Israel’s election: The main issues in the words of the leading candidates | Israel Election 2026 News
Israeli Election Highlights Key Issues Ahead of Vote
As Israel approaches what has been termed one of its most pivotal elections, candidates’ positions on significant issues reveal a surprising consensus among the frontrunners. Despite what outsiders might expect, the leading candidates have largely refrained from questioning the government’s actions in Gaza following the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023.
The major candidates have not outlined clear strategies for progressing toward a two-state solution—a concept born from the 1990s Oslo Accords. Instead, discussion has predominantly focused on internal politics and the future character of Israeli society. Voters face a choice between the incumbent hard-right government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has resisted judicial oversight, and a coalition of opposition candidates advocating for similar policies but under legal constraints and without the more extreme elements currently in power.
Stance on the Two-State Solution
The commitment to a two-state solution expressed in the Oslo Accords appears sidelined in the current campaign. Many candidates have come under fire for allegedly facilitating aggressive settlement policies in the West Bank, which contradict international law and the goal of peace. For instance, Netanyahu has stated unequivocally, “We are going to fulfill our promise that there will be no Palestinian state; this place belongs to us.” Meanwhile, Gadi Eisenkot of the Yashar party described the two-state principle as a “mistake.” Religious Zionist leader Bezalel Smotrich went further, advocating for the complete annulment of the Oslo Accords and promoting a vision that precludes Palestinian statehood.
In contrast, Yair Golan of the Democrats has pushed for a reevaluation of strategies, citing a societal trauma stemming from recent violence. He suggested a need for rethinking approaches to establish a civil separation while ensuring security responsibility.
Debate Over Haredi Conscription
The conscription of Israel’s ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) population remains a significant and contentious issue. This feature of Israeli society has gained prominence as wars’ toll rises. Netanyahu relies on support from Haredi parties, such as Shas and United Torah Judaism, which are advocating for legal protections against military service.
Commenting on recent arrests of Haredi draft evaders, Netanyahu remarked that these actions threaten the “world of Torah,” asserting that they are counterproductive to voluntary enlistment efforts. Shas leader Aryeh Deri declared that no government supporting Shas would formally regulate the status of yeshiva students unless conscription legislation is modified. Eisenkot framed the election as a choice between a government avoiding conscription policies or one committed to universal service.
Judicial Overhaul Controversy
Since taking office, Netanyahu’s government has sought to dilute the powers of the Israeli judiciary, which has sparked widespread protests. Major reforms have altered how judges are appointed, and recent legislation has begun to erode the Attorney General’s influence. Critics have characterized these actions as undermining democracy, prompted by legal troubles the prime minister faces. Netanyahu claims that his reforms are intended to prevent judicial overreach.
Opposition figures, like former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, have pledged to repeal these judicial reforms if elected, emphasizing the urgency of restoring judicial independence.
Calls for Accountability After the October 7 Attack
Amidst all this, questions surrounding accountability for security failures prior to the October 7 incident have gained prominence. Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi resigned earlier this year amid investigations into lapses in security that allowed the attack to occur. Despite demands for accountability, Prime Minister Netanyahu has resisted calls for a comprehensive inquiry into his administration’s actions leading up to the conflict.
Eisenkot criticized Netanyahu’s leadership, suggesting that a dedicated commission would be necessary to uncover the truth. In response, Netanyahu expressed a desire to pursue a government-led inquiry that would garner broad public support, although these discussions have yet to advance significantly.
In summary, candidates in the upcoming election share common ground on several issues while diverging sharply on matters of governance, policy formulation, and accountability. As voters head to the polls, the stakes remain high.
