.
Some favour expanded Israeli control.
Others support limiting settlement expansion or pursuing alternative diplomatic arrangements.
A future coalition's position on these issues would affect relations with Palestinians and the international community.
The possibility of Palestinian statehood
The question of Palestinian statehood remains fundamental to international diplomacy.
Many governments continue to support a negotiated two-state solution.
However, significant political and practical obstacles remain.
These include disagreements over borders, Jerusalem, settlements, security arrangements, governance, and mutual recognition.
Neither Netanyahu's bloc nor Eisenkot's political position should be assumed to support immediate Palestinian statehood.
Analysts have noted that important security and territorial policy differences between Israel's major political camps are narrower than their domestic political rivalry might suggest. Carnegie Endowment
International pressure
The next Israeli government will also face scrutiny concerning humanitarian conditions, civilian protection, international legal obligations, and regional stability.
European governments, United Nations institutions, and human rights organisations have expressed serious concerns over aspects of Israeli policy.
Israel's leaders have defended many military measures as necessary for national security.
A future government will have to manage these competing pressures.
Diplomatic engagement may become easier or more difficult depending on the coalition's composition and policy choices.
11. Could Israel's Political Crisis Affect Relations With Saudi Arabia and Other Gulf Countries?
Relations between Israel and Gulf countries have become an important part of Middle Eastern diplomacy.
The Abraham Accords established or advanced formal relations between Israel and several Arab countries, including the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.
These agreements demonstrated that regional diplomatic relationships could develop even while the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remained unresolved.
However, subsequent wars and regional tensions have complicated further diplomatic progress.
Saudi Arabia's importance
Saudi Arabia is particularly important because of its political influence, economic position, and role in the Islamic world.
The possibility of formal diplomatic relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia has attracted significant international attention.
However, progress depends on multiple factors.
These include regional security, US-Saudi relations, the Palestinian question, and domestic political considerations.
A new Israeli government could potentially create opportunities for renewed negotiations.
But the election result alone cannot resolve the disagreements that have obstructed normalisation.
The United Arab Emirates and Bahrain
Countries that already maintain formal relations with Israel will continue to evaluate the implications of its political transition.
Economic cooperation, investment, technology, and security remain important areas of interest.
At the same time, public concern about Palestinian suffering and regional military operations can complicate diplomatic relationships.
The next Israeli government may seek to strengthen existing partnerships.
Its success will depend partly on whether regional tensions decrease and whether diplomatic initiatives produce tangible results.
Could political deadlock delay diplomacy?
Yes.
Major diplomatic agreements often require strong political leadership and the ability to secure parliamentary support.
A caretaker government may find it harder to make controversial concessions.
Potential negotiating partners may also hesitate to conclude agreements with an administration whose political future remains uncertain.
However, diplomatic communication does not stop during political transitions.
Existing agreements and institutional relationships continue.
The main uncertainty concerns the ability to launch or complete major new initiatives.
12. Five Possible Scenarios for Israel's Next Government
The election has created several possible political outcomes.
None should be treated as certain.
The eventual result will depend on the final seat distribution, party negotiations, presidential consultations, and decisions made by individual political leaders.
Scenario One: Netanyahu Forms Another Right-Wing Government
Netanyahu could attempt to attract additional support from outside his existing bloc.
With approximately 53 projected seats, he would need at least eight more lawmakers to reach 61.
This could involve persuading an opposition party or individual lawmakers to support his leadership.
Such negotiations might require substantial policy concessions or changes to ministerial arrangements.
Potential advantages:
A government led by Netanyahu could provide continuity in security policy and established international relationships.
His existing coalition partners already have experience working together.
Potential obstacles:
Opposition leaders have made strong commitments against serving under Netanyahu.
His existing partners may resist compromises necessary to broaden the coalition.
Even if a majority is achieved, it could prove fragile.
Assessment: Mathematically possible, but politically difficult.
Scenario Two: Eisenkot Forms a Government With Arab-Party Support
Eisenkot could attempt to assemble a coalition supported by Arab-led parties.
The projected numbers indicate that such an arrangement could command a parliamentary majority.
However, it would require major political compromises.
Some opposition parties have rejected cooperation with Arab-led parties.
The Arab parties themselves may disagree over whether to join the government or support it externally.
Potential advantages:
Such an arrangement could end Netanyahu's premiership and establish a new political direction.
It might also expand the role of Arab citizens' elected representatives in national decision-making.
Potential obstacles:
Disagreements over Palestinian policy, national identity, and security could threaten coalition stability.
Some parties might refuse to participate.
Assessment: Numerically plausible, but dependent on substantial political concessions.
Scenario Three: A National Unity Government
Another possibility is a broad coalition involving major parties from competing political blocs.
A national unity government could provide a larger parliamentary majority and potentially reduce the immediate risk of another election.
It might focus on national security, economic stability, institutional reforms, and urgent domestic challenges.
However, the leadership question would be extremely difficult.
Would Netanyahu remain prime minister?
Would Eisenkot accept a shared leadership arrangement?
Could the parties agree on a rotation system?
Would Netanyahu's existing partners remain involved?
These questions could prevent an agreement.
Assessment: A possible route out of deadlock, but major personal and ideological obstacles remain.
Scenario Four: A Minority Government Supported From Outside
A minority government is another theoretical possibility.
Under such an arrangement, some parties could remain outside the cabinet while providing sufficient parliamentary support for the government to survive.
For example, Arab-led parties might support certain confidence-related votes without formally joining an Eisenkot coalition.
However, such an arrangement would require careful negotiation.
It could become unstable if supporting parties withdrew their cooperation.
Budget legislation and controversial security decisions might be particularly difficult.
Assessment: Possible under appropriate parliamentary arrangements, but potentially vulnerable to repeated political crises.
Scenario Five: Another General Election
If no candidate can form a government, Israel could eventually return to the polls.
The country has experienced repeated elections in recent years because of political fragmentation.
Between April 2019 and November 2022, Israel held five national elections.
Another election would therefore not be unprecedented.
However, it could prolong uncertainty and deepen voter frustration.
There would also be no guarantee that a new election would produce a clearer result.
Political parties might campaign on similar issues and return to parliament with another fragmented distribution of seats.
Assessment: A credible possibility if coalition negotiations fail.
13. Could Israel Face Another Election in 2027?
The possibility of another election has become one of the central questions following the October vote.
If coalition negotiations fail completely, the constitutional process could eventually lead to a new election.
Such an outcome would extend the current period of political uncertainty.
Why another election might not solve the problem
Repeated elections do not necessarily produce different political alignments.
Voters may remain divided over the same issues.
Netanyahu could retain substantial support among conservative voters.
Eisenkot could continue attracting voters seeking political change.
Arab-led parties might preserve or increase their parliamentary representation.
Religious parties could continue holding influential positions.
Consequently, another election could reproduce many of the same coalition difficulties.
The economic and political costs
Elections require public resources and administrative preparation.
Repeated campaigns can also intensify political polarisation.
Government planning may become more difficult when ministers and political parties remain focused on electoral competition.
Long-term policy decisions could be delayed.
Public confidence may decline if voters repeatedly participate in elections without seeing the formation of a stable government.
Nevertheless, elections remain a legitimate democratic mechanism for resolving parliamentary deadlock.
The challenge is whether another vote would produce a more workable political outcome.
14. What Does the Election Reveal About Israeli Society?
The October election reveals a country experiencing profound political disagreements.
These divisions involve leadership, security, religion, democratic institutions, and national identity.
They also reflect different experiences of war and its consequences.
Security and accountability
Many Israeli voters consider national security a central political priority.
The attacks of 7 October 2023 and the subsequent war profoundly affected Israeli society.
Questions about government preparedness, military decision-making, intelligence failures, and political responsibility remain important.
Some voters prioritise continuity and experienced leadership.
Others believe that accountability requires political change.
Religion and public life
The relationship between religion and the state continues to influence political competition.
Disagreements over military-service exemptions, education, public funding, and religious authority have created tensions among different sections of society.
These debates can affect coalition negotiations because religious parties often play important parliamentary roles.
Jewish-Arab political relations
The increased representation of Arab-led parties has brought questions of political equality and participation into sharper focus.
The election has demonstrated the potential influence of Arab voters.
However, it has also exposed continuing resistance to cooperation between some Jewish-led and Arab-led political parties.
Whether the new parliament produces greater political inclusion remains an important question.
The future of democratic institutions
Disagreements over judicial independence, executive authority, and institutional accountability are likely to continue.
The composition of the next government could influence the direction of these debates.
A broad coalition might seek compromise.
A narrow ideological coalition might pursue more contested reforms.
Continued political deadlock could delay major institutional changes while leaving underlying disagreements unresolved.
15. What International Leaders and Governments Will Be Watching
Israel's international partners and regional neighbours have strong reasons to monitor the coalition-building process.
The next government's policies could influence military cooperation, diplomatic negotiations, trade relationships, and regional security.
The United States
Washington will be watching the formation of a government capable of making significant security and diplomatic decisions.
The identity of the prime minister matters, but so does the composition of the coalition.
A leader dependent on hardline partners may face different political constraints from one governing through a broad centrist alliance.
European countries
European governments will monitor developments concerning Gaza, the West Bank, humanitarian conditions, and international law.
The next government's approach to settlement policy and regional diplomacy could affect bilateral relations.
Iran
Iranian policymakers will assess whether Israel's political transition changes its military posture or diplomatic strategy.
However, the underlying rivalry between the countries is unlikely to disappear solely because of a change in Israeli leadership.
Arab governments
Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and other regional states will evaluate whether a new government creates opportunities for diplomacy or reinforces existing disagreements.
International organisations
The United Nations and other international institutions will continue focusing on humanitarian conditions, civilian protection, regional security, and compliance with international obligations.
Political uncertainty may complicate negotiations, but it does not eliminate the responsibilities of the Israeli state.
16. The Next Few Weeks: What Happens After the Election?
Several important developments will determine the immediate direction of Israeli politics.
First, the remaining ballots must be counted.
The preliminary projections provide a strong indication of the parliamentary balance, but the final certified results remain important.
Even small changes in the distribution of seats could affect coalition calculations.
Second, the president will consult parliamentary parties.
President Isaac Herzog will assess which candidate has the best chance of forming a government.
Party recommendations and political commitments will influence this process.
Third, coalition negotiations will begin or intensify.
Potential partners will discuss leadership arrangements, ministerial responsibilities, and policy commitments.
Fourth, parties will face pressure to reconsider campaign promises.
Some leaders may have to choose between maintaining their pre-election positions and participating in a viable government.
Fifth, Netanyahu will continue leading the caretaker administration during the transition.
The duration of that arrangement will depend on the success or failure of coalition negotiations.
The coming weeks may therefore be more important than the election night speeches themselves.
17. Frequently Asked Questions About Israel's Political Crisis in 2026
1. Who won Israel's election in October 2026?
As of 29 October, there is no clear governing winner. Netanyahu's bloc leads in preliminary seat projections, but neither it nor Eisenkot's opposition bloc has secured the 61 seats required for a parliamentary majority. Final results are still pending.
2. How many seats does Netanyahu need to form a government?
A governing majority normally requires at least 61 seats in Israel's 120-member Knesset. Netanyahu's bloc is projected to hold approximately 53 seats, leaving it eight seats short of that threshold.
3. Who is Gadi Eisenkot?
Gadi Eisenkot is a former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces and a leading opposition politician. He heads the Yashar party and has emerged as Netanyahu's principal challenger in the 2026 election.
4. Why are Arab parties important in this election?
Arab-led parties are projected to win approximately 19 seats. Their support could help an opposition-led coalition reach a parliamentary majority. However, ideological disagreements and resistance from other parties complicate potential cooperation.
5. Can Netanyahu remain prime minister without a parliamentary majority?
Yes. Netanyahu can continue serving as caretaker prime minister while the constitutional process for forming a new government proceeds. However, caretaker status does not guarantee that he will lead the next fully constituted government.
6. Could Eisenkot become Israel's next prime minister?
Yes. Eisenkot could become prime minister if he successfully assembles a government capable of securing parliamentary confidence. His main challenge is obtaining sufficient support from parties with different political positions.
7. Could Israel hold another election in 2027?
Yes. If the government-formation process fails, another election could be required. However, this outcome is not inevitable, and negotiations may still produce a viable coalition.
8. How could the election affect the Gaza situation?
The next government's policies could influence military strategy, humanitarian arrangements, reconstruction, and diplomatic negotiations. However, a change of prime minister would not automatically resolve the underlying conflict or guarantee a major change in Israeli security policy.
9. Could Israel's political crisis affect relations with Iran?
Political uncertainty may influence decision-making and diplomatic timing. Nevertheless, Israel's strategic concerns about Iran are shared across significant parts of its political spectrum, meaning that a leadership change would not necessarily eliminate tensions.
10. What happens if no political leader can form a government?
Israel's constitutional process provides several opportunities for different lawmakers to attempt to form a coalition. If these efforts fail, the Knesset can be dissolved and another general election held.
Conclusion: Israel's Election Has Ended, but Its Political Battle Is Far From Over
Israel's October 2026 election has demonstrated the limitations of electoral victories in a deeply divided parliamentary system.
Benjamin Netanyahu remains politically influential, but his projected parliamentary support is insufficient to guarantee another government.
Gadi Eisenkot has emerged as a serious alternative, yet his path to power depends on difficult compromises among parties that disagree over fundamental questions.
Meanwhile, Arab-led parties have achieved a potentially historic level of parliamentary representation, placing political inclusion and coalition cooperation at the centre of the national debate.
The outcome will depend on decisions made after the ballots are counted.
Party leaders must determine whether they are willing to compromise, cooperate with former opponents, or risk another election.
The stakes extend beyond the question of who becomes prime minister.
Israel's next government will inherit significant domestic challenges, difficult security decisions, and complex diplomatic relationships across the Middle East.
Its policies could influence relations with the United States, Iran, Palestinians, neighbouring Arab countries, and international institutions.
Yet the election also illustrates a broader democratic reality: winning votes and building a government are not always the same achievement.
A political leader may emerge with the largest party but remain unable to govern.
An opposition alliance may command substantial support but struggle to agree on a common programme.
And smaller parties, sometimes excluded from the centre of political debate, may become essential to the formation of a government.
For Israel, the immediate challenge is to translate a divided electoral result into a functioning administration.
For the wider Middle East, the question is whether the next Israeli government will reinforce existing regional tensions or create opportunities for greater diplomatic stability.
Israel's voters have delivered their verdict. The country's political leaders must now decide what they are prepared to do with it.
