Netanyahu and Eisenkot share hawkish stance, unlikely to change Palestinian policy after election

Election context The next national election in Israel is scheduled for next week, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu facing his main challenger, Gadi Eisenkot. Both candidates have campaigned on security‑focused platforms, and analysts note that the outcome is unlikely to produce a radical shift in the country's approach to the Palestinian territories.

Stance on an independent Palestinian state Both Netanyahu and Eisenkot have publicly stated that they do not support the creation of an independent Palestinian state. The stance is consistent across reports from Al‑Monitor and the Straits Times, indicating that the two‑state framework is unlikely to be revived regardless of the election result.

Gaza policy The leaders share a hawkish view toward Gaza. They have said that Israeli forces would remain in the enclave until Hamas, whose charter calls for Israel's destruction, is disarmed. If the militant group does not comply, they have warned that hostilities could resume. This position mirrors statements made after the October 7 attacks three years ago.

Settlement differences While both politicians favour settlement activity in principle, their approaches diverge. Netanyahu has overseen a rapid expansion of settlements, including the establishment of outposts in areas designated for Palestinian civil administration, a move that many countries deem illegal under international law. In contrast, Eisenkot has pledged to adhere to Israeli law, opposing unauthorized settlements, dismantling illegal outposts, and seeking to curb settler violence.

E1 controversy Eisenkot has also opposed the Netanyahu government’s plan to build in the E1 area, which would split the West Bank and isolate East Jerusalem. The opposition reflects a broader debate over the extent of settlement expansion and its impact on the territorial contiguity of a potential Palestinian state.

Coalition dynamics The two candidates are expected to rely on different coalition partners to form a government. Analysts suggest that these differing alliances could steer Israel onto divergent policy paths, even if the core positions on security and settlements remain similar.

Implications for the peace process Given that both leaders reject an independent Palestinian state and maintain a hard‑line stance on Gaza, the long‑standing peace process is unlikely to experience a significant breakthrough following the election. The focus will remain on security concerns, settlement policy, and the future status of the West Bank and Gaza.