Israeli opposition signals foreign policy change in style, but not substance
Israeli opposition leaders outlined their policy agendas at the Herzliya Conference, but analysts noted their foreign policy positions on the wars in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran differ little from Prime Minister Netanyahu's far-right coalition.
Leading figures from the Israeli opposition used the Herzliya Conference to present their policy agendas, but analysts observed that their foreign policy stances are nearly identical to those of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's ruling far-right coalition.
None of the three main opposition figures – former military Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot, and former prime ministers Yair Lapid and Naftali Bennett – offered much criticism of Israel's recent wars in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran. Instead, they criticized Netanyahu for how the campaigns were conducted and for what they portrayed as his subservience to US President Donald Trump, who they claim prevented Israel from pursuing its wars in Lebanon and Iran at full intensity.
Bennett, who will run jointly with Lapid in the next elections, limited his criticism to insisting Israel would fight its wars better: "After a thousand days of war, the truth must be told: Hamas is rearming in the south, Hezbollah is growing stronger, attacking our soldiers and threatening our citizens, and the head of the octopus, the regime in Tehran, remains standing."
Eisenkot, one of the favorites to replace Netanyahu in polls, accused Netanyahu of exaggerating Iran's nuclear threat but continued to support the wars in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran in principle.
Opposition accusations that Israel has never been more isolated are not unfounded – world leaders have been sharply critical, and public opinion in the US, Israel's strongest ally, is shifting away from traditional support. However, analysts stress that the differences are stylistic rather than substantive.
Left-wing Hadash party parliamentarian Aida Touma-Sliman told Al Jazeera that the opposition "really believe what they're saying" and reflect Israeli society. Disagreements with the government are confined to domestic issues, while on genocide and attacks on Iran and Lebanon there is unanimity.
Sociologist Yehouda Shenhav-Shahrabani said that Eisenkot, Lapid, and Bennett "reflect quite precisely the current condition of Israeli society." They supported the absurd war with Iran and criticized Netanyahu only for failing to account for Trump's volatility. "Same lady, different dress," he concluded.
The October 7, 2023, attack continues to shape all politics. The security mindset has shifted – Israel relies more on military might, and the opposition now offers to be even more proactive militarily. As Mitvim Institute president Nimrod Goren noted, if the opposition wins upcoming elections, it will need to balance military force with diplomatic engagement.
