The five issues that determine the Middle East's view of Israel's elections - analysis

BySETH J. FRANTZMANOCTOBER 29, 2026 16:10

With the votes mostly counted, Israel is now heading into a holding pattern, as Israeli parties must begin coalition talks. This could take weeks. As Israel waits, so does the Middle East. The view of Israel across the region is complex. Some countries are hostile to Israel, and they will remain hostile. Some openly say they don’t care who wins Israel’s elections. This kind of talking point is usual among those in the Palestinian Authority. However, the truth is that the region will be impacted by who comes out on top.

Does the Middle East care who wins Israel's elections? Across the region, governments are watching the political developments in Israel.

However, they are not waiting for a new Israeli government to decide their own policies. The Middle East has changed significantly since the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel and the conflicts that followed.

Countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, and Iran have their own policies and concerns. These interests do not change because Israel has an election. Nevertheless, the role of Israel's next government could influence how these countries approach Jerusalem.

There are five key issues that illustrate how the region views Israel's elections.

The Board of Peace and the future of Gaza

The first issue is Gaza. The US-backed Board of Peace has been around for around ten months. It seeks to advance a new peace concept for Gaza's future. However, questions remain about reconstruction, Hamas disarmament, security arrangements and the implementation of the ceasefire. 

Countries such as Egypt, Qatar and many others want to see Washington move forward. However, the Board appears to be waiting. Washington doesn’t want to pressure Israel. On the other hand, the Trump administration could try to get things from a new government based on its endorsement of Israel’s prime minister. The region wants to see progress, but the regional countries are also aware that the fundamental challenges will remain regardless of who leads Israel.

A new Israeli government might approach the Board of Peace differently. However, it would still need to address Hamas, the future of Gaza's governance and Israel's security requirements.

The more important question may be what Washington intends to do next. Regional governments know that the Trump administration remains central to the initiative. They are therefore watching Washington as closely as Jerusalem.

The Abraham Accords and normalization

The second issue is normalization. The Abraham Accords were signed in 2020, during Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's tenure. They reflected an attempt at a regional shift, particularly in the Gulf, where countries increasingly saw opportunities in economic and security cooperation with Israel.

The UAE, Bahrain and Morocco have maintained relations with Israel despite the conflicts of recent years. Their interests in trade, technology and regional stability are important. However, it has been hard for Israel to attract new members. Some have suggested the US should pressure countries to join. Countries want to see progress on the Palestinian issues.

Saudi Arabia presents a challenge. Riyadh has pursued its own regional diplomacy, including relations with Washington and efforts to reduce tensions with Iran. Normalization with Israel remains linked to broader Saudi interests, particularly the Palestinian issue. Saudi Arabia has also moved close to Turkey and Pakistan.

A new Israeli government could make discussions easier, but Saudi Arabia is unlikely to abandon its conditions. The Abraham Accords demonstrated that countries in the region could pursue relations with Israel based on shared interests. The elections are unlikely to reverse that calculation.

Is Iran worried about the elections?

Iran is watching Israel's elections, but Tehran is likely to tread carefully. It knows about the messaging in Israel and the US about a resumption of strikes. Israel’s current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shared an image of an Iranian nuclear strike on Israel prior to the election. He was also endorsed twice by US President Donald Trump.

For decades, Israeli governments have viewed Iran's nuclear program, ballistic missiles, and regional proxies as major threats. This did not begin recently and will not change. Iran also knows this.

The wars involving Iran, Israel and Iranian-backed groups have transformed the regional balance of power. Tehran must now assess its own military capabilities and its choice as to what to do next. Iran may hope that political uncertainty in Israel could constrain future Israeli operations. However, Iran may be surprised to find out that if it takes risks, it will still face Israel’s determination.

The larger issue for Iran is the relationship between Israel and the United States. Tehran's calculations depend heavily on Washington's policies, including sanctions, military deployments, and the possibility of further confrontation. The US could shift on whether it wants a deal depending on what happens in Jerusalem.

Turkey-Israel tensions are not just about Netanyahu

Turkey is another country where a change in Israeli leadership might improve the atmosphere without resolving the disputes. There is an increasing view among Israeli policymakers that Ankara represents a threat to Israel and a potential new adversary. One concept is that even if Iran is defeated, Turkey will become the next enemy.

Relations between Ankara and Jerusalem have experienced repeated crises over the last two decades. Israel and Turkey both have had the same leader for most of the last two decades. Both leaders, Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Netanyahu, come from a more religious right-wing camp. Political change in either place could reduce tensions, but won’t end them.

Turkey's growing influence in Syria following the fall of the Assad regime in December 2024 has created another possible area of competition. Ankara wants a central role in shaping Syria's future, while Israel is concerned about threats emerging along its northern frontier.

Turkey may welcome a new Israeli government, particularly if it either country adopts less confrontational rhetoric. However, Ankara will continue pursuing its interests in Syria and across the region. This includes Ankara’s east Mediterranean policies. The challenge is whether Israel and Turkey can establish mechanisms to manage their competition and avoid a military confrontation.

Syria, Jordan and the region's wait-and-see approach

Syria illustrates why regional governments are likely to judge Israel by its actions rather than its election results.

The new government in Damascus is seeking to consolidate control over the country, rebuild the economy and strengthen ties with neighboring states. It considered warming ties with Israel in 2025. However, Israeli leaders have made clear that they are not interested in a deal. The last real progress toward a deal was in January with US support.  The Iran war has postponed any real focus on Syria. What has replaced strategy are IDF tactics along the border.  Israel has also focused on security threats in southern Syria and the protection of the Druze community. A different Israeli government might pursue a flexible diplomatic approach toward Damascus. However, Israel's security concerns along the Golan Heights will remain.

Jordan and Egypt face similar calculations. Both countries have maintained peace treaties with Israel through numerous changes of government. Their priorities include border security, regional stability, and preventing renewed conflict.

Jordan is particularly focused on developments in the West Bank and Jerusalem, while Egypt remains central to diplomacy over Gaza. Jordan considers itself tied to the status quo of the Holy Sites in Jerusalem, for instance. It was very critical of Israel at the United Nations General Assembly this year. Egypt’s president has sought to downplay tensions with Israel.

This reflects a broader reality across the Middle East. Governments may prefer certain changes in Israel, but they have learned to be more cynical and pessimistic about the chance for change.

The region is also increasingly focused on its own economic development, infrastructure projects, trade corridors and security partnerships. Israel is an important part of this region, but it does not determine every regional calculation. One concern countries have is that Israel’s current government has been lashing out and that it has ambitions to become a kind of regional hegemon. This may be driving Saudi Arabia and other countries to rethink their strategy.

In this sense, the Middle East's approach to Israel's elections is best described as “trust, but verify.” The region cares about the outcome, but it is not waiting for Israel to decide its future.

Follow us on Google

---