By Masar Badil – Oct 28, 2026Khaled Barakat, a member of the Executive Committee of the Palestinian Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement (Masar Badil), said that the internal divisions exposed by the “Israeli elections” reflect a deepening crisis within the Zionist entity, rather than any meaningful possibility of political change for the Palestinian people. He warned against illusions about the role of the Zionist electoral system, emphasizing that the struggle is not to replace one Israeli government with another, but to dismantle the colonial system itself.“’Israel’ is no longer able to maintain the same internal process of administering the colony as it did before 7 October,” Barakat said. “These elections have revealed that ‘Israeli’ society is living in another world, disconnected from the reality unfolding on the ground. Despite everything that has happened, despite the genocide in Gaza and the defeats and crises confronting the Zionist project, the overwhelming majority of the leading candidates and political forces are openly fascist.”“What are the actual differences between Netanyahu and Eisenkot? Eisenkot is the general who invented the Dahiya Doctrine, and today he is essentially accusing Netanyahu of failing to carry out genocide and war crimes successfully. Both camps are competing over who can better serve the Zionist colonial project.”Barakat emphasized that the electoral competition is taking place within a broad Zionist consensus that excludes Palestinian national rights.“The real dispute between the competing fascist Zionist camps is over the best way to steal Arab land, how to continue the genocide, and how to clean Israel’s hands of its crimes before the international community. They disagree over methods, tactics and presentation, but not over the fundamental colonial objectives.”Barakat identified several common principles shared by Netanyahu, Eisenkot and the competing Zionist political blocs.“They all agree on maintaining Zionist control over Palestine from the river to the sea. They may disagree over whether genocide should proceed slowly or rapidly, but they do not disagree over the continuation of the colonial project and its genocidal mandate. They reject Palestinian political sovereignty, the right of return, Palestinian national rights and even the prospect of a ‘Palestinian state’. Within each camp, there are figures whose tactical positions are closer to those of their supposed opponents than to others in their own bloc.”“In this sense, the competition between Netanyahu, Eisenkot, Bennett, Lieberman, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich is not a confrontation between fundamentally different political projects. It is a competition within the same colonial system, over how best to maintain and expand it.”The illusion of change through Zionist electionsBarakat warned against portraying Israeli elections as an opportunity for Palestinians to achieve meaningful change, including through the parliamentary participation of Palestinian parties in the territories occupied in 1948.“The first illusion we must reject is that any fundamental change can come through Zionist elections. The second illusion is that the so-called Arab vote can transform the nature of this regime. At most, Palestinians are being told that they are slaves, and can choose who will be their master: Netanyahu or Eisenkot.”“The Arab parties in the territories occupied in 1948 have not played the necessary role throughout the genocide. Instead of organizing the masses and confronting the colonial system, they have tranquilized people by telling them to wait for the elections. Now they present themselves as victorious because they have won 16 to 18 seats in the Knesset.”“But what is the outcome? They will be asked to raise their hands for one camp or the other: Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, or Eisenkot, Bennett and Lieberman. This is not Palestinian political power or national liberation. It is participation in deciding which faction of the colonial ruling class will administer the entity and carry out the ongoing genocide, at the same time that those very politicians swear that they will never rely on Arab parties.”Barakat also addressed the role of the Palestinian Authority in relation to the internal political crisis of the Israeli state.“The Palestinian Authority remains a servant of the Israeli project. The disagreement among the Zionist factions is over how much of a servant it should be. When Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben-Gvir attack the Palestinian Authority, it is not because they oppose its role in serving the colonial system, but because they demand even greater subordination.”“The Palestinian Authority finds itself, like other local forces that mediate between the colonizer and the colonized, caught between the demands of the colonial regime and the pressure of the Palestinian people. In these elections, nobody even asks about the position of the Palestinian Authority. It has become irrelevant to the actual struggle taking place within the Zionist political establishment.”Global Polls Find ‘Israel’ Is the Least Popular Country on Earth, Disliked by 67% of PeopleThe crisis of the Zionist entity after 7 OctoberBarakat stressed that the deepening divisions within the “Israeli” political establishment cannot be separated from the Palestinian resistance and the regional confrontation that has developed since 7 October 2023.“Netanyahu’s opponents accuse him of failing to guarantee ‘Israeli’ security in Gaza, throughout Palestine, in Lebanon and in Iran. They use these accusations in their struggle for power, alongside internal disputes such as the conscription of the Haredim. These arguments are politically useful to them, but they also reflect a real crisis confronting the Zionist entity.”“The crisis did not emerge because of the elections. It emerged because of the steadfastness of the resistance and the inability of the Zionist state to achieve its declared objectives. If Netanyahu is removed from the political scene, it will not fundamentally be the achievement of the electoral system. It will be the result of the resistance and the crisis it has imposed on the colonial project. It is the resistance that holds the power to change the equation, not internal elections between competing fascists.”Barakat argued that the developments demonstrate the significance of the strategy pursued by the Palestinian resistance leadership in Gaza.“The situation today demonstrates the correctness of the strategy of Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and the resistance in Gaza: to push the Zionist entity into a deep internal crisis that will eventually contribute to its dismantling due to its internal rot. This is why we see the Zionist right wing fighting the right wing, competing with itself and struggling over the future of the colonial project.”“This is not a normal state. It was never a normal state from the moment of its creation, and it will never return to what it was before 7 October. What we are witnessing is a colonial society increasingly consumed by its own contradictions, while the reality of the struggle has moved beyond the capacity of its traditional political structures to contain it.”Barakat also cautioned against viewing a possible change in leadership as necessarily representing a reduction in the danger posed by the Israeli state.“Netanyahu may be more immediately dangerous in certain respects, but Eisenkot represents an enormous strategic danger. He is a leading architect of the doctrine of collective destruction, and he may be presented internationally as a more acceptable or responsible figure.”“In the collective consciousness of the Palestinian people, some of the notorious Zionist leaders of the past, such as Ariel Sharon, may appear almost like babies compared to Netanyahu and Eisenkot, given the scale of the crimes committed against our people today. This is the worst form of Western colonialism, and the question is not which individual will administer it.”“It is premature to say which fascist leader will head the Zionist entity following these elections. But we already know that changing the individual at the top will not change the fundamental character of the system.”The task ahead: isolate the Zionist entity and advance the struggle for liberationBarakat concluded by emphasizing that the Palestinian movement and its international supporters must reject illusions about electoral change and instead intensify efforts to isolate Israel and advance the struggle for liberation.“What is required from us today is not to be fooled into exchanging one master for another. We must warn against the political trends that will begin promoting the illusion that Arab votes can determine who governs the Zionist entity, as though that represents a victory for the Palestinian people.”“The problem with Israel is not simply the government that administers it. The problem is the colonial entity itself. It must be dismantled completely, not merely placed under new management. This is why we must uphold more firmly than ever the objective of a free Palestine from the river to the sea.”Barakat stressed the importance of the Palestinian resistance and its potential expansion throughout the region and the Palestinian diaspora.“The only force that is truly relevant to the future of Palestine today is the resistance. And this resistance is going to spread and develop — in Palestine, in southern Lebanon, in Syria, and among Palestinians in the shatat, the diaspora. We have seen the continuation of confrontation in Al-Khalil, and we will see new forms of organization and struggle emerge to lead the next stage of our movement.”“Our responsibility is to strengthen this struggle, to organize our people and our allies, and to impose comprehensive international isolation on this illegitimate entity and its backers and sponsors, the US and its imperialist partners in Europe and Britain. The task is to confront the Zionist colonial project, not to give it new legitimacy through the illusion of electoral reform.”Barakat also warned that Western governments and allied Arab regimes may seek to rehabilitate the Israeli state’s international image by promoting an alternative political leadership.“We know that some reactionary Arab regimes and European governments will tell us that Eisenkot is someone they can talk with, that he is more reasonable, more pragmatic or more suitable for negotiations. They will try to sell the replacement of Netanyahu as a new beginning, while the same colonial policies and the same rejection of Palestinian rights continue. Of course, the United States views the entity as a strategic investment and asset in the region, regardless of its leadership.”“We must ask a simple question: What exactly are these elections offering the Palestinian people? The opportunity to choose which war criminal will lead the Zionist entity?”“Most recently, the world witnessed a striking second-round election result in Brazil, in which Lula da Silva and his supporters turned back a right-wing tide. But what if the Brazilian elections were, rather than a vote between Lula and Flavio Bolsonaro, a choice between Jair Bolsonaro and Flavio Bolsonaro? This is the real picture of the Zionist elections, despite the escalating clamor over internal contradictions.”“The Palestinian people do not need a new administrator for their colonization. They need liberation, return and the dismantling of the colonial system. That is the struggle before us, regardless of who occupies the prime minister’s office in Tel Aviv.”“For those who might say that one of the outcomes might be the removal of Netanyahu and him being tried in courts, we need to remind them that our fight is not to prosecute Netanyahu for corruption in the Zionist regime. Our fight isn’t against one person. Our fight is about removing ‘Israel’ from the face of the earth, and not about removing Netanyahu,” Barakat affirmed. (Masar Badil)