Israel’s prime minister has refused for three years to create an independent inquiry into the worst security failure in the country’s history, and voters now get to decide if that refusal costs him his job.
Story Snapshot
- Israelis vote October 27 in the first election since the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack.
- Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, who has built his campaign around accountability.
- Netanyahu has not created a state commission of inquiry into the attack despite years of public pressure.
- A recent poll found 71% of Jewish respondents and 52% of Arab respondents want the next government to launch one.
A Campaign Shaped By One Unanswered Question
Israel holds its first election since the October 7, 2023 attack on October 27, and the vote is turning into a referendum on who bears responsibility for that day. Netanyahu, the country’s longest-serving prime minister, is running against Gadi Eisenkot, a former Israel Defense Forces chief of staff who served under him from 2015 to 2019. The contest centers on security credentials versus government accountability.
Netanyahu has cast himself as “Mr. Security,” pointing to Israel’s military campaigns against Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran since the war began. He argues the country needs an experienced wartime leader managing conflicts across Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran rather than risking a change in leadership. His campaign leans heavily on the idea that continuity protects hard-won military gains.
Three Years Without A State Inquiry
Netanyahu’s government has not formed a state commission of inquiry into the failures that let roughly 1,200 people be killed on October 7. He has blamed security agencies instead and resisted an independent probe into his own decisions. Critics note he is the only senior official who held power that day and still opposes a formal inquiry into what happened.
Israel has used independent commissions after major failures before. Lawmakers convened them following the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre, the 1995 assassination of Yitzhak Rabin, and the 2021 Mount Meron crowd crush. The absence of one after October 7 breaks with that long-standing precedent, according to policy analysts tracking Israel’s accountability institutions.
Eisenkot’s Pitch: Accountability First
Eisenkot has made a state inquiry the centerpiece of his campaign, promising to establish one immediately if his Yashar party takes power. He has said the probe should examine his own record as military chief alongside the Netanyahu government’s conduct, framing it as full accountability rather than a political attack.
Eisenkot also lost a son and son-in-law in the war, giving his message added personal weight with voters. His platform includes a universal service law requiring military or civilian service from all citizens, along with reconstruction funding for communities damaged in the conflict. Supporters describe him as offering unity after what they call chaos under the current government.
Public Pressure Keeps Building
An Israel Democracy Institute poll taken October 5-8 found strong cross-community demand for answers. Seventy-one percent of Jewish respondents and 52% of Arab respondents said the next government should establish a state commission of inquiry, according to Ynet’s reporting on the survey. The Israeli Supreme Court has also pressed the issue, ordering the government in November 2025 to explain why no commission existed.
🇮🇱 ISRAEL ELECTIONS: WILL NETANYAHU WIN?
Benjamin Netanyahu’s decades-long dominance of Israeli politics faces another challenge as voters head to the polls tomoorow.
Final surveys from Israel's major television broadcasters underline the challenge:
• Channel 13: Opposition… pic.twitter.com/MHCZlMT4Mi
— Perspective (@PerspectiveNN) October 26, 2026
Netanyahu’s government did propose an alternative: a “national commission” with members appointed by political parties rather than independent judges. Critics argue that structure would let the ruling coalition control the investigation’s findings, undermining the independence such inquiries have traditionally carried in Israel.
Why This Matters Beyond Israel
The dispute reflects a pattern familiar to voters everywhere: a leader claims credit for wartime performance while resisting scrutiny over what happened before the war started. Families of victims, legal scholars, and now a leading opposition candidate all argue that security success and government accountability are separate questions. Israeli voters must decide October 27 whether those questions can keep being avoided.
Sources:
youtube.com, bbc.com, pbs.org, ynetnews.com, en.idi.org.il, heraldtribune.com, bbc.co.uk, israelpolicyforum.org
