Israel Election Offers No Break in West Bank Occupation

Israel’s election next week is unlikely to loosen its hold on the occupied West Bank or alter its use of military force against Iran, regional policymakers and analysts said. Palestinian statehood remains a distant prospect as Israeli parties compete to project harder-line positions.

Occupation policy beyond the ballot

The election pits Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud and its ultranationalist allies against an opposition led by former military chief Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar party. Analysts said the sides differ more in degree than direction: in the aggressiveness of Israel’s wars, the scale of West Bank settlement expansion and whether a leader chooses diplomacy.

Aviv Bushinsky, a former adviser to Netanyahu, said settlement expansion would continue if Netanyahu won, as would wars against Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah. “What you see now is what you’ll see after the election, maybe even more aggressively,” he said. “As long as Iran is in such a situation, it’s a waste of time talking about Palestine.”

Palestinian analyst Ghassan Al-Khatib said Israeli parties shared the same position on Palestinian statehood and settlements. “The substance of the policy remains the same: No to a Palestinian state and yes to further settlement expansion. On this, they are all in agreement,” he said.

Al-Khatib said a government led by Netanyahu’s opponents might seek to repair Israel’s international standing by curbing some settler violence or pursuing settlement expansion less conspicuously. He called that a change in style, not substance. Michael Young of the Carnegie Middle East Center said Israel’s security establishment and much of its political class shared an outlook centered on confronting Iran, maintaining “forward defense” and preserving military deterrence.

Joost Hiltermann of the International Crisis Group, who has conducted research in the West Bank, said growing settler violence, Palestinian frustration and the absence of a “political horizon” had created combustible conditions. Even a minor trigger, he warned, could spark a wider uprising.

Force as regional strategy

Israel’s security doctrine rests on breaking Iran, maintaining buffer zones beyond its borders and using force to deter enemies. Netanyahu said Israel must prioritize “prevention and offense over containment and defense,” including pre-emptive strikes, while making Israel a regional power and maximizing its independence in armaments.

US President Donald Trump praised Netanyahu as a “great warrior prime minister,” reinforcing expectations that Netanyahu would try to finish the campaign against Tehran if he stayed in power. Netanyahu said his ambitions went beyond containing Iran. “Completing the task means toppling the terrorist regime in Iran, the head of the venomous octopus,” he said in a speech this week.

Analysts questioned whether anything short of a US-Israeli ground invasion would make Tehran abandon what it considers core security interests in an existential fight. Young said: “This is a quagmire. The Iranians can outlast Trump.” Analysts said Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza had suffered major losses, but Iran-aligned groups had survived; the conflict could also strengthen Tehran’s resolve to pursue a nuclear deterrent.

Abdulaziz Sager, chairman of the Gulf Research Center, said Netanyahu’s policies in Gaza, the West Bank, Syria and Lebanon were damaging. He said a settlement with Iran was needed before the conflict escalated further.

Proposals and limits of diplomacy

In a separate opinion article, Gershon Baskin, the Middle East director of the International Communities Organization and co-head of the Alliance for Two States, argued that replacing Netanyahu alone wouldn’t end the conflict. He said Israel’s center-left leaders had avoided discussing the Palestinian issue and Israel’s regional future before the election, apparently believing those subjects would cost votes.

Baskin proposed a regional agreement that would combine normalization and regional integration with security guarantees, economic cooperation, Gaza reconstruction and a process toward an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel. He said Saudi-Israeli normalization couldn’t be separated from Palestinians’ right to self-determination. The proposal would require American leadership and active participation by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Jordan and other regional partners.

Baskin also called for new Palestinian leadership with democratic legitimacy, public confidence and the capacity to make historic decisions. He said Palestinians, not Israel, Washington or Arab states, must choose it. He described President Mahmoud Abbas’ recent decision to postpone Palestinian elections as troubling and said Palestinians had gone approximately two decades without national elections.

For Gaza, Baskin proposed a transitional arrangement with a Palestinian technocratic administration, a professional Palestinian police force and an international stabilization presence. He said the arrangement should enable reconstruction, Israeli military withdrawal and an end to Hamas’ armed control. He also said settlement expansion and violence in the West Bank undermined a negotiated future.