As the Israeli government prepares for the military takeover of Gaza City and, many fear, lay the groundwork for full seizure and occupation of Gaza, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stirred anger at home and abroad. Overwhelming evidence that large numbers of Gazans are starving has left Israeli leaders facing worldwide condemnation, the threat of partial arms embargos from allies, as well as growing charges of genocide.

In Israel itself, Netanyahu and his cabinet have been under intense criticism for months from former military and intelligence chiefs, opposition leaders, and intellectuals, as well as military reservists and tens of thousands of public protesters. At the heart of the rift between the Israeli people and their government are the 50 hostages still held by Hamas, of which around 20 are believed to be still alive. Yet on August 8, the Israeli cabinet decided to ramp up the war, and the new plans will de facto advance a full occupation of Gaza with the possible objective of long-term military rule of Gaza, as some cabinet members have advocated. The government insists that by expanding military operations, it will save the hostages. But Israelis are not convinced.

Following the announcement, a survey by Kan, the Israeli public broadcaster, found that only 28 percent support the new plan. The family members of hostages believe it will spell the death of their loved ones. In direct contrast to the government’s determination to prolong and expand operations, a consistent and growing majority—more than 70 percent in some recent surveys—supports a hostage deal and an end to the war as soon as possible. “Now!” and “There’s no time!” have been core slogans advocating such a deal ever since the initial weeks following Hamas’s October 7 attack. Since the new Gaza plan was announced, demonstrations have swelled, and the hostage families have called for a general strike.

All of which has contributed to the perception that the country has been hijacked by a fanatical religious far-right minority—one that has gained extraordinary leverage and influence by helping Netanyahu cling to power despite his legal predicaments.. Seemingly bearing out the image that the country has been captured by extremists, polls have consistently found that, if new elections were held today, Israelis would oust the current leadership. In other words, if only the government were more aligned with public opinion, the country would be taken in a decidedly different direction.

But the assumption that a post-Netanyahu Israel can chart a new course misses the extent to which Israelis concur with the government on many deeper, longer-term issues. Based on a number of surveys over the years and throughout the current war, both the anti-Netanyahu public and the main opposition parties differ little from the current leadership on the future status of Palestinians, the inevitability of ongoing Israeli occupation in general, and the acceptability of denying self-determination, or alternately, democracy and civil rights to Palestinians in the territories, among other issues. Polls show that, like their current leaders, the large majority of Israeli Jews do not empathize with the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, which Israeli television and mainstream newspapers barely cover. Many believe civilian deaths and harms are the fault of Hamas and are exaggerated or even fabricated, as government and Israeli commentators constantly claim.

This underlying reality points to some hard truths. Removing Netanyahu from power might well help bring an end to the unfolding disaster in Gaza and could even cause the religious right to relinquish its grip on Israeli politics. But it is unlikely to fundamentally reorient Israeli policies toward the Palestinians or to present a true alternative to the decades-old policies of expanding Israeli control and suppressing Palestinian self-determination. These strategies, together with Palestinian spoilers, have fueled the broader conflict all these years and ruined Israel’s prospects for being a democracy, and they will drive future violent escalations for years to come. No matter how much politicians and commentators in the United States—or the Israeli opposition for that matter—focus on Netanyahu, the fact is that when it comes to Israeli intransigence regarding Palestinians, the prime minister alone is not the problem. The problem is Israeli society, politics, and culture as it has evolved over decades.

For all his vaunted staying power, Netanyahu’s political future in Israel is uncertain. As of now, the prime minister could well lose the next elections, which are scheduled for late October 2026. Since July, when two ultra-Orthodox religious parties abandoned the ruling coalition, he has presided over a precarious minority government. If it collapses, elections would most likely be held in early 2026.

Opposition to the prime minister is deeply entrenched. Well before the October 7 attacks, the government came under extraordinary criticism for its judicial overhaul, which many saw as a move to consolidate Netanyahu’s grip on power, weaken his corruption indictments, and undermine Israeli democracy while empowering theocratic forces in society. Through much of the nine months preceding the attacks, hundreds of thousands of Israelis mounted weekly demonstrations against the government, and reservists threatened to refuse to show up for duty. According to the Israel Democracy Institute, in early 2023, when the government first announced the reforms, between 58 and 66 percent of........

© Foreign Affairs