Israeli elections and media bidding

The statements of the candidates for the Israeli parliamentary elections that will be held at the end of this month are remarkably intertwined, and they do not focus on internal Israeli issues only, but also on directing an extremist discourse at the regional level and Israel’s relations with neighboring countries, where hostile statements are made in every direction and calls to occupy some areas again, expel Palestinians from their lands, deport them, end their presence, etc., and other statements directed for media consumption, and seeking to build a direct hostile approach towards the developments taking place internally, In an effort to gain the largest supportive segment of the Israeli public, which is divided according to the numerous opinion polls published in various Israeli channels, which summarize the electoral confrontations between Prime Minister Netanyahu and the candidate of the Yashar Party, General Eisenkot, in light of a conflict that will not only be decided by the election results, but will extend to the opposition candidates, which confirms that the electoral race will be primarily between personalities, most of whom the Israeli public has experienced before, and may move towards trying a new military leadership. In this context, media campaigns seek to work in every direction, with a focus on issuing irresponsible and uncontrolled statements that work to strengthen the position of the candidate, whether he was in power before, such as Naftali Bennett, who previously headed the government, or he was a newcomer, such as Eizenkot or Yair Golan, which raises other problems related to the pattern of dealing or orientation that this or that candidate focuses on. Therefore, all candidates tend to adopt a different narrative based on incitement and issuing threats in every direction, in an effort to attract more supporters, which may coverDespite the lack of other paths through which it can move, especially since Israel faces great challenges, which requires rearranging priorities and tasks and moving towards national consensuses to build a real approach and coherent positions, otherwise the alternative is to go to civil war. From the perspective of disciplined Israeli circles, Israel will face a major regional hurricane that will be of no use to uncontrolled statements or heated media campaigns funded by businessmen seeking to achieve their goals through the arrival of some candidates and keeping the current situation as it is. All of this is happening in light of a sterile partisan struggle that does not benefit the Hebrew state and does not confirm its cohesion in light of the developments taking place that must be dealt with responsibly, and not by issuing fiery statements, especially since the majority of the candidates do not have a vision for running the state in the true sense, as most of them do not have any political or economic experience to deal with many challenges, not all of which are security or military, which requires prudent political approaches and not engaging in bidding in order to reach power. Of course, an atmosphere like this leads to fear of upcoming developments that also affect the interior, where crises in education, the judiciary, and civil society interact. Israel therefore faces real problems in dealing with its current candidates based on a very narrow vision, which will have major effects, and may push it into the maze of the narrow partisan arena and its narrow agendas. Based on the assessment of the media bidding and the directed and misleading political discourse, Israel will face conflicting paths in which there is not enough room for possible or available consensus, especially since the callNetanyahu to form a national unity government may not be on the table unless the elections favor the candidate of the Yashar Party, with the exclusion of any presence of representatives of the Arab parties, which means that the upcoming options for the election candidates will not be clear, especially since everyone will continue to bargain and bid, focusing on a propaganda speech devoid of any real content, to gain the votes of a public characterized by a great degree of rejection of any peace settlement, adopting a military tendency and completely rejecting the idea of ​​a “two-state solution.” An academic specializing in strategic affairs