Israel Election 2026: Four Scenarios That Could Decide Netanyahu’s Political Future
Israel is preparing for a closely watched general election on October 27, 2026, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu facing a significant challenge from opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot. The election could reshape the country’s political leadership, but the final outcome may depend as much on coalition negotiations as on the number of votes secured by individual parties.
The election is the first since the Hamas-led attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, which triggered a major regional conflict and intensified debate over the government’s security policies. Netanyahu’s critics have questioned his administration’s handling of the security failures surrounding the attack, while his supporters argue that his experience remains essential in a volatile regional environment.
Recent opinion polls suggest a tight contest between Netanyahu’s right-wing and religious allies and a fragmented opposition bloc. Neither side is guaranteed the 61 seats needed for a majority in Israel’s 120-member parliament, known as the Knesset. As a result, smaller parties and negotiations between rival political groups could determine who forms the next government.
Why the Election Matters for Netanyahu
Netanyahu has been one of Israel’s most influential political figures, serving as prime minister for much of the period since 2009. His political future is now being tested by public concerns about national security, military service obligations, the cost of the country’s prolonged conflicts and disagreements over religion and state.
The October 7 attack remains a central issue in the campaign. Opposition figures have called for accountability and a formal investigation into the security failures, while Netanyahu has defended his leadership and highlighted his government’s military and security policies.
Former military chief Gadi Eisenkot has emerged as a leading challenger. His Yashar party is part of a broader opposition landscape that also includes political groups led by former prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, as well as other centrist, secular and left-wing parties.
However, opposition parties do not necessarily agree on every policy. Their ability to cooperate after the election will be crucial to whether they can replace Netanyahu.
Scenario One: Netanyahu Forms Another Government
The first possibility is that Netanyahu remains prime minister by assembling a coalition with enough support in parliament.
His Likud party is supported by right-wing and religious political groups, including Jewish Power, Religious Zionism and ultra-Orthodox parties such as Shas and United Torah Judaism. These parties have played important roles in previous coalition arrangements.
Even if Netanyahu’s bloc does not secure 61 seats independently, he could attempt to attract additional lawmakers or negotiate support from parties that are not formally part of his existing alliance.
This scenario would allow Netanyahu to continue his current political direction, although coalition partners could demand policy commitments in exchange for their support. Disputes over military service exemptions, religious affairs, settlements and government spending could complicate negotiations.
Netanyahu’s long experience in coalition politics could help him navigate these discussions. Nevertheless, the close electoral contest means that the outcome cannot be determined by opinion polls alone.
Scenario Two: Eisenkot Leads an Opposition Government
A second possibility is that Eisenkot and other opposition leaders secure enough parliamentary support to form a new government.
Eisenkot, a former chief of the Israel Defense Forces, has presented himself as a security-focused alternative to Netanyahu. His campaign has emphasised leadership, accountability and rebuilding public confidence following the October 7 attack.
An opposition victory would not automatically guarantee a stable government. The opposition includes parties with different positions on economic policy, religion, national security and relations with Arab political groups.
To reach the 61-seat threshold, the opposition would need to negotiate a workable agreement among its partners and potentially seek support from parties outside its core alliance. The distribution of senior government positions and agreement on major policy priorities could become central to those negotiations.
A government led by Eisenkot could seek changes to some of Netanyahu’s domestic and settlement policies. However, significant differences over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would remain. Eisenkot has opposed Palestinian statehood and maintained a hard-line position on several security questions, meaning a change in leadership would not necessarily produce a fundamental shift in Israel’s regional policy.
Scenario Three: A National Unity Government
A third scenario involves a national unity arrangement bringing together political leaders from opposing camps.
Such a government could become an option if neither Netanyahu’s allies nor the opposition can form a stable majority independently. Leaders might decide that a broader coalition is preferable to prolonged negotiations or another election.
A unity government could include centrist politicians and members of Netanyahu’s political camp, potentially reducing the influence of some more ideologically hard-line parties. It could also create opportunities for agreements on security, military service and economic policy.
However, the political obstacles would be substantial. The opposition has campaigned against Netanyahu, and many of its supporters regard replacing him as a central objective. Netanyahu’s existing partners may also resist an arrangement that excludes them or reduces their influence.
Israel has previously experienced power-sharing agreements, including an arrangement between Netanyahu and Benny Gantz in 2020. That partnership eventually collapsed, illustrating the difficulties of maintaining a government when its members have conflicting political interests.
A new unity arrangement would therefore depend on whether the leaders could agree on responsibilities, policy priorities and the distribution of power.
Scenario Four: Political Deadlock and Another Election
The fourth possibility is that negotiations fail and no candidate manages to establish a functioning government.
Israel’s proportional representation system allows a wide range of political parties to enter parliament, but it also means that forming a governing majority can be difficult. A party can win the largest number of seats without having enough support to govern.
If Netanyahu and Eisenkot both fail to secure the backing of 61 lawmakers, political negotiations could continue for an extended period. Smaller parties could become decisive by choosing which candidate to support or by refusing to join either camp.
A prolonged stalemate could eventually lead to another election, depending on the constitutional process and the available parliamentary options. Such an outcome would extend political uncertainty and delay decisions on domestic and security priorities.
It could also affect public confidence in the political system, particularly as voters continue to debate accountability for the October 7 attack and the future direction of national policy.
The Role of Smaller Parties and Arab Political Groups
Smaller parties may hold the balance of power if the two main political blocs remain closely matched. Their parliamentary seats could determine whether either side reaches the majority threshold.
Arab-led political parties may also influence the negotiations. Some have indicated that they could support arrangements intended to replace Netanyahu, but opposition leaders differ over whether and how such support should be used. Electoral calculations and disagreements over political cooperation could limit the options available to Eisenkot.
Other parties near the electoral threshold could affect the distribution of seats and the balance between the two camps. This makes the final parliamentary composition particularly important.
What Happens After the Vote?
Israel’s president consults political factions after the election and designates a lawmaker considered best placed to form a government. That candidate must negotiate sufficient support to establish a coalition under the country’s parliamentary procedures.
The election result will therefore be only the first stage of the process. The final government will depend on the number of seats won by each party, the agreements reached between political leaders and whether those agreements can withstand competing demands.
For Netanyahu, the vote represents a major test of his continued leadership after years of political dominance and growing criticism over security and governance. For Eisenkot, it is an opportunity to turn opposition momentum into a viable governing coalition.
The four scenarios show why the election could have several possible outcomes. Netanyahu could retain power, Eisenkot could lead a new government, rival factions could agree to share power, or political deadlock could force Israel back to the polls. Until the results and coalition negotiations are clear, none of these outcomes should be treated as certain.
