JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political camp emerged from Israel’s general election ahead of its opponents but without enough seats to command a parliamentary majority, according to final results released on October 30, 2026. The outcome leaves his prospects for another term dependent on coalition-building rather than the electoral lead alone, with difficult negotiations ahead and another election a possibility if no governing arrangement can be reached.

Netanyahu’s grouping of right-wing and far-right parties secured 53 seats in the 120-seat Knesset. His Likud party took 27 seats, retaining its position as the largest parliamentary faction. The opposition bloc headed by centrist Gadi Eisenkot won 48 seats. Those results establish Netanyahu’s advantage over the main opposition grouping, but also the central limitation of that advantage: neither camp emerged with a majority, and the prime minister’s existing bloc remains well short of one.

The distinction between finishing first and assembling a government is therefore central to the result. Likud’s position gives Netanyahu the largest individual party in parliament, while the broader alignment around him also leads Eisenkot’s bloc. Neither measure, however, resolves the question of parliamentary support for a government. For Netanyahu, securing a majority would mean turning an electoral lead into a governing arrangement that reaches beyond the seats already held by his camp.

Read more: Binance reports $6.3 billion breach impact as asset freezes widen

Likud’s 27 seats also underline why the party’s result cannot be read in isolation from those of its allies. The larger figure of 53 represents the combined strength of Netanyahu’s political camp, not support for Likud alone. Even with those allied parties included, the grouping lacks a majority. Securing a majority through coalition talks would consequently require more than preserving the existing alignment: Netanyahu’s bloc would need support beyond its current parliamentary strength.

Eisenkot faces a different version of the same problem. His opposition bloc finished behind Netanyahu’s camp with 48 seats, leaving it unable to form a majority on that strength alone. Opposition to another Netanyahu term does not, by itself, settle how an alternative government could be assembled. For Eisenkot, the result makes the question of possible partners particularly important: an alternative majority arrangement would have to extend beyond the opposition grouping reflected in the final tally.

That question was already drawing public pressure before the final results were released. On October 29, protesters gathered outside Eisenkot’s home in Herzliya, urging the Yashar party leader to build a coalition with Israel-Arab parties rather than allow Netanyahu another term. The demonstration put a specific potential route to an alternative government into public view. It also directed demands at Eisenkot, making his approach to coalition-building a focus alongside the parliamentary position of Netanyahu’s camp.

Read more: 2021 federal deficit fell $360 billion as recovery lifted revenue

The protesters’ demand and Netanyahu’s electoral lead point to distinct considerations in the contest over what follows. Netanyahu’s camp holds more seats than Eisenkot’s bloc, while the demonstrators want the opposition leader to pursue a broader arrangement to prevent the prime minister from continuing in office. The demonstration establishes that demand, not an agreement among potential partners. Whether such an arrangement could be negotiated remains a separate question from the preference expressed outside Eisenkot’s home.

The figures likewise do not turn either bloc’s preferred outcome into a settled result. The 53 seats held by Netanyahu’s camp are insufficient for a majority, but the opposition’s smaller tally does not resolve the government-formation question in Netanyahu’s favour. To command a majority, either side would need to secure support beyond its existing alignment. The election has established the relative strength of the competing camps; it has not supplied either with a parliamentary majority.

Coalition negotiations will now test whether those electoral positions can be translated into a workable governing arrangement. Netanyahu enters that process with both the leading bloc and the largest party, while Eisenkot faces public calls to pursue cooperation with Israel-Arab parties. Those are starting positions rather than completed agreements. The available routes depend on parties reaching terms, and the results alone cannot establish which potential partners would be willing to support a government or on what basis.

Another vote remains a possible outcome if coalition-building fails. For now, the final tally supports a narrower conclusion than a decisive victory for either side: Netanyahu’s camp finished ahead, but its lead did not deliver control of parliament. Eisenkot’s bloc remains behind and also lacks a majority on its own. The next stage will turn on whether negotiations can bridge those limitations, with the election result leaving both the leadership and composition of the next government unresolved.