By Ramzy Baroud | MEMO | October 29, 2026

In the past, many Palestinians and Arabs followed Israeli elections closely. They did so not because they entertained illusions that a Zionist leader would deliver peace and justice, dismantle the occupation or remove illegal settlements. Rather, they feared that some Israeli leaders were worse than others. They hoped to avert the worst-case scenario.

Over time, however, that distinction gave way to the belief that all Israeli leaders were essentially the same. This is not pessimism. It is experience.

Consider, for example, the expansion of illegal Jewish settlements during the Oslo peace process under Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

Between 1992 and 1995, the number of Israeli settlers in the West Bank, excluding East Jerusalem, increased from 111,673 to 140,235 – a rise of more than 25 per cent, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS), drawing on Israeli statistical records.

The same pattern continued under the Labour government of Prime Minister Ehud Barak.

Within his first six months, Barak’s government issued tenders for 3,196 settlement housing units, exceeding the annual average under his right-wing predecessor, Benjamin Netanyahu.

When Naftali Bennett formed a coalition government in June 2021 that included the Arab party Ra’am, settlement expansion continued unabated.

According to the Israeli settlement watchdog Peace Now, the Bennett–Lapid government advanced plans for 7,292 settlement housing units during its first year, a 26 per cent increase over the annual average recorded under previous Netanyahu governments.

The settlements are themselves a driving force behind the occupation. They require land, and therefore land confiscation; protection, and therefore an expanded military presence; water, roads and infrastructure, and therefore the appropriation of Palestinian resources. Together, these elements deepen dispossession and generate further Israeli violence.

According to the PCBS, the West Bank contained 645 Israeli settlement sites, outposts and other occupation installations by the end of 2025, including 350 settlement outposts.

The Palestinian Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission, a Palestinian Authority body, reported that Israeli authorities targeted approximately 29,335 dunums of Palestinian land through declarations of so-called “state land” between October 2023 and August 2026 – one of the largest waves of such land appropriation since Oslo.

By September 2026, the Commission had also documented the advancement or consideration of plans for more than 18,000 additional settlement housing units across the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem.

Alongside this expansion is the violence unfolding across the West Bank.

By the end of 2023, the West Bank had experienced its deadliest year for Palestinians since the UN began systematically recording casualties in 2005.

The Colonization and Wall Resistance Commission documented 23,827 attacks by Israeli forces and settlers against Palestinians and their property during 2025 alone. In the first seven months of 2026, settler attacks increased by 63 per cent compared with the corresponding period of the previous year.

Typically, this violence, carried out by the Israeli occupation army and armed illegal settlers, is contextualised within the ongoing genocide in Gaza. But violence in the West Bank also serves another purpose beyond collective punishment: the confiscation of Palestinian orchards, the annexation of land, the expansion of settlements and the crushing of Palestinian resistance, including non-violent opposition to this colonial enterprise.

Any Israeli candidate in the 27 October elections who supports settlement expansion does so with full knowledge of its consequences: further dispossession, military occupation, annexation and violence.

The difference between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, and politicians presented as less extreme, is often one of language, strategy and timing.

Former Israeli military chief and Yashar party leader Gadi Eisenkot, for example, openly supports the expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, despite his reputation as a more “moderate” alternative to Netanyahu.

What, then, about Gaza?

Who among Israel’s leading political figures is promising to end the genocide, lift the siege, ensure unrestricted humanitarian aid, restrain the army or investigate violations of international law? None.

Israeli media have spent the past three years reporting on major disagreements between the government, military establishment, intelligence agencies and political opposition over what should happen in Gaza.

Yet Eisenkot has pledged to end Hamas’s rule in Gaza within 18 months of taking office, whether through US President Donald Trump’s framework or through continued war.

For his part, Yesh Atid leader and former Prime Minister Yair Lapid has proposed placing Gaza under Egyptian administration for up to 15 years, effectively shifting responsibility for Israel’s actions onto Arab states.

Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, meanwhile, supports continued Israeli military control until Palestinian groups are disarmed.

The disagreement, therefore, is often over how Israel should achieve its objectives, rather than whether those objectives should change.

Other major disagreements primarily concern Israeli society: the conscription of ultra-Orthodox Jews, judicial reform and accountability for the failures of 7 October.

But these disputes should not be confused with the questions that matter most to Palestinians.

If Netanyahu succeeds in forming another right-wing coalition, the policies of occupation, settlement expansion and military confrontation will continue, potentially with renewed momentum.

If Israel produces a broader coalition, its members may reach compromises over judicial reform, conscription and other domestic disputes. The occupation, however, is unlikely to become the central point of disagreement.

More troubling still, even a government leaning towards the centre-left might succeed in presenting Israel to the international community as a country ready to move beyond the image it acquired during three years of genocide, without fundamentally changing its conduct on the ground.

The international community must therefore remain vigilant. It cannot allow a future Israeli government to present itself as a peacemaker, or sell the illusion of a newly reformed Israel, while continuing to invest in settlements, occupation, war and genocide.

The Israeli military intensified its deadly attacks on Palestinians in different parts of the Gaza Strip in the last 24 hours that preceded the announcement of the Knesset election results, which are expected by the morning of Friday, October 30.

Read more: Israel’s elections: all roads lead to genocide

At least six Palestinians were killed and dozens of others wounded in Israeli strikes that targeted different areas of the war-torn enclave.

The fatalities include four government employees, who were killed in an Israeli strike on the Ministry of Economy in the Al-Mawasi area, west of the southern city of Rafah. Thirty others were wounded in the same offensive. 

The Gaza-based government media office condemned the assault in a statement published on Telegram, describing it as “a new crime and a horrific massacre that targeted a group of civilian public-sector employees.”

It added that “targeting government teams and civilian public employees is part of the organized crime that the Israeli occupation has practiced, and a malicious exposed attempt to push towards chaos and disorder by undermining the work of government crews and institutions, which seek to maintain the stability and safety of society.”

Meanwhile, two people were killed and several others were wounded when an Israeli drone struck a civilian vehicle near the entrance to the Al-Maghazi refugee camp, in the central Deir al-Balah Governorate.

The latest deaths take the toll of people killed by Israel in Gaza since the US-brokered ceasefire deal was reached in October 2025 to more than 1,574 people, with 5,867 others wounded, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry.

The ministry also reported that at least 74,570 people have been killed since Israel started its genocidal aggression on the besieged strip in October 2023.

Jaffa, Israel — Outside of Ahva Elementary School in Ajami, a historic Palestinian neighborhood just south of central Tel Aviv, the mood was defiant on October 27, the day of Israel’s national elections. “We fear that if we do not get this government out of power, we will lose everything,” one Palestinian voter told me after casting her ballot.

It came as no surprise that she, like most of the Palestinian citizens of Israel I interviewed on Election Day, asked not to be named. Since October 7, 2023, more than 400 Palestinian citizens of Israel have been investigated by police for “incitement,” often over social media posts, according to the legal rights group Adalah.

During the 1948 war, which Palestinians call the Nakba, most of Jaffa’s nearly 100,000 Palestinian residents fled or were expelled. The fewer than 4,000 who remained were concentrated in Ajami, fenced in with barbed wire, where they lived under Israeli military rule until 1949.

Just weeks ago, it was not clear that the parties most Palestinian citizens of Israel vote for would even appear on the ballot. In September, Israel’s Central Elections Committee, a body of party representatives, voted to disqualify both Arab parties — which are led by and draw most of their votes from Palestinian citizens of Israel — from running in the election. The Joint List is an alliance of three parties running together to clear the 3.25 percent threshold needed to enter the Knesset.

Hadash, a left-wing party with roots in Israel’s Communist Party, is the only one of the three with both Jewish and Palestinian members. Ta’al’s platform has historically focused on the rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel. Balad, a Palestinian nationalist party, calls for Israel to become a state of all its citizens, with equal rights for everyone.

The other party, running independently, is Ra’am, a conservative Islamist party led by Mansour Abbas, which in 2021 became the first Arab party to join an Israeli governing coalition.

The two Arab parties were eventually reinstated and allowed to run in the Israeli election, but only after an appeal to Israel’s Supreme Court.

As Israelis vote to elect the country’s 26th parliament (Knesset), Palestinian voters in the Ajami neighborhood said Gaza was at the top of their minds. Just down the road is a public memorial displaying photos of some of the more than 20,000 children who have, according to a UN commission, been killed by the Israeli military in Gaza since October 7, 2023.

The memorial, at Hajj Kahil Square, has been torn down more than once. In May, according to Bokra, a Palestinian news site, two men, one of them carrying a rifle, ripped the photos from the walls. The next day, Jaffa residents put them back up and renamed the traffic circle the “Gaza Children’s Roundabout.” Police, who ultimately answer to Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel’s far right minister of national security, have also tried to stop protesters from displaying the images.

Whether or not to participate in Israel’s national elections has long been a fraught topic among Palestinian citizens of Israel.

Whether or not to participate in Israel’s national elections has long been a fraught topic among Palestinian citizens of Israel. Some fear that voting in the election would lend legitimacy to a state that expelled most of their families in 1948 and maintains a military occupation over Palestinians in the West Bank, and that human rights groups say has committed genocide in Gaza; but others view it as their only way to gather power in the Knesset, especially more than three years after October 7.

An unprecedented wave of homicides in the community has also pushed many to the polls. At least 184 Palestinian citizens of Israel have been killed this year, putting 2026 on pace to surpass last year’s record of 252, according to the Abraham Initiatives. Police filed indictments in just 12 percent of homicides in Palestinian communities by June 2026, compared with a historic rate of indictments in 65 percent of cases involving homicides committed against Jewish Israelis.

On Israel’s Election Day, a recorded voice message went out to more than 1 million Palestinian voters from Sousan Sultan, whose sister Susan was killed in April 2025, and whose husband, Ziad, was murdered last August. “My sister was murdered, and she cannot vote in the election,” Sultan said in the recording, asking voters to cast their ballots in her sister’s name.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his main challengers have all ruled out forming a coalition with the Arab parties, even as polls suggest the opposition may struggle to reach a majority without them. Throughout the campaign, Likud (Israel’s largest right-wing party) and its allies have made those parties a frequent target of their campaign ads, using Palestinian electoral power as a way to drum up turnout among anti-Palestinian blocs.

Some ads depict images of Palestinian political leaders, including Ahmad Tibi, who was an adviser to Yasser Arafat, alongside center-right politician Gadi Eisenkot, whose Yashar party leads the opposition, proclaiming the choice is “the right” or “Palestine.”

In the Negev, the desert region in Israel’s south that is home to most of the country’s roughly 300,000 Bedouin citizens, many of whom identify as Palestinians, voter turnout has historically been low. But in this election, that appears to have completely shifted. In the Bedouin village of al-Atawneh, turnout had reached 64 percent by noon on the day of the election, the highest in the country, according to Central Elections Committee data. In the last election, it was 41 percent for the entire day.

“We are seeing record-breaking voter turnout in the Naqab [the Arabic name for the Negev] today for the Knesset elections, reaching unprecedented levels,” Huda Abu Obaid, advocacy coordinator with the Negev Coexistence Forum, told Truthout on Election Day. “However, right-wing groups are intentionally delaying the voting process, forcing voters to wait in excessively long lines.”

Many of the Negev’s Bedouin citizens live in villages the state does not recognize, which lack connection to the national water and electricity grids and where homes face demolition for being built without permits. Israeli authorities demolished a record 5,187 buildings in Bedouin communities in the Negev in 2024 alone, up from 3,283 the year before, according to the Negev Coexistence Forum.

Far right parties sent their own observers to polling stations in Palestinian communities, and rights groups reported long delays in the Galilee, in the north, and the Negev, both home to large Palestinian populations. The Central Elections Committee said it had found no evidence of systematic tampering and that polling stations would stay open past 10:00 pm for anyone still in line.

On Election Day in 2015, Netanyahu warned in a video that Palestinian voters were heading to the polls “in droves,” a message widely credited with driving a late surge in support for Likud. This year, he did it again, warning his base of high Palestinian turnout and claiming, without evidence, that his opponents were trying to steal the election.

With about 84 percent of all votes counted by Wednesday afternoon, no party bloc was close to reaching the 61-seat threshold required to form a majority in the Knesset. Netanyahu’s bloc was the largest, at 54 seats, but it was still down from 68 he held in the outgoing Knesset. Meanwhile, the opposition bloc (composed of all non-Arab parties running to unseat Netanyahu) won 49 seats. The Arab parties won a combined total of 17 seats, the most they have ever won in history. Turnout among Palestinian citizens reached an estimated 80 percent, breaking a record set in 1999, and surpassing the turnout rate among Jewish Israeli voters for the first time ever.

Jafar Farah, director of the Mossawa Center, a Haifa-based advocacy group for Arab citizens of Israel, cautioned against reading too much into the numbers. Farah was elected to the No. 2 spot on Hadash’s slate in May but withdrew in September. He said the rise in Palestinian turnout does not necessarily mean Palestinian citizens have renewed faith in the Israeli state or its institutions, or believe the ballot can end the military occupation of the West Bank (a theme in some of the Joint List’s campaign ads), or change conditions in Gaza. Instead, Farah said, many voters see casting a ballot as a form of “damage control.”

At least 184 Palestinian citizens of Israel have been killed this year.

“The increase in turnout projected in the 2026 polls, if it materializes, cannot automatically be interpreted as a return of trust in the Israeli establishment or in the Arab parties,” Farah said. “It may also reflect a growing sense of the need for political protection in conditions marked by uncertainty.”

A May poll by Tel Aviv University’s Moshe Dayan Center found that while more than 77 percent of Palestinian citizens of Israel want an Arab party in the next government, only 40 percent believe Jewish Israelis genuinely support a political partnership with them.

Netanyahu’s challengers offer little on the issues many Palestinian voters care about. Eisenkot’s party says it supports Jewish settlement wherever it is carried out legally and opposes a Palestinian state. Eisenkot himself has said anyone still thinking about a two-state solution after October 7 is “simply delusional.” Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who leads the B’Yachad list, has ruled out ceding any land to what he calls Israel’s enemies, an apparent reference to a Palestinian state.

As of today, the math appears simple: Without the Joint List or Ra’am joining the coalition, the opposition appears to have no way to form a majority in the Knesset. Yet Naftali Bennett and Avigdor Liberman, two right-wing opposition leaders, are still ruling out any government that relies on Arab parties, and Eisenkot has not dropped conditions for coalition partners that most Palestinian lawmakers are unlikely to accept.

Palestinian citizens of Israel turned out in record numbers to get the Netanyahu government out of power, but it remains to be seen whether the other opposition parties will join in their efforts.

---

---

By Peiman Salehi | The Cradle | October 28, 2026

The presence of Saudi, Turkish, and Pakistani officials in Tehran on 26 October reflected a growing recognition that Iran cannot be excluded from any serious regional security arrangement. Despite the US–Israeli war against Iran, Tehran remains central to the region’s military and political balance.

For Riyadh and its partners, the meeting also exposed the limits of the Mecca defense pact, particularly as Saudi Arabia faces renewed confrontation with the Ansarallah-aligned Yemeni Armed Forces (YAF).

Much of the speculation surrounding the four-country meeting centered on what Iran might be expected to surrender, particularly its relationship with Sanaa. Such expectations rested on the assumption that Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Pakistan had established a regional security order into which Iran was now seeking admission, with Tehran potentially offering concessions over Yemen in return.

Yet the political and military circumstances that brought the participants to Tehran suggest a different calculation. Iran has withstood sustained American and Israeli attacks, while Saudi Arabia and its partners have struggled to contain the YAF’s military operations. Any agreement that disregards these realities risks reproducing the confrontations it seeks to resolve.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry had identified Israel’s expansionist policies, Lebanon, and the US war against Iran among the subjects for discussion. Yemen was absent from the announced agenda and the subsequent press statement.

Ali Bagheri, deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said the gathering also served to congratulate Mohsen Rezaei, the council’s newly appointed secretary, and discuss regional security, including opposition to foreign interference, particularly by Washington. According to information obtained by The Cradle, Yemen was not discussed during the meeting.

On the morning of 27 October, a day after the talks, Rezaei met Yemen’s ambassador, Ibrahim Mohammad al-Dailami, in Tehran. Rezaei praised Yemen’s defense of Gaza and its confrontation with Israel, while the ambassador thanked him and the Iranian government for their positions.

The encounter came amid speculation that Tehran’s diplomatic engagement with Riyadh might come at the expense of its relationship with Sanaa. By publicly reaffirming those ties immediately after the summit, Iran signaled its intention to pursue regional diplomacy while maintaining its existing alliances.

Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of Iran’s conservative daily Kayhan, wrote in a 27 October editorial that “Yemen’s revolutionaries are allies of Islamic Iran.” He warned that the visiting delegations might seek to create the impression that Tehran was distancing itself from Sanaa, offering Washington and its allies “breathing room, however brief” by encouraging expectations of an imminent settlement.

The Mecca pact’s limits

Iran has good reason to approach the Saudi–Turkish–Pakistani framework, commonly known as the Mecca pact, with caution. The agreement brings together three states with substantial military capabilities and extensive relations with Washington, raising questions about whether their security cooperation could eventually be directed against the Axis of Resistance.

For Riyadh, Yemen remains a central concern. Years of confrontation with the YAF have demonstrated Sanaa’s ability to impose high military and economic costs beyond Yemen’s borders. Saudi Arabia’s renewed campaign has again brought its energy infrastructure and military installations within range of Yemeni retaliation, exposing the limits of the kingdom’s reliance on foreign military protection.

In Tehran, closer military coordination among the pact’s members could be seen as an attempt to contain the Axis of Resistance at a time when American security guarantees are becoming increasingly uncertain.

Iran’s participation in talks with the pact’s members carries no commitment to join their alliance. Tehran has made no such announcement, while Rezaei’s explanation of the summit emphasized the establishment of security through regional cooperation, the withdrawal of foreign forces, and an end to outside interference.

These objectives leave considerable differences between the participants. Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Pakistan maintain security relationships with Washington, while Iran regards the American military presence as a principal source of regional instability. Their respective positions on armed resistance movements, Israeli aggression, and the obligations of any collective defense arrangement also remain unresolved.

The meeting produced a brief press statement confirming the participants’ intention to continue their dialogue, without setting out binding commitments. Rezaei indicated that further meetings would follow, suggesting that the four governments were exploring the foundations of a wider regional accommodation.

The initiative itself emerged from Pakistani army chief Asim Munir’s visit to Tehran the previous week, according to information obtained by The Cradle. Iranian officials also confirmed Pakistan’s proposal, describing the gathering as an opportunity to advance regional security arrangements based on shared interests and mutual trust.

Riyadh’s security dilemma

The Saudi–Turkish–Pakistani alliance combines considerable military resources, diplomatic influence, and strategic relationships. Its effectiveness, however, depends on the willingness of its members to confront threats that may carry very different consequences for each country.

The limited assistance Pakistan and Turkiye have provided during the renewed confrontation between Yemen and Saudi Arabia illustrates these constraints. Although both countries have pledged support for Riyadh, their involvement has fallen short of the decisive intervention that might alter the military balance with the YAF.

Kayhan was more scathing in its assessment, accusing Turkiye and Pakistan of having “milked Saudi Arabia and done nothing.”

Saudi Arabia’s own account of the visit was more restrained. In a statement following the meeting, Riyadh said the talks formed part of efforts to de-escalate tensions, encourage diplomatic solutions, and support mediation by Qatar and Pakistan. It also reaffirmed the Mecca pact’s role in promoting regional security and stability.

Islamabad and Ankara have also sought to limit their military involvement. Turkish officials have ruled out offensive operations against Yemen, while Pakistan has denied reports that its aircraft carried out strikes on Yemeni forces. These restrictions expose the distance between the pact’s collective defense commitments and its members’ willingness to enter a wider war.

The continuing Yemeni operations against Saudi targets have consequently strengthened the argument for direct engagement with Tehran. Riyadh must weigh the costs of further confrontation against the possibility of reaching an understanding with Iran, whose regional relationships and military capabilities remain central to the wider balance of power.

Despite the damage inflicted during the war, Tehran has retained the ability to influence the course and costs of regional confrontation. Its leverage over the Strait of Hormuz and its capacity to retaliate against military infrastructure have complicated Washington’s efforts to impose a settlement on its own terms.

These developments have strengthened Tehran’s negotiating position, although translating military endurance into a durable security arrangement will require more than the recognition of its regional weight. Tehran must also demonstrate that cooperation with its neighbors can reduce the likelihood of renewed war without undermining the relationships that have helped it withstand external pressure.

For Saudi Arabia, the lesson is equally significant. Its security cannot be guaranteed indefinitely through military partnerships that exclude one of the region’s principal powers, particularly when those partnerships have struggled to prevent attacks on Saudi territory.

Yemen cannot be traded

The suggestion that Tehran might trade its relationship with Ansarallah for concessions from Riyadh overlooks the movement’s independent political interests and roots in Yemen. Ansarallah’s resistance to Saudi intervention grew out of a prolonged struggle over the country’s political future, during which its ties with Iran deepened.

The two sides share important strategic interests, but Yemen’s military and political decisions cannot be reduced to directives from Tehran. The YAF’s intervention in support of Gaza, its confrontation with Israel, and its continuing war with Saudi Arabia reflect calculations shaped by Yemen’s own circumstances.

Iran’s regional relationships have also evolved through years of confrontation with Washington and Tel Aviv. The Islamic Republic’s resistance to American and Israeli pressure has become inseparable from its wider regional security calculations, particularly as the war has intensified the threats facing its allies.

Sanaa has paid a substantial price for its military and political positions, enduring years of bombardment, blockade, and attempts to dismantle its authority. Ansarallah’s survival has given it considerable influence over Yemen’s future, making any settlement negotiated without its participation unlikely to produce lasting results.

The assumption that Tehran could simply secure Yemeni compliance also underestimates the political consequences of such an arrangement. The Sanaa government would have little reason to accept an agreement that disregards its security interests or leaves Saudi military pressure intact.

Rezaei’s meeting with the Yemeni ambassador therefore served an important political purpose. As Tehran opened discussions with the Mecca pact’s members, it reaffirmed a relationship whose continuity remains important to the wider Resistance Axis.

Israel’s declining leverage

The summit’s joint statement made no reference to Israel, but Rezaei’s subsequent account of the talks placed Israeli military operations among the issues discussed. He said the participants had emphasized ending Israeli attacks and securing Israel’s withdrawal from occupied territories in Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine.

Before Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, Saudi–Israeli normalization was a serious diplomatic prospect. Washington sought to advance Israel’s integration into a regional security and economic framework that would strengthen its position while isolating Iran and its allies.

The wars that followed have disrupted those calculations. Israel’s military campaigns across West Asia, alongside the American war against Iran, have exposed the risks associated with a regional order built around Israeli military superiority and US security guarantees.

Rezaei’s public emphasis on Israeli aggression reflects the changing circumstances in which the talks took place. Riyadh has not formally adopted his characterization in the joint statement and maintains its longstanding relationship with Washington, but Saudi security concerns have increasingly brought it into direct contact with Tehran despite years of hostility.

The contrast with 2017 is especially revealing. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) then threatened to take the confrontation inside Iran, reflecting Riyadh’s confidence in its ability to challenge Tehran through regional pressure and military alliances.

Nearly a decade later, Saudi officials are in Tehran discussing regional security with the same government Riyadh once threatened to attack. Years of confrontation have failed to break Iran’s regional influence, while Washington’s ability to shield its allies from another war is increasingly in doubt.

Yemen’s ability to remain a consequential military actor despite years of Saudi-led operations has also shaped this reassessment. Its continued resistance has demonstrated the limits of attempts to impose regional arrangements through military force.

Tehran’s next move

The summit’s lasting significance will depend on whether the participating governments can translate their discussions into practical security arrangements. Iran has an opportunity to advance its longstanding position that West Asia’s security must be determined by the countries of the region, without dependence on foreign military intervention.

Such an arrangement would require Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, and Pakistan to recognize Iran’s security concerns and its existing alliances. Tehran would also have to address its neighbors’ security concerns without compromising those relationships.

The presence of all four countries in Tehran suggests that these questions are now receiving serious attention. Rezaei’s subsequent meeting with Yemen’s ambassador also indicated the basis on which Iran intends to participate: regional cooperation alongside continued support for its established allies.

Any regional agreement must also account for Yemen and the other members of the Axis of Resistance. Their military and political weight cannot be ignored, nor can their futures be decided through negotiations between Tehran and its neighbors.

Iran has emerged from the war with its regional alliances intact and greater room to negotiate. The question now is whether Riyadh and its partners are prepared to reach an understanding with Tehran that recognizes those alliances rather than seeking to dismantle them.

MEMO | October 28, 2026

A group of former US government officials who resigned because of Washington’s policy in the Gaza Strip has urged candidates seeking the 2028 presidential nomination to pledge not to appoint officials they said enabled Israel’s genocide in the enclave, Anadolu reports.

“Senior Biden Administration officials who were architects of the Gaza policy are now actively white-washing their own roles in enabling genocide,” Gaza Resignees said in a statement signed by 12 former officials.

“They violated U.S. and international law by providing U.S. weapons while Israel indiscriminately and disproportionately attacked civilians and civilian infrastructure, and as Israel arbitrarily blocked humanitarian assistance to Gaza,” it said.

The signatories include former State Department officials Josh Paul, Annelle Sheline and Stacy Gilbert, former diplomats Hala Rharrit and Mike Casey, former White House official Anna Del Castillo and former USAID senior adviser Alexander Smith. Also among them are former Army officer and Defense Intelligence Agency official Harrison Mann, former Air Force Maj. Riley Livermore, former Navy Lt. Cmdr. Hani Z. Nofal and former political appointees Tariq Habash of the Education Department and Lily Greenberg Call of the Interior Department.

“Not even two years since the end of their disastrous time in office, many of these same officials appear to be pursuing a path back into the halls of power,” they said.

“The most basic level of accountability, the most minimal level of consequences, is to ensure that those who have wreaked so much harm from within the highest levels of our Government cannot return to it,” according to the statement.

The group said that “Gaza has become a litmus test for the credibility of American politicians and the viability, in particular, of Democratic candidates.”

The pledge asks candidates to acknowledge US “complicity” in Israel’s genocide in Gaza. It also asks them to exclude any past or present political appointee who was “an architect, leader, defender, or key enabler” of the policy.

In a video released with the statement, the former officials took turns reading the call over images of former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who now sits on the board of directors of the Center for American Progress, a Washington think tank.

“We have watched as elite institutions have welcomed these officials,” said Mann, as the video showed former White House Middle East coordinator Brett McGurk, who is now with venture capital firm Lux Capital and a CNN commentator. It also showed former National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and former USAID Administrator Samantha Power, who both joined Harvard Kennedy School after leaving office.

“We have watched as these officials have tried to launder their bloody reputations,” Paul said, with Rharrit adding, “and prepare to re-enter the halls of power.”

“And we say, enough,” the former officials said in the video. “Enough with the culture of impunity in Washington. Enough with policies that break our laws and defy our values.”

“They have blood on their hands,” they added.

Top Biden administration officials at that time acknowledged civilian suffering in Gaza but defended Israel’s right to defend itself following the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack.

US-made weapons were photographed several times in Israeli strikes in Gaza, although US authorities have declined to confirm this.

Since October 2023, Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza has killed more than 74,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and wounded over 175,000, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry. It has also caused widespread destruction affecting around 90% of the territory’s civilian infrastructure.

More than 1,500 Palestinians have been killed in the Gaza Strip since an October 2025 ceasefire went into effect.

President Trump on Wednesday shared a quote crediting him with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s lead in the Israeli elections, though his coalition is far from the majority needed to form a new government. “When President Trump endorsed Bibi Netanyahu, the whole tide turned, and now, rather than a decisive defeat for a Great Prime […]

Incumbent could turn defeat into another term in office as rival parties erect confected barrier to unseating him

• Israel election results – live updates

• Full report: Coalition talks loom in Israel

• Analysis: Rise of Palestinian parties will redraw political landscape

Hours before the final results from Israel’s elections were in, several things were clear. Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right coalition had lost its mandate, and the opposition had a firm majority.

But most of Israel’s Jewish opposition ruled out governing with Palestinian-led parties, in the course of a racist election campaign in which Netanyahu painted Palestinian citizens as an enemy inside the state.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: John Wessels/AFP/Getty Images

© Photograph: John Wessels/AFP/Getty Images

© Photograph: John Wessels/AFP/Getty Images

With nearly all votes counted, Netanyahu’s coalition government has lost its majority, but main opponents also fail to gain outright majority; marked gains by Palestinian parties

• Israel election – live updates

• Full report: Coalition talks loom in Israel

• Analysis: Rise of Palestinian parties will redraw political landscape

With almost all votes counted, Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government has lost its majority, but his main opponents, an alliance of Jewish Israeli parties unofficially led by Gadi Eisenkot, have also failed to gain an outright majority.

Israeli media report that Netanyahu’s bloc is ahead, with projections he could take 53 seats under the current vote share, but this could change further. The projections put Gadi Eisenkot’s opposition bloc on 48 seats and the Palestinian parties on 19 seats. Sixty-one seats are needed to form a majority to govern in the Knesset.

The remainder of votes to be counted come from absentee ballots, according to Israeli media. We can expect absentee ballots to be counted on Wednesday night, with final results by Thursday.

The Palestinian Israeli parties have received a historically strong vote. The Joint List, a new ticket of several Arab-majority parties, triumphed with at least 12 seats, while Ra’am, the other Islamic party, won seven.

The key question is whether the Eisenkot-led “Change” bloc (consisting of the rightwinger Naftali Bennett’s Together party, the centre-left Yair Golan’s Democrats and the rightwing Yisrael Beiteinu party) will partner with Palestinian Israeli parties or if they will resort to a new election, or even working with Netanyahu.

Netanyahu took the stage at a post-election rally in Jerusalem just after 3am, telling his supporters that official results will show that “Likud is the largest party in Israel”. He told his supporters that the country must “establish a strong, rightwing national government” – adding that a government that relied on the support of Palestinian parties must not be formed.

Eisenkot told cheering supporters in Tel Aviv that the “Israeli public has voted against Netanyahu’s service as Israel’s prime minister … a worthy leader would have accepted the people’s non-confidence and announced today his retirement from politics”. In his speech, he also warned Netanyahu not to “use Israel’s security” for political ends, playing on fears that the prime minister could use this period of uncertainty to launch a new attack on Iran.

The Palestinian Israeli vote, which represents about 20% of the population, had long been seen as a decisive factor for who will be able to form government, and the high turnout of this election was driven by the community experiencing increased racism and discrimination under Netanyahu’s government.

This is the most voted-for election in Israel’s political history, with many Israelis flying back into the country to cast their vote, and nearly 80% of IDF soldiers voting.

Donald Trump said his endorsement had helped Netanyahu perform better than polling estimates.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Atef Safadi/EPA

© Photograph: Atef Safadi/EPA

© Photograph: Atef Safadi/EPA

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will visit Cyprus on Thursday and Friday for talks with President Nikos Christodoulides, the government spokesman said.

Abbas will be received at the Presidential Palace for a private meeting, followed by a working lunch with delegations from both sides.

It is the third contact between the two leaders since Christodoulides took office, with the last being held in May 2025 in Palestine.

The agenda covers the Middle East and Cyprus’ humanitarian role, in particular the ‘Amalthea’ sea corridor for aid shipments to Gaza.

The leaders will also discuss bilateral relations, EU-Palestine relations, developments in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the Cyprus problem.

The government said the visit reflects the “historical ties between Nicosia and Ramallah”.

Relations date to the 1960s and 1970s, when Archbishop Makarios took Cyprus into the Non-Aligned Movement, and the island recognised the State of Palestine immediately after its 1988 declaration.

A Cypriot representative office opened in Ramallah in 2009, and after the 2012 UN General Assembly vote, it was upgraded to a full embassy, among the first in the EU.

Demetris Christofias, president from 2008 to 2013, made the relationship a visible part of his foreign policy.

On his first official visit to Israel and the Palestinian territories, Christofias met Abbas in Ramallah, and the two signed five bilateral agreements.

His term also covered the opening of the Ramallah office and the 2012 upgrade to an embassy.

Abbas’ last visit was in June 2022, when then President Nicos Anastasiades said close ties with Israel would not come at the expense of Palestinians’ “legitimate rights”. Christodoulides visited Ramallah in August 2023.

President Nikos Christodoulides visited Ramallah in 2023 and laid a wreath at Yasser Arafat’s tomb, and in March 2024 the first aid ship for Gaza left a Cypriot port.

Israel once declared Androulla Vassiliou, wife of former president George Vassiliou, persona non grata after a delegation she led tried to meet Arafat, who was confined to his compound in Ramallah.

Abbas has led the Palestinian Authority since 2005, with its Fatah-dominated administration governing parts of the West Bank, while Hamas has run Gaza.

Durante la apertura de su gira "Free Palestine", el rapero estadounidense prometió mantener su defensa activa por el pueblo palestino.

Al Mayadeen | October 27, 2026

Palestinian National Initiative Secretary-General Mustafa Barghouti told Al Mayadeen after “Israel’s” election that “Netanyahu has fallen” and that “the era of Smotrich and Ben-Gvir is over.”

He hailed the Arab electorate for its stand “against fascism,” and said divisions within the right-wing camp had weakened Netanyahu’s bloc, leaving the remaining parties to determine the next political steps.

Warnings on the road ahead

Barghouti warned that if former military chief Gadi Eisenkot fails to ally with Arab parties, “Israel” could face another election or a zionist unity government. He said that regardless of who leads the next Israeli government, Palestinian statehood remains off the table, and that the most dangerous scenario would be Netanyahu’s government continuing as a caretaker administration.

On Gaza, he said US President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace has failed to bring peace to the besieged territory, and that the election result would have repercussions there. He expressed distrust of Trump and said that if the US president loses his congressional majority, it would be a “positive development” for Palestinians.

What the exit polls show

Exit polls after Tuesday’s vote showed Netanyahu’s right-wing and religious bloc at about 50 seats, down from the 64 it won in 2022. Eisenkot’s opposition bloc was at 51 to 53 seats, and both fall short of the 61 needed for a majority.

Likud was projected as the largest single party, with 24 to 25 seats against 21 to 23 for Eisenkot’s Yashar party, though a pro-Netanyahu channel, Channel 14, gave the prime minister’s camp 60 seats.

Arab parties, the Joint List and Ra’am, were projected to win a record 16 to 18 seats, nearly double their 10 in the outgoing Knesset, on turnout that reached a three-decade high.

Eisenkot said the exit polls reflect “a complete lack of confidence” in Netanyahu, but he has ruled out a government that depends on Arab parties, and other opposition leaders have said the same.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said his party “won’t let” Arab voters celebrate, and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir warned Netanyahu against a unity government with Eisenkot.

Gaza and the Board of Peace

The Gaza ceasefire took effect on October 10 last year, but more than 100 aid and rights groups said earlier this month that it is a ceasefire “in name only.”

Gaza’s Health Ministry has said at least 1,471 people were killed between the ceasefire and early October. In August, Netanyahu rejected the Board of Peace’s 15-point roadmap, which Hamas had accepted, effectively bringing the initiative to a standstill.

When the final results are in, Israeli President Isaac Herzog will consult representatives of all the parties in the Knesset and then task whoever he thinks is best placed with forming a government.

Exit polls indicate opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot will have to work with Arab-Israeli leaders to have a hope of governing

• Israeli elections: live updates

• Full report: Coalition talks loom as Israel exit polls suggest Netanyahu and Eisenkot blocs tied

• Israel election: what we know so far

The big gains made by Palestinian parties in Israel’s general election pose an urgent and fundamental challenge to the country’s mainstream opposition: either cooperate with Arab Israelis or hand Benjamin Netanyahu a roadmap to political survival.

In the wake of Tuesday’s exit polls, the leader of the opposition bloc, Gadi Eisenkot, declared them a victory for “Israel’s Zionist national majority” but the real outcome looks as if it will be far more complex than that.

Continue reading...

© Composite: Alamy

© Composite: Alamy

© Composite: Alamy

Early indications suggest it will be some time before the shape of new government and who will lead it is clear

• Israel election – live updates

• Israel election: what we know so far

• Rise of Palestinian parties in Knesset will redraw Israel’s political landscape

Israel’s election appeared to have delivered no clear winner on Tuesday night after a historic turnout by voters for an election described by some as the most consequential in the country’s history, and marked by a record participation by Israeli Arab voters.

Exit polls published on Tuesday evening suggested that the opposition bloc of parties led by the former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces, Gadi Eisenkot, would win most seats in the Knesset by a slight margin, edging out Benjamin Netanyahu’s right and far-right coalition despite the prime minister’s Likud emerging as the largest party.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Amir Levy/Getty Images

© Photograph: Amir Levy/Getty Images

© Photograph: Amir Levy/Getty Images

Le bloc d'opposition au Premier ministre israélien Benjamin Netanyahu est arrivé en tête des élections législatives mardi, mais sans obtenir la majorité nécessaire pour former un gouvernement, selon de premiers...

The vote for the 26th Knesset serves as a crucial referendum on the state’s institutions, economy, and military strategy.

The legislative elections for the 26th Knesset, the legislative power, take place at a critical political crossroads for Israel. Scheduled as the first parliamentary contest since the outbreak of hostilities against Gaza following the events of October 7, 2023, these elections serve as a national referendum on the governance model of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

RELATED:
Israel Opens Polls for First General Election Since the Gaza Genocide

The outgoing 25th Knesset became the first Israeli legislature since 1988 to complete its full four-year term without early dissolution, surviving despite severe domestic turmoil, mass protests over judicial reforms, and persistent coalition instability.

However, the upcoming vote occurs under international scrutiny and severe domestic polarization. Official data from the Israeli Central Elections Committee shows the number of ballots needed across the country to fill all 120 seats in parliament.

Political analysts note that the campaign reflects deep fractures within Israeli society regarding military strategy, economic priorities, and the future shape of the state’s institutional structure.

Social and Geopolitical Context of the 2026 Elections

The socio-political environment surrounding the current electoral moment is marked by the prolonged attacks on Gaza and wider regional escalations involving Lebanon and Iran.

These conflicts have heavily strained the Israeli economy, accelerated militarization across public life, and deepened existing social divides.

Economic pressures, driven by soaring military expenditures and disruptions across key industrial sectors due to a labor crisis resulting from the movement of Palestinians, the trade blockade, and the brain drain, have intensified Israeli public debate concerning state budgets and resource allocation.

Simultaneously, domestic divisions have intensified around long-standing structural issues, most notably the military conscription exemptions granted to the ultra-Orthodox Haredi population, generating coalition crises and widespread friction between secular citizens and religious factions.

On the diplomatic front, the state faces unprecedented international isolation, underscored by ongoing proceedings at the International Court of Justice and arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court against Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, and Yoav Gallant, former Israeli Defense Minister, for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Despite mounting global pressure and civil society accountability campaigns, the political establishment continues to rely heavily on strategic diplomatic and military backing from Western allies, maintaining an insular focus on security doctrines as voters head to the polls.

Netanyahu escalates racist incitement with false claims of ballot raids by Muslim Brotherhood
——
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intensified his election-day rhetoric, publishing inflammatory claims on social media that supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood were… pic.twitter.com/Oq6hWpSDku

— The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) October 27, 2026

The Electoral System: Proportional Representation and Coalition Dynamics

Israel uses a closed-list nationwide proportional representation system to elect the 120 members of the Knesset. The entire country forms a single electoral district.

Voters select a political party slate rather than individual constituency representatives. To gain representation in parliament, a party list must clear an electoral threshold of 3.25 percent of the total valid votes.

Because no political party in Israeli history has ever won an absolute majority of 61 seats on its own, every administration requires a multi-party governing coalition.

Following the Central Elections Committee, official vote tallies determine seat allocations using the d’Hondt method, which allocates parliamentary seats among the various candidate lists based on the votes received.

Parties frequently enter formal surplus vote-sharing agreements before election day to capture remaining unallocated seats.

Once results are certified, the President of Israel holds consultations with elected party leaders before tasking a chosen candidate, typically the head of the largest faction or coalition bloc, with forming a government within a 28-day timeframe.

This framework gives smaller sectoral and single-issue parties significant leverage during post-election negotiations. Far-right, religious, and nationalist slates often demand key ministerial posts, policy concessions, or budget allocations in exchange for their critical coalition votes.

Political analysts note that institutional features of the system, combined with state policies, impact electoral participation among Palestinian citizens of Israel. Electoral threshold adjustments and legal challenges against Arab-led party slates continuously shape voter turnout in Palestinian municipalities.

While Palestinian citizens account for roughly 20 percent of the population, their representative parties face ongoing systemic exclusion from executive coalition agreements, restricting their influence within the parliamentary framework.

As Arab voter turnout rises, Israel’s far-right leaders are sounding the alarm. War criminal Netanyahu accused “supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood” of raiding polling stations and “stealing the elections,” saying Israel is “in a war for the home.”

Finance Minister Bezalel… pic.twitter.com/vrXawm1VF2

— Quds News Network (@QudsNen) October 27, 2026

Key Candidates and Political Factions

The candidate field for the 26th Knesset reflects a fragmented political landscape divided into distinct ideological camps, which we will detail:

The Right-Wing and Religious Coalition

• Likud: Led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the ruling party centers its platform on national defense, state security, and maintaining its long-standing parliamentary dominance.

• Otzma Yehudit: Headed by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, this far-right faction advocates for expanded settlements, strict law-and-order policies, and hardline security measures.

• Religious Zionist Party–Zehut: Led by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich alongside Moshe Feiglin, this nationalist alliance focuses on West Bank administration, land policies, and conservative social programs.

• Ultra-Orthodox Parties: Shas, led by Aryeh Deri, and United Torah Judaism (UTJ), led by Yitzhak Goldknopf, prioritize state funding for religious institutions and maintaining draft exemptions for Haredi seminary students.

The Opposition Alliances

• Together (Beyachad): A political alliance formed by former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid. The joint platform focuses on institutional stability, economic reform, and governance changes.

• Yashar: A new political movement launched by former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot. The party presents a technocratic platform focused on national security, military management, and state administration.

• Yisrael Beiteinu: Headed by Avigdor Lieberman, this right-wing secular nationalist party focuses on mandatory military conscription for all demographic groups and civic policy reforms.

• The Democrats: Formed through the merger of the Labor and Meretz parties under the leadership of former IDF Deputy Chief of Staff Yair Golan, this unified center-left party emphasizes judicial independence and social-democratic domestic policies.

Arab-Majority Parties

• Joint List: Re-established by Hadash, Ta’al, and Balad under the leadership of Yousef Jabareen, the alliance campaigns on civil rights equality, an end to house demolitions, legal recognition for unrecognized Bedouin villages, and opposition to military occupations.

• United Arab List (Ra’am): Led by Mansour Abbas, this pragmatic Islamist faction focuses on securing municipal development funds, infrastructure investments, and crime-reduction programs for Arab communities.

Netanyahu: Governance Record, Systemic Corruption, and Legal Jeopardy

Benjamin Netanyahu, with more than 15 years, is the longest-serving Prime Minister in Israel. Netanyahu governance has consistently centered on maintaining military administration over occupied Palestinian territories, expanding West Bank settlements, and privatizing state assets.

Netanyahu administrations restructured national tax policies, deregulated key economic sectors, and prioritized defense spending over social welfare initiatives. Netanyahu’s political trajectory remains deeply entwined with ongoing legal proceedings across both domestic and international courts. In domestic tribunals, he faces active criminal charges across three separate indictments known as Cases 1000, 2000, and 4000.

– Case 1000 involves charges of fraud and breach of trust regarding allegations that he received expensive gifts from wealthy business figures in exchange for political favors.

– Case 2000 includes fraud and breach of trust charges related to negotiations with media publishers to secure favorable press coverage in return for legislation restricting competing news outlets.

– Case 4000 contains the most severe charges, bribery, fraud, and breach of trust, alleging that Netanyahu granted regulatory concessions to telecom giant Bezeq in exchange for positive coverage on the Walla news platform.

Netanyahu consistently denies all allegations, maintaining that the investigations represent a politically motivated campaign by law enforcement authorities. In early 2023, his government introduced a major judicial reform initiative designed to restructure judicial appointments and limit Supreme Court oversight over executive decisions.

Opposition figures and legal experts argued that these proposals aimed to undermine judicial independence and stall his ongoing trial, prompting widespread domestic protests and deep institutional instability.

On the international stage, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu, determining that reasonable grounds exist to hold him criminally responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

The court cited specific charges, including the deliberate use of starvation as a method of warfare and intentional attacks directed against civilian populations.

Although the Israeli government rejects the jurisdiction of the tribunal, the warrants impose severe diplomatic constraints and travel limitations on Netanyahu across states parties to the Rome Statute.

Voter turnout in Israeli elections as of 16:00 GMT surpassed all votes cast in the 2022, as per data released by the Central Elections Committee.

🔴 LIVE updates: https://t.co/M2TC79fNBS pic.twitter.com/LP4ByVJF30

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) October 27, 2026

Post-Election Scenarios and Potential Outcomes

The final distribution of seats in the 120-member Knesset will determine whether the incumbent coalition or opposition alliances secure the 61-seat majority required to govern.

If the right-wing and religious coalition retains power under Netanyahu’s leadership, the administration is expected to immediately revive paused judicial reform packages to restructure judicial selection processes and restrict legal oversight of executive actions.

Under this outcome, state policy would focus on expanding West Bank settlement infrastructure, maintaining long-term military control over Gaza, and preserving military conscription exemptions for the ultra-Orthodox population to maintain internal coalition stability.

Alternatively, if an opposition alliance formed by figures such as Gadi Eisenkot, Naftali Bennett, or Yair Lapid captures a parliamentary majority, executive authority would shift toward institutional stabilization. An opposition-led government would likely halt proposed judicial overhauls, reinstate traditional oversight mechanisms, and launch official state inquiries into military and intelligence failures.

Regarding military service, an opposition government would attempt to implement universal conscription policies that include Haredi citizens, a move likely to provoke significant resistance from religious sectors.

Striped of executive protections, Netanyahu’s domestic criminal trials would proceed without executive delays, while international legal pressures stemming from International Criminal Court warrants would remain active.

In the event that neither political bloc achieves a clear 61-seat threshold, the Knesset would enter a state of severe parliamentary deadlock. Under Israeli electoral law, Netanyahu would remain in power as caretaker Prime Minister while political factions negotiate prospective coalition agreements or initiate procedures for new legislative elections, extending the prevailing political uncertainty.

#Israel | Trump endorses Netanyahu ahead of Tuesday's elections, linking his reelection to continued military action against Iran as the Israeli leader fights to retain his parliamentary majority.#DonaldTrump #Netanyahu #IsraeliElections #teleSUREnglish pic.twitter.com/aVhUPyvaKs

— teleSUR English (@telesurenglish) October 27, 2026

Sources: TeleSUR – Al Jazeera – Al Mayadeen – Press Tv – Anadolu Agency – TRT World – RT – The Times of Israel – Reporteros Sin Fronteras – BBC – DW – EFE – AP News – AFP

Bereaved families tell voters to remember the victims while others have flown thousands of miles to cast their ballots

Election day in Israel began with a protest by some of the voters with most at stake. Bereaved families of those killed in the 7 October attacks held a minute of silence at 6.29am, the moment when Hamas launched its onslaught just over three years ago.

They gathered in a Tel Aviv plaza that has become known as “hostages square” because it was the centre of demonstrations demanding the return of more than 200 captives from Gaza. Holding pictures of their loved ones, they stood in silence then called on voters to remember the losses and betrayals of that day when deciding on the next government.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Ilia Yefimovich/AFP/Getty Images

© Photograph: Ilia Yefimovich/AFP/Getty Images

© Photograph: Ilia Yefimovich/AFP/Getty Images

Israel’s 2026 elections are dominated by competing Zionist interpretations of October 7, while Palestinian victims and political representation remain excluded from meaningful debate. The article argues that substantial change will require external pressure, including Boycotts, Divestment, and Sanctions.

Participation record, duel serré entre Benjamin Netanyahu et l’opposition, accusations de fraude et fortes tensions politiques : les Israéliens se rendent massivement aux urnes ce mardi 27 octobre pour un scrutin...