Photo: Noam Moskovich

October 23, 2026

This time of year, on the Jewish calendar is often associated with “MarCheshvan,” or “bitter Cheshvan,” a traditional reference to the quiet associated with the only month on the Hebrew calendar without a festival or holiday. This year, with highly contested and consequential elections in both the United States and Israel occurring during Cheshvan, the mood and energy in our Jewish community are anything but quiet.  

Though the focus of our energy is on our local U.S. elections on November 3rd, we are also closely following the election in Israel on October 27th. As part of Am Yisrael, the Jewish people, we are bound by a shared history and responsibilities that extend across borders. Nearly half of the Jewish people live in Israel and many of us have family and close friends there. Our region is also home to Israeli citizens, some of whom are traveling to Israel to vote next week.   

Since October 7, many American Jews have experienced a struggle on two fronts: supporting Israel’s survival against enemies committed to its destruction while defending our ability to live openly and proudly as Jews here at home. The violence across North America in recent years, particularly in Washington, D.C., Michigan and Boulder, and the antisemitism and exclusion experienced in our own communities, make that struggle painfully real. We reject rhetoric that turns Jewish attachment to Israel into an accusation of moral guilt or demands that Jews renounce that connection to be accepted.  

Our attachment to Israel also carries an obligation to speak honestly about its government. Many American Jews remain deeply committed to Israel while hoping for different leadership. Our concerns include efforts to weaken an independent judiciary, extremist violence against Palestinians, accountability for the failures of October 7, and the unequal burdens of military service. As we wrote in our June statement, “We Live the Consequences,” violence against innocent people and the failure to hold Israeli perpetrators accountable violate the Jewish ethical values we teach our children and try to embody in our communities.  

Many of us approach this election with hope and trepidation, praying for leadership that will keep Israelis safe, uphold democratic institutions, and restore confidence in the rule of law. 

Understanding this election also requires listening carefully to Israelis. Their choices are shaped by the trauma of October 7, repeated military deployments, and profound fears for their families’ safety. Israelis will choose that leadership through a democratic parliamentary system whose results will not be known until the coalition building process is complete.  

We invite you to read our full analysis. It explores the bonds that connect American and Israeli Jews, the questions facing Israeli voters, and how a new government will be formed. Remaining engaged with Israel and the Jewish people requires us to keep learning, even—and especially—when the choices are difficult.  

  

Understanding Israel’s October 27 Election: What’s at Stake and Why It Matters to American Jews  

Israel’s October 27 election carries significant implications not only for Israeli citizens but also for Jewish communities around the world. While Israelis will determine their country’s next government and bear the most immediate consequences of that decision, the outcome will also shape Israel’s relationship with American Jews, the broader American public, as well as American elected officials and policy makers (not to mention the impact on other Diaspora Jewish communities, and Israel’s friends and detractors outside the United States).   

Our understanding of Israel’s election requires examining several interconnected issues: the relationship between American Jews and Israel, the political divisions within Israeli society, the major policy questions facing voters, and the mechanics of Israel’s parliamentary electoral system.  

 

Jewish Peoplehood and the Connection Between American Jews and Israel  

The relationship between American Jews, Jews elsewhere in the Diaspora, and Israel is rooted in the concept of Jewish peoplehood. Jews are an am, a Hebrew word meaning a people or nation, which also conveys for many the bonds of a tribe or extended family. Jews share a history, a homeland, and responsibilities to one another across borders. This is what is means to be part of Am Yisrael, or the Jewish people.  

Many American Jews have relatives and close friends in Israel. Others have built lasting relationships through travel, study, or community partnerships. Here in Minnesota and the Dakotas, our partnerships with the Israeli cities of Rehovot and Sovev Kinneret make those bonds especially personal.  

Our region is also home to many Israeli citizens, for whom this election is particularly significant. Some will travel from Minnesota and the Dakotas to Israel to cast their ballots, participating directly in the selection of their country’s leadership.  

Nearly half of the world’s Jews live in Israel, and the worldwide Jewish population remains smaller than it was before the Holocaust. The safety and future of Israelis are therefore matters of profound concern for Jewish communities throughout the world.  

For most American Jews, Israel remains central to their Jewish identity. A 2025 Jewish Federations of North America survey found that 88 percent of American Jews support Israel as a democratic and Jewish state, and 71 percent feel emotionally connected to Israel. 

These findings demonstrate that attachment to Israel remains widespread among American Jews, even as disagreements over the policies and leadership of the Israeli government have become increasingly pronounced.  

 

The Impact of Israel’s Policies on American Jewish Communities  

Since October 7, 2023, many American Jews have experienced a struggle on two fronts: supporting Israel’s survival against enemies committed to its destruction while defending their ability to live openly and proudly as Jews in the Diaspora.  

Across the United States, including Minnesota and the Dakotas, antisemitism and the accompanying sense of alienation and exclusion have become significant challenges.  

The increase is evident in JCRC’s own work. According to Rob Allen, JCRC Director of Community Security, incident reports have averaged 40 percent above the 2022 level over the past three years.  

National data reflects similar concerns. The ADL recorded 6,274 antisemitic incidents in 2025, its third-highest annual total. Even as the overall number declined from 2024, physical assaults reached a record high. Brandeis University research has also documented how hostility toward Israel has damaged Jewish students’ friendships and sense of belonging.  

Three violent attacks in 2025 and 2026 demonstrated the potentially deadly consequences of antisemitism associated with hostility toward Israel.  

On May 21, 2025, Israeli Embassy staff members Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim were shot and killed outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C., after attending the American Jewish Committee’s Young Diplomats Reception. According to the federal indictment, the shooter fired approximately 20 shots and afterward told police, “I did it for Palestine, I did it for Gaza.” Prosecutors alleged that he had reviewed information about AJC’s support for Israel before the attack.  

Eleven days later, on June 1, a firebomb attack in Boulder, Colorado, struck participants in a Run for Their Lives gathering calling for the release of hostages held in Gaza. Karen Diamond, 82, later died from her injuries. Other participants, including an 88-year-old Holocaust survivor, suffered severe injuries.  

The federal indictment alleged that the attacker searched online for “Zionist” events and defined Zionists to include people supporting Israel’s existence. His selected target was a group asking for captives to come home.  

On March 12, 2026, an armed attacker drove a truck loaded with gasoline and fireworks into Temple Israel, a synagogue in West Bloomfield, Michigan, where 140 preschool children and staff were present in the building. The attacker exchanged gunfire with synagogue security personnel before setting off an explosion and dying at the scene. No congregants or staff members were killed. 

The FBI determined that the attack was an act of terrorism inspired by Hezbollah and deliberately targeted the Jewish community. Investigators found that the attacker had searched for Israeli gatherings and Jewish institutions in Michigan, reviewed Temple Israel’s programming, and posted anti-Israel and pro-Hezbollah messages in the days leading up to the attack. 

These attacks are among the most extreme examples, but they do not reflect anywhere near the number of similarly motivated attacks on North American Jews. They illustrate how rhetoric directed against Israel or Zionism can translate into violence against Jews and Jewish institutions far removed from the decisions of the Israeli government. These acts of violence are not criticism of the Israeli government, instead they are fueled by hatred of the Jewish state that assigns collective responsibility or moral guilt to Jews because of their connection to Israel.  

The JCRC has consistently opposed narratives that deny the Jewish people’s historical connection to Israel or portray Jewish attachment to Israel as inherently illegitimate. For example, in September, JCRC signed onto an open letter by more than 6,000 leaders across entertainment, academia and public life to reject the accusation of genocide against Israel. 

At the same time, Palestinian suffering demands compassion and serious attention. Criticism of Israeli policies, including policies affecting Palestinians, is an important part of democratic discourse. The challenge arises when criticism is claimed as a basis for threatening Jews, excluding them from civic life, or demanding that they renounce their attachment to Israel as a condition of acceptance.  

 

American Jewish Political Attitudes Toward Israel  

The relationship between American Jews and Israel has become an increasingly significant issue in American political life.  

In the Jewish Electorate Institute’s August–September 2026 survey, 35 percent of Jewish Democrats said the rise of anti-Israel candidates made it harder for them personally to identify as Democrats. Half—50 percent—said they could not support candidates accusing Israel of genocide.   

These findings suggest that rhetoric about Israel can have significant consequences for American Jewish political identification and electoral choices.  

At the same time, neither major American political party receives particularly strong evaluations from Jewish voters when it comes to confronting antisemitism. In the same survey of Jewish registered voters, only 37 percent said “fighting antisemitism” described the Democratic Party, while just 27 percent said it described the Republican Party.  

The findings reflect a complicated political environment in which many American Jews remain deeply connected to Israel while feeling increasingly alienated by elements of American political discourse on both the left and the right.  

 

American Jewish Attitudes Toward Netanyahu and Israel’s Government  

Strong American Jewish attachment to Israel should not be confused with automatic support for the policies or leadership of the current Israeli government.  

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu leads the most right-wing government in Israeli history, and many of its policies have generated significant concern among American Jews.  

Polling focused specifically on Jewish Americans reveals considerable opposition to Netanyahu’s continued leadership. In the Jewish Electorate Institute’s August–September 2026 survey of 800 Jewish registered voters, 60 percent wanted Netanyahu replaced, including 53 percent who felt strongly. Only 16 percent wanted him reelected. Yet the same survey found that 86 percent of respondents described themselves as pro-Israel.  

These findings illustrate an important distinction: American Jews can maintain strong attachments to Israel while opposing the policies of its current government and hoping for a change in leadership, just as Americans do regardless of who is in the White House. 

A separate August 2026 Jewish People Policy Institute survey found that 54 percent of its American respondents preferred an opposition victory, compared with 14 percent who preferred the current coalition. Eight percent had no preference, and 24 percent said it was not their place to say. That survey drew from a panel of 804 “connected” American Jews, with stronger ties to Jewish community, Israel, or Jewish identity, and is not representative of all American Jews.  

Although the surveys use different methodologies, both suggest substantial dissatisfaction with Netanyahu’s leadership among American Jews. Neither establishes a consensus behind a particular successor.  

 

Concerns About Israeli Democracy, Extremism, and Accountability  

American Jewish concerns about the direction of Israeli politics predate the current election and the October 7 massacre. In an August 2023 public commentary and September 2023 statement, the JCRC opposed legislation weakening Israel’s independent judiciary and urged that changes to the judicial system rest on broad national agreement.  

The struggle over the courts had already divided Israelis and Jews abroad before October 7, raising fundamental questions about the independence of democratic institutions, the protection of minority rights, the ability to restrain abuses of governmental power, but also the ability of electoral majorities to see their victories at the ballot box translated into enacted legislation.   

More recently, concerns have focused on extremist violence against Palestinians and the failure of Israeli authorities to enforce the law consistently against Israeli perpetrators.  

In its June 9, 2026, statement, “We Live the Consequences,” the JCRC addressed both the moral implications of this violence and its consequences for Israel’s democratic credibility and relationships with Diaspora Jewish communities. Beyond these concerns, two additional issues have emerged as significant questions of accountability and shared responsibility within Israeli society.  

The first is the demand for an independent state commission of inquiry into the failures surrounding October 7. Many Israelis believe that understanding the military, intelligence, and political failures that preceded the massacre is essential to restoring public trust.  

The second concerns the unequal burden of military service, particularly the longstanding exemptions from compulsory service enjoyed by many ultra-Orthodox men. The issue has become increasingly contentious as other Israelis and their families have endured repeated deployments and extraordinary sacrifices.  

In an October 2026 Israel Democracy Institute survey, equalizing conscription and establishing a state commission of inquiry received the highest levels of support among the proposed actions presented to Jewish respondents. Both issues speak to larger questions about the obligations of citizenship, equality before the law, and the accountability of political leadership.  

 

Israeli Security Concerns and the Future of the Arab-Israeli Conflict  

Understanding the Israeli election also requires examining the security fears that shape Israeli political attitudes. For many Israelis, decades of violence have profoundly damaged confidence that territorial concessions will lead to peace.  

The suicide bombings of the Second Intifada and the October 7 massacre, as well as the attacks following Israeli withdrawals from southern Lebanon and Gaza, have reinforced concerns that territorial withdrawals can create new security threats.  

Journalist and analyst Haviv Rettig Gur has explained how many Israelis associate previous withdrawals with “rivers of blood.” These experiences have contributed to widespread fears that a Palestinian state established under present conditions could become another base for attacks against Israeli civilians.  

Public opinion reflects this skepticism.  

Tel Aviv University’s July 2026 Peace Index found that only 24 percent of Jewish respondents preferred a two-state solution, compared with 71 percent of Arab respondents. Clearly, opposition to Netanyahu does not necessarily translate into support for the establishment of a Palestinian state in the near future.  

Israeli political disagreements increasingly concern questions of governance, democratic institutions, and political leadership, even among voters who share significant concerns about the security implications of Palestinian statehood.  

Any future effort toward an eventual negotiated peace will need to address the fear and distrust that have accumulated over decades of conflict, alongside Palestinians’ aspirations for self-determination.  

 

What Issues Are Driving Israeli Voters?  

Although the Israeli-Palestinian conflict receives substantial international attention, Israeli voters are also focused on a range of domestic political, economic, and social issues. Israel Democracy Institute researchers Tamar Hermann and Lior Yohanani have described divisions increasingly centered on Israel’s internal character.  

Among the central questions are the future of Israel’s democratic institutions, the relationship between religion and state, government accountability, and whether Arab political parties should be included in governing coalitions.  

Economic concerns are also significant. The Israel Democracy Institute’s September 2026 election survey found that security and the cost of living were leading considerations for Jewish voters. Among Arab voters, combating crime in Arab society ranked first.  

These findings highlight the different experiences and priorities that Israeli citizens bring to the election. They also suggest that the outcome cannot be understood solely as a referendum on Netanyahu or on Israeli-Palestinian relations. The election reflects competing visions of Israel’s political institutions, economic future, religious character, and social responsibilities.  

 

How Israel’s Electoral System Works  

Israel’s electoral system differs significantly from that of the United States, and understanding its structure is essential to interpreting election results.  

Israelis do not vote directly for prime minister. Instead, they vote for party lists for the 120-seat Knesset, Israel’s parliament. Seats are allocated proportionally among parties that receive at least 3.25 percent of valid votes.  

This threshold can have significant consequences. A relatively small party that crosses the threshold may gain several seats, while a party that narrowly misses it receives none. Such outcomes can substantially alter the balance between potential governing coalitions.  

Because Israel has a multiparty parliamentary system, the largest party does not automatically form the government. Instead, the ability to assemble a governing coalition is generally more important than finishing first in the election.  

Following the vote, Israel’s president consults with the parliamentary parties and assigns the head of one of Israel’s largest parties the task of forming a government. That leader initially has 28 days, with a possible extension of up to 14 days, to assemble a governing coalition.  

A government must then win the confidence of the Knesset. In practice, parties generally seek a coalition controlling at least 61 of the 120 seats. If the first attempt to form a government fails, additional attempts are possible.  

If the government-formation process ultimately fails, another election would be required, as happened following the inconclusive elections of April and September 2019. Recent polling suggests a serious risk of another stalemate, particularly if parties maintain their stated restrictions on possible coalition partners. Neither Netanyahu’s current allies nor the Jewish-led opposition may have enough seats to assemble a majority without reaching beyond their existing alliances. 

In the meantime, Netanyahu would remain prime minister at the head of an outgoing caretaker government, while the newly elected Knesset takes office. A caretaker government retains governing authority but is subject to legal requirements of restraint, including restrictions on certain senior appointments. 

Consequently, even after the election results are known, the identity of the next prime minister and the composition of the next governing coalition may remain uncertain for weeks or months. If a stalemate leads to another election in 2027, that uncertainty could continue through the subsequent round of coalition negotiations, with the caretaker government remaining in office until a new government is formed. 

 

What to Watch for After the Election  

The election will determine the composition of the next Knesset, but its longer-term significance will depend on the governing coalition that emerges and the policies it pursues. Several questions will be particularly important for Israeli citizens and Jewish communities abroad.  

• Will the next government strengthen Israel’s democratic institutions and restore public confidence in the rule of law?  

• How will it address extremist violence, military service obligations, and accountability for the failures of October 7?  

• What approach will it take to Israel’s security challenges and the future of the Arab-Israeli conflict?  

• Will it be able to address economic pressures and the divisions between different sectors of Israeli society?   

• And how might the next government affect Israel’s relationships with Jewish communities around the world, including American Jews who remain deeply attached to Israel while holding a wide range of political and ideological perspectives?  

For Jewish Minnesotans and Dakotans, these are not simply questions about a foreign election. The decisions made by Israel’s next government will influence the future of a country to which many feel a profound connection and will also have an impact on the challenges and opportunities facing Jewish communities here at home. Understanding the election, the political forces shaping it, and the possible directions of the next government is therefore an important part of remaining engaged with Israel and the Jewish people. We hope you found this analysis helpful and look forward to continuing to engage in conversation about these topics together in the weeks and months to come.