A Formidable Challenger
The former chief of staff of the Israel Defense Forces is, according to several recent opinion polls, now one of the most formidable challengers Benjamin Netanyahu has faced in years. Having broken away from Benny Gantz’s National Unity party to establish his own political movement, Eisenkot has rapidly become the standard-bearer for a broad swathe of Israelis who have grown weary of both Netanyahu’s seemingly endless tenure and the ideological trench warfare that has consumed Israeli politics.
That prominence in the polls – a recent one had him leading Netanyahu ahead of the next election – alone makes him worthy of attention. But Eisenkot is also an unusual political figure in other respects. He is a soldier who does not appear to relish political combat, a man widely regarded as personally decent in a political culture where accusations of corruption and cynicism have become almost routine, and a staunch conservative on matters of national security who is nevertheless regarded by many abroad as a centrist.
These are the essential ingredients that the Israeli left – Eisenkot considers himself a centrist – has failed to conjure up for years. Even when his opponents have been more popular on domestic issues, Netanyahu’s ownership of the security issue has been something they have always struggled to contend with. Now, they hope, they have a leader who can at least fight Bibi to a draw on the most existential issue in the Israeli firmament.
Discipline Rather Than Daring
The son of Moroccan Jewish immigrants, Eisenkot grew up in the southern city of Eilat and entered the army as a teenager, eventually spending almost four decades in uniform. Unlike some of Israel’s more flamboyant military commanders, he built his reputation less on daring exploits than on discipline, preparation and professionalism. Colleagues have long described him as methodical to the point of obsession – the sort of commander who had already read every briefing before anyone else entered the room.
He rose through the ranks of the famous – or infamous, in some circles – Golani Brigade. He fought in Lebanon and during both Palestinian uprisings, commanded Israel’s Northern Command and eventually became chief of the General Staff in 2015.
It was during that long military career that his name became associated with what came to be known as the Dahiya Doctrine, the theory that terrorist organizations embedded within civilian areas could only be deterred by overwhelming military force directed against the infrastructure from which they operated. Eisenkot himself has always insisted that decisive military action and adherence to international law are not mutually exclusive.
A Netanyahu Opponent, But Not a Dove
One of the curiosities of Eisenkot’s political rise is the tendency of foreign observers to assume that opposition to Netanyahu must necessarily imply dovish instincts. Yet on questions of Israeli security, Hamas, Hezbollah or Iran, Eisenkot’s views differ more in tone and emphasis than in ultimate direction. Few Israelis doubt that he would prosecute a war vigorously if he believed one was necessary.
That reputation for seriousness has only been reinforced by personal tragedy. In December 2023, Eisenkot’s son, Gal, was killed fighting Hamas in Gaza. Two nephews also lost their lives during the conflict. In a country where military service is almost universal, such sacrifices carry significant moral weight. Even political opponents rarely question Eisenkot’s motives or patriotism. He has paid a price for Israel’s security that few politicians, anywhere, could claim to have borne.
Ironically, that may also explain his political appeal. Israeli voters have endured years of polarization, repeated elections, corruption trials, constitutional disputes and, finally, the greatest security failure in the country’s modern history. There is a discernible appetite for competence over charisma, sobriety over spectacle.
Whether Eisenkot possesses the political instincts required to translate public respect into electoral victory remains an open question.
Yet there is something quietly compelling about him. He does not appear to enjoy politics in the way many politicians do. He rarely indulges in theatrical rhetoric or personal abuse. His speeches are more likely to sound like operational briefings than campaign rallies. In another era, such qualities might have been regarded as electoral liabilities, or at least as stiffness. In today’s Israel, they may prove to be precisely what many voters are looking for.
It is often said that democracies elect the leaders they deserve. Sometimes they elect the leaders they believe they need. After years of drama, many Israelis appear to be looking for something rather less exciting: competence, restraint and a man whose life suggests that public service is more than simply another career. Those qualities – combined with Netanyahu’s well-trodden vulnerabilities – might make Eisenkot the most formidable challenger Israel’s seemingly eternal prime minister has faced in years.
