Netanyahu survived his enemies. Can he survive his own voters?

His loyalists expect another comeback, but former supporters say the spell has broken as the nation heads toward an election

As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fights to retain power, loyalists are crediting him with strengthening the country and defeating its enemies, while former supporters blame his leadership for October 7 and are seeking alternatives on both the left and the right.

With less than a month to go before Israel’s elections, Netanyahu faces an uphill battle to retain power.

But polls show it won’t be an easy task. A recent survey  conducted by Maariv, one of Israel’s leading newspapers, estimates that his party, Likud, will only win 20 seats out of 120 total in the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, a drop of 12 compared with its performance in the 2022 elections.

Sinking ratings

The decline in Likud’s ratings is hardly surprising. Netanyahu and his government have been blamed for failing to prevent the October 7, 2023 attacks, in which more than 1,200 Israelis were killed and 251 people were taken to Gaza as hostages.

He has also faced criticism for pursuing a series of controversial policies concerning the judiciary and the media; remaining in power amid graft probes that led to charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust; and contributing to Israel’s growing isolation on the international stage.

In Bibi we trust

Surprisingly, however, the Maariv poll shows that around 40 percent of respondents still want Netanyahu to remain Prime Minister of Israel.
Loyalists offer a long list of Netanyahu’s achievements. For them he is the man who subdued Israel’s enemies, confronted Iran’s nuclear ambitions and strengthened Israel’s position in the region.

Under his leadership, Israel deepened relations with the United States and expanded its diplomatic ties through the Abraham Accords, normalizing relations with the United Arab Emirates, Morocco and Bahrain in 2020. Under him, Israel has also bloomed economically, championing a more open, market-oriented economy, privatization and competition, something that has helped to position the state as a global technology hub. 

Naor Shukri, a 56-year-old resident of Haifa, is among those loyalists; he vows to vote for Likud on October 27.

“Indeed, October 7 happened during the watch of Netanyahu, and he is also responsible for that failure. But he is not the only one. Many other people, including the Shin Bet [internal spy agency – ed.], the IDF and various politicians, are equally to blame and need to be investigated.”

“Plus, those events would have happened anyways, regardless of who was running the country. So pinning the blame on Netanyahu is not fair, to say the least,” he added.

Shukri is not alone. Yair Avraham, a 65-year-old resident of Tel Aviv, also believes that although Netanyahu failed to prevent the attacks, his subsequent record should be taken into account when assessing his suitability for another term.

“In the end of the day, he led a brilliant multi-front campaign against Hamas, Hezbollah of Lebanon, the Houthis of Yemen, the Iraqi militias and the regime of Iran. His achievements were recognized internationally and when you look at the map of the Middle East and compare it to what it was like three years ago, you realize that Israel has only emerged stronger. Our enemies are way weaker.”

Both men believe Netanyahu has not received sufficient credit for these and other achievements from the liberal media and the international community. In their view, this reflects an effort to discredit Israel’s actions, replace its right-wing government and hand power to more liberal political circles that they believe would be influenced by the West.

Their claims are not without context. Over the years, European countries have poured billions of dollars into Israel’s liberal NGOs and think tanks that promote equality, coexistence and a two-state solution with the Palestinians. Such funding has long been opposed by conservative circles, which argue that the money has also helped finance anti-government protests that have destabilized the country and ultimately created an opportunity for Israel’s enemies to attack on October 7. 

“We all know Europe and liberal Americans are trying to get rid of Netanyahu,” said Avraham.

The problem, however, is that Netanyahu’s coalition bloc, according to the polls, does not have enough seats to reach the crucial threshold of 61. To overcome this hurdle, Netanyahu will either need to perform better than expected on election day or persuade members of the opposing, so-called change bloc, that joining forces with him would be the better option.

He has pulled off this political maneuver before. In 2020, he convinced Benny Gantz, then leader of the Blue and White party, to form a unity government, bringing an end to a year-long political stalemate.

In 2023, shortly after the Hamas-led attacks, he did it again, establishing an emergency government with Gantz.

This time, Israeli analysts say, such an arrangement is unlikely, largely because politicians from the opposing camp no longer trust Netanyahu or his promises.

Indeed, many Israeli politicians have openly vowed not to join his government under any circumstances. The list is lengthy and includes former prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, as well as other contenders for the top job, such as Gadi Eisenkott and Avigdor Liberman.

But Shukri and Avraham believe Netanyahu is such an experienced politician that he could still surprise his opponents.

“Netanyahu is a magician. He has been buried politically so many times before and yet he is still around, while all his rivals are no longer relevant,” said Shukri.

“Bibi cannot be underestimated. I agree it won’t be easy for him to form a government but he knows how to maneuver the system and I am sure in the end of the day he will find a solution, form a government and remain in power,” echoed Avraham.

War as a political tool?

Critics, however, argue that Netanyahu might not even need to rack his brains over coalition negotiations. They fear he could launch another round of hostilities with Iran, pushing the prospect of elections into the distant future.

Their concerns have not emerged out of thin air. Only recently, Israeli Chief of the General Staff Eyal Zamir warned that a war with Iran could postpone the vote.

Netanyahu himself sent an alarming message in late September, claiming there were “indications” that Israel’s enemies might attack the country ahead of the elections and vowing to retaliate if such a scenario materialized.

“I take the warnings of our Prime Minister very seriously,” argued Avraham. “I doubt he would go into a war just for the sake of postponing the elections. Throughout the years he has been known as a careful politician, who doesn’t like risking our soldiers’ lives and who only does that out of necessity. Here it would be the same. Netanyahu will open a front only if there is a concrete threat, not anything else.”

Shukri appears to agree. “Don’t believe what the liberal media is telling you about Bibi. They will always demonize him and depict him as a politician who clings to power no matter what. The truth is that he genuinely wants the best for the country, and I hope that on October 27, the people will give him that opportunity [to remain in power – ed.].”

Roni Plotnik is not going to be one of them.

He says he voted for Netanyahu and Likud from the time he first became eligible to do so in 2003. Today, however, he intends to support Yair Golan and the Democrats, a left-wing, liberal-Zionist party that advocates a strong security policy alongside diplomatic solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Plotnik says his opinion changed in 2014, during Operation Protective Edge, a 51-day military campaign against Hamas in Gaza that killed more than 2,000 Palestinians, many of whom were civilians. 

“Operation Protective Edge was a major turning point. I watched Israeli leaders promise to destroy Hamas, demolish tunnels and restore deterrence, only to see a familiar cycle emerging: military action, a period of calm and then another round of fighting.”

“Everything was one big deception,” he recalled, arguing that right-wing governments had sold voters “fantasies that don’t correspond with reality.”

Then came October 7, 2023. For Plotnik, the massacre was not an isolated catastrophe but the collapse of a security concept that had been failing for years.

Israel’s leadership, he argues, had effectively built a wall that allowed politicians and the public to ignore Gaza while assuming that a state of neither war nor peace could continue indefinitely.

”That concept collapsed,” Plotnik said. “The policy of ignoring and stagnation crumbled down.”

Plotnik believes Israel’s only realistic path towards long-term security is an agreement with its enemies. He plans to support Golan because he believes diplomacy is necessary if Israelis want their children and grandchildren to have a chance to grow up in peace.

His alternative is not pacifism. He points to Egypt and Jordan as examples of how agreements can maintain stability even without affection between populations.

”There is no love between the countries, but there is quiet based on state interests,” he said.

”Not everything will work and the agreement will collapse? We can always go back to fighting,” he added.

From Netanyahu to Ben Gvir

Not every former Netanyahu voter, however, has reached the same destination.

Guy Even Tzur says he voted consistently for Netanyahu from 2015 until now. He still considers himself firmly on the right, but he, too, has decided it is time for a change. His choice is almost the polar opposite of Plotnik’s: Itamar Ben Gvir.

Ben Gvir, leader of the hawkish Jewish Power party, has served as national security minister in the current government of Netanyahu. He opposes Palestinian statehood, advocates a hard line against Palestinian militancy and has a 2007 conviction for incitement to racism and support for a terrorist organization.

However, this does not bother Even Tzur because he believes voters “should be voting ideologically and for people who actually deliver.”

Ben Gvir, he believes, has done just that. Even Tzur credits him with pushing tougher prison conditions for security prisoners, expanding civilian access to firearms and taking a harder line on crime and security.

“This is why he deserves my vote. Netanyahu, on the contrary, showed that he makes mistakes and can miss massively,” he argued.

Even Tzur says October 7 was a major realization point. But unlike Plotnik, he does not believe the war proved Netanyahu’s entire security doctrine fraudulent. He claims Netanyahu conducted the subsequent campaign effectively and achieved major successes.

However, he claims, October 7 also demonstrated that “Netanyahu is not a political magician. He makes mistakes and thus can be replaced.”

The only question that begs to be answered is: by who. Even Tzur believes Netanyahu has not produced a successor from within the Likud, and this is exactly why he wants to create an alternative by strengthening the ideological right. He doesn’t reject the idea of Netanyahu leading the next government but he also wants to give power to more hawkish voices within the camp to make sure tougher policies are implemented. 

Plotnik, on the contrary, rejects the notion, claiming that another term of Netanyahu would perpetuate the strategic approach that, in his view, contributed to October 7.

The two men are moving in opposite political directions. Yet both have reached a similar conclusion: Netanyahu’s long-standing dominance no longer makes him the automatic choice. And now, more and more former Likud supporters can imagine a future without him.