AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): The Zionist regime is preparing to hold fateful elections on October 27 of this year. Elections that will be held in an atmosphere filled with political tension and unprecedented international pressures.
However, these elections are not merely a referendum on "Benjamin Netanyahu," a prime minister who has been at the center of power for nearly two decades. Rather, they are also considered a test to measure the Zionist regime's ability to change its course after years of war and international isolation.
A noteworthy point in this period is that "Gadi Eizenkot," the former Chief of the General Staff of the Zionist regime's army and Netanyahu's most prominent rival, is leading in a number of polls. He presents himself as a candidate who is the symbol of responsibility and adherence to integrity and has raised the banner of restoring public trust.
Despite all this, Netanyahu's possible defeat in the elections does not necessarily mean the collapse of the approach that he has consolidated in the Zionist regime. While parts of this regime's society want new leadership, this society has simultaneously taken harsher positions toward Palestinians and believes in the use of military power more than before.
This contradiction is the main axis of the conclusion of "Aluf Benn," the editor-in-chief of the Hebrew newspaper "Haaretz," in an article titled "What Israel's Election Won't Change" in the American magazine "Foreign Affairs."
This same issue also forms the basis of The New York Times' report about Eizenkot. Alongside the Wall Street Journal's editorial, which raises the possibility that Netanyahu may remain in power even if he loses the elections due to Eizenkot's failure to form a new government.
Eizenkot; A Different Face with a Similar Approach
The New York Times report paints a picture of a man who tries to distinguish himself from the political model represented by Netanyahu. Eizenkot, 66, presents himself as an option who, in appearance, behavioral style, and background, is at the opposite point from Netanyahu.
According to a detailed report prepared by three journalists of this newspaper, Eizenkot is the son of an immigrant family from Morocco who grew up in the cities of "Tiberias" and "Eilat" and rose from an environment with a popular background. If he reaches the position of prime minister, for the first time a person from the Eastern Jews known as "Mizrahi" will reach this position. A group that constitutes half of the Zionist regime's Jews and also holds a large part of Netanyahu's stable electoral base. Netanyahu, in contrast, was raised in the "Ashkenazi" elite in the occupied city of Jerusalem.
This newspaper, in analyzing Eizenkot's personality, writes that the former Chief of the General Staff of the Zionist regime's army applies the same strict military discipline in politics as well. A discipline that was formed in him during his command of the Golani Brigade and then his leadership of the army. He distances himself from grandiose and ornate speeches and prefers to speak about his plans with a calm and direct tone, as if he is conveying field orders to his soldiers.
The most important distance between these two rivals goes back to the philosophy of leadership and their understanding of moral responsibility. Eizenkot describes Netanyahu as the opposite of a leader. He criticizes Netanyahu, who always tries to be at the center of attention in moments of success and appear in souvenir photos, but when a disaster occurs, he turns away and directs responsibility to security and military institutions.
The Hebrew newspaper "Times of Israel" had also previously quoted Eizenkot as saying that this election is a choice between responsibility and shirking responsibility. In this context, he has committed to forming an official committee to investigate the failures of the attack of October 7, 2023. A committee that would also examine his own personal decisions during his leadership of the Zionist regime's army.
According to the American newspaper, Eizenkot's political motivations have also been influenced by his experience of personal loss and tragedy during the war. In December 2023, he received news of the killing of his younger son "Gal," 25, following the explosion of a tunnel in the Gaza Strip. After that, two of his relatives—one the son of his sister and the other the son of his wife's brother—were also killed in subsequent battles.
This newspaper, citing "Ehud Barak," the former Prime Minister of the Zionist regime, writes that Eizenkot's rise can mean moral reform and healing in the governance structure of this regime. Barak emphasizes that Eizenkot, despite having less eloquence compared to Netanyahu, will not be a leader whom his peers refer to as a liar.
However, the significant difference between these two politicians in personal behavior and Eizenkot's desire to save democratic institutions, the judiciary, and press freedom does not mean a fundamental change in the foreign policy orientation of the Zionist regime or its approach toward the Palestinian people.
After October 7; A Consensus Beyond Netanyahu
"Aluf Benn," the editor-in-chief of the Hebrew newspaper "Haaretz" and a researcher at the "Bill Graham Center for Contemporary International History" at the University of Toronto in Canada, in an analytical article in "Foreign Affairs" magazine, emphasizes that Eizenkot's victory will not create any rupture in the security doctrine governing the Zionist regime.
He says that most of the major Jewish parties of the Zionist regime, despite differences in political tendencies, completely reject the formation of an independent Palestinian state. This position also includes the "Yesh Atid" party. A party that Eizenkot has recently founded. According to him, these parties consider the idea of a two-state solution an obsolete legacy of the 1990s, a period that, in their view, was dominated by excessive optimism.
Almost all of these parties also believe that the widespread war against the Gaza Strip, attacks on Iran, the occupation of areas in Lebanon and Syria, and the creation of what the Zionist regime's government and army call security zones—areas that are in fact occupied territories—were morally justified and practically necessary.
According to the Foreign Affairs article, the most important differences between Netanyahu and Eizenkot in security files are limited to tactical details and the method of managing the conflict, and not its final objectives.
Netanyahu raises the slogan of complete victory, an objective that is unattainable according to the report. He also insists on his promises about overthrowing Iran's system. In contrast, Eizenkot believes that completely changing governments through airstrikes is nothing but an illusion. From his perspective, the realistic goal is that after inflicting military blows to weaken Iran's capabilities, this country's enriched uranium should be taken from it and Iran's nuclear program should be placed under strict supervision.
Regarding Gaza as well, Eizenkot has promised to put an end to the rule of the Islamic Resistance Movement of Palestine (Hamas) within 18 months. An objective that, according to him, should be pursued through a combination of military pressure and providing diplomatic paths for negotiation.
In this regard, he relies on balanced field options. Options that resemble his actions in 2003 when he commanded Israeli forces in the West Bank. When he combined security operations with coordination to end the Second Intifada.
The West Bank and Occupation; A Difference with a Limited Scope
The tactical difference between these two politicians is also evident in the manner of dealing with extremist settler attacks in the West Bank.
Netanyahu turns a blind eye to these actions to preserve the votes of his allies in the far-right wing, but Eizenkot unequivocally calls them Jewish terrorism.
However, in Aluf Benn's words, Eizenkot's position does not stem from sympathy for Palestinian victims but from his deep understanding of the reality that such behaviors push the West Bank toward a bloody and imminent explosion and increase the diplomatic isolation and international condemnation of the Zionist regime.
These internal developments occur simultaneously with the rapid deterioration of the Zionist regime's image in public opinion and the decline of its global standing. The Foreign Affairs article emphasizes the heavy economic and diplomatic consequences whose effects are already apparent. According to this report, the level of international support for the Zionist regime has reached its lowest historical level, and accusations of committing war crimes and genocide in the shadow of widespread destruction and famine in Gaza have increased.
"Chuck Schumer," the Democratic minority leader in the US Senate, pointed to one of the manifestations of this change in July 2025. He considered the reports and images published from Gaza about hunger, famine, suffering, and death utterly unacceptable, although he claimed to also emphasize the Zionist regime's right to self-defense.
In Britain as well, "David Miliband," the Foreign Secretary, announced plans to ban the import of goods from Zionist settlements and expand the authority to impose sanctions against companies and institutions that support, finance, or benefit from settlement construction in the West Bank. The implementation of these plans could confront Zionist banks participating in financing settlement projects with legal and financial restrictions in London.
On the other side of the Atlantic, despite the overt support of "Donald Trump," the US President, for Netanyahu's election campaign, the number of voices in both the Democratic and Republican parties calling for restrictions on American aid and the transfer of military technology to the Zionist regime's army has increased.
Aluf Benn notes that Zionists generally attribute international anger to anti-Semitism and not to the existence of legitimate human rights protests. However, the increase in international isolation has fueled concern in the Zionist regime's society. A society that fears facing what "Ehud Barak," the former Prime Minister of the Zionist regime, called a diplomatic tsunami.
This Zionist researcher in his article predicts that Eizenkot's approach will enjoy the support of more international partners, at least for a while. In his view, this support can stem from Eizenkot's direct tone and his promises to stop or slow down controversial settlement plans such as the "E1" plan. This plan is located in East Jerusalem and in the distance between this city and the "Ma'ale Adumim" settlement.
Eizenkot has also promised to confront Zionist settler violence and dismantle unauthorized settlement outposts.
However, from the author's perspective, this period of de-escalation will end quickly; when Eizenkot's Western partners are confronted with the limitations of his possible government coalition. A coalition that may include far-right figures such as "Avigdor Lieberman," a politician who rejects any political agreement with the Palestinian Authority.
What Will Happen After the Zionist Regime's Elections?
The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, in examining the scenarios after the Zionist regime's elections, emphasizes that the polls indicate a kind of complex political deadlock. A situation that may prevent Eizenkot from forming a stable coalition even if his "Yesh Atid" party wins first place. The reason for this situation is stated to be the increasing tendency of Zionist voters toward more right-wing and extremist positions.
In such circumstances, according to the editorial board of this newspaper, Netanyahu may remain in the position of prime minister for a few more months until another election is held.
These few months, which will be after the US congressional midterm elections, can be fateful for the war against Iran, a war that Trump has shown to be at the top of his priorities. In this context, the US President on October 18 announced his support for Netanyahu's victory in the Zionist regime's elections.
The sum of the reports of the mentioned media shows that whatever the final result of the elections, a possible change at the head of power of the Zionist regime will not necessarily lead to a strategic transformation in this regime's orientations.
Aluf Benn predicts that whether the ballot boxes lead to the formation of a majority government headed by Netanyahu, whether a national unity government is formed, or whether a coalition led by Eizenkot with the support of Arab parties comes to power, the Zionist regime will most likely continue to occupy territories beyond this regime's borders, suppress Palestinians, and rely on military power.
**************
End/ 345E
