After the parliamentary elections in Israel, an end to Benjamin Netanyahu's rule is becoming apparent. At the same time, the opposition alliance does not have a stable majority. While there are tough negotiations and compromises ahead, voices of the Palestinian resistance see the fragmentation of the Zionist camp as an opportunity. – A comment by Ali Najjar.

The newly elected Knesset met for the first time on Tuesday. The elections on October 27 did not produce a clear result. Benjamin Netanyahu's main challenger, the former Chief of General Staff Gadi Eisenkot, has now received the award from President HerzogOrderto form a government. The move came after the ultra-Orthodox United Torah Judaism party distanced itself from Netanyahu.

But Eisenkot's camp is anything but homogeneous. In Israel's fragmented multi-party system, small parties often form blocs to secure a governing majority after the election. The opposition bloc brings together liberal, social democratic, right-wing and radical right-wing forces - from Avigdor Lieberman to Naftali Bennett. A stable government has not yet emerged from this.

Palestinian parties as kingmakers

A key weakness of the Zionist camp is the Arab-Palestinian parties. The United List and Ra'am together won 19 of the 120 Knesset seats. Voter turnout among Palestinians with Israeli citizenship was remarkably high, marking a change from previous elections. In the past, many boycotted the election so as not to legitimize the colonial regime.

Elections in Israel: Uncertainty about the new government

Now these parties could tip the scales. One option for Eisenkot would be a minority government that would rely on Palestinian MPs for individual projects. Ra’am even signaled a willingness to enter into a governing coalition with Eisenkot’s camp, which many Palestinian and Arab commentators sharply criticized as opportunism.

But the greatest resistance comes not from the Palestinian population, but from parties from Eisenkot's bloc. Lieberman (Together) and Bennett (Yisrael Beiteinu) reject cooperation with Palestinian partiescategorically, even if they would only tolerate a minority government. This is precisely what shows the colonial character of the Israeli state. Palestinian votes are allowed to support a government - but not to have an equal say.

This constellation drove Netanyahu to the seemingly desperate attempt to propose a unity government to Eisenkot. Eisenkot refused. Instead, the opposition is courting the support of the ultra-Orthodox parties.

Haredim between military service and compromise

The ultra-Orthodox parties play a special role in the Israeli political system. The Haredim – also known as ultra-Orthodox Jews – traditionally pursue an insular clientele policy that is intended to protect their isolated, conservative, patriarchal way of life.

Their demands include exemptions from military service, state funding for their communities and an independent education system. This is exactly where they collide with Eisenkot's demand to include ultra-Orthodox men in military service.

Despite these conflicts, a minority government with the tolerance of the Haredim is also possible. The Zionist consensus fears a government dependent on Palestinian votes - not only for its content but also for its symbolic impact.

No real difference

In a sense, the parties of the Zionist consensus are right: a government dependent on Palestinian votes does not fit into the self-image of a state that wants to be “Jewish” and “democratic” at the same time. This irresolvable paradox is at the core of the colonial state order in Israel.

A closer look reveals hardly any real political differences between the camps. A change of Eisenkot government would not be a fundamental break with Israeli colonial policy, but rather a shift in style and coalition constraints.

Eisenkot rejects a Palestinian state, wants to secure Israel's rule between the Jordan and the Mediterranean and demands the military destruction of Hamas. According to available statements, a new government would not represent a fundamental departure from Israel's warfare in the Gaza genocide, which is destroying large parts of Palestinian society.

Israel votes – Palestinians are left out

No mandate for submission

The International Palestinian OrganizationMasar Badilrejects the election as irrelevant to Palestinian liberation. Its executive member Khaled Barakat emphasizes that the competition between Netanyahu and Eisenkot is not a conflict of fundamentally different projects, but a dispute within the same colonial system.

Masar Badil warns against seeing the Palestinian Knesset parties as a path to liberation. At most, they could mediate between Netanyahu and Eisenkot's camps, but would have no independent national mandate. The organization instead calls for international pressure, the isolation of Israel and the overthrow of the colonial system.

Whether Eisenkot can form a government remains questionable. If he fails, new elections could follow in spring 2027 - and Netanyahu would remain in office until then. But even a change at the top would not change this: as long as the Zionist state exists, Palestinian liberation remains a question of resistance, not of coalition arithmetic. Palestinian liberation does not begin in the Knesset, but where resistance against occupation, expulsion and subjugation continues.

The postCrisis of Zionism after the election: Palestinian liberation is not electableappeared firstperspective.