Gaza Palestinians View Israeli Elections Through Lens of Existential Struggle
Translated & summarized from Arab48 by baba
Palestinians in Gaza view the Israeli Knesset elections with skepticism, seeing the parliament as a colonial structure and electoral participation as a tactical necessity rather than a strategic path to change. They observe the divisions between the Joint List and the United Arab List, criticizing the latter's bargaining approach and acknowledging the limitations of the former's opposition. While recognizing the need for civil engagement within the Israeli system to protect daily life, Gazans caution against "soft Israelization" and emphasize that the true Palestinian struggle lies outside the Knesset, confronting the broader colonial project.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Gaza Palestinians view the Israeli Knesset as a colonial structure, not a path to genuine change.
- Electoral participation by Palestinian citizens of Israel is seen as a tactical necessity for daily survival.
- The United Arab List's bargaining approach is met with deep suspicion and criticism in Gaza.
- The Joint List is recognized as national opposition, but its parliamentary impact is deemed limited.
- Gazans caution against "soft Israelization" and functional integration into the Zionist regime.
- The true Palestinian struggle is seen as lying outside the Knesset, confronting the colonial project.
Palestinians in Gaza are observing the Israeli Knesset elections from behind the rubble of destruction and ongoing siege, viewing the political landscape with a critical lens. Their perspective is shaped by the chronic divisions and intense competition between the Joint List, comprising national and leftist parties, and the United Arab List, with its Islamic roots and coalition approach. This view is informed by the experiences of the 2021 elections and subsequent harsh developments, raising questions about Gazans' perception of this parliamentary game and the implications of the lack of comprehensive unity among Arab parties in Israel.
While Gazans understand the existential challenges faced by Palestinians within Israel, including systemic racism and organized crime, they largely do not endorse the parliamentary mechanism. They view the Knesset as a colonial Zionist structure designed to negate Palestinian existence rather than enable change. Electoral participation is seen as a purely tactical tool for defending daily life, not a strategy for salvation, with the understanding that any Arab parliamentary representation will remain constrained by the dominant Zionist equation.
The division between the Joint List and the United Arab List is interpreted in Gaza as stemming from a deeper identity and strategic crisis within the Palestinian political elite in Israel. The United Arab List's approach of parliamentary bargaining, led by Mansour Abbas, is met with deep suspicion and bitterness in Gaza. This strategy of trading national rights for civil budgets and services faced its harshest ethical and political failure amid the recent war. The Joint List, conversely, is seen as a genuine national opposition line, but Gaza recognizes the inherent limitations of the Israeli parliamentary platform in protecting Palestinian lives or curbing the war machine.
Merging the Joint List and the United Arab List is considered impossible, as it would pit a movement prioritizing radical opposition and rejection of Zionism against one focused on administrative integration and compromise. Gaza harbors no illusions that a unified Arab list would cause a political earthquake, as the Knesset has proven adept at marginalizing any significant Arab bloc. However, the current division is seen as a drain on struggle energy, diverting the battle from confronting the racist project to narrow party power struggles.
Gazans acknowledge the necessity of civil engagement within the enemy's system, such as municipalities and the Knesset, to protect land, identity, and prevent displacement. However, they caution against mistaking daily necessity for strategic illusion. The real danger lies in "soft Israelization," where tactical engagement becomes functional integration, as exemplified by Mansour Abbas's trade-off of national rights for meager service budgets, turning Arab representation into a cosmetic tool for the Zionist regime.
The war on Gaza is understood not as solely Netanyahu's doing but as a military and security doctrine agreed upon by the entire Israeli establishment in response to the October 7th shock. Opposition parties largely agree on the objective of "crushing Gaza," differing only on tactics and prisoner negotiations. While removing Netanyahu might not end the settlement project or alter "day after" plans, Gazans see his potential ouster and any Israeli political process involving Palestinian citizens of Israel as a possible window to alleviate the war's intensity and daily death toll, even if the overarching Zionist institutional framework remains unchanged.
The strategic conclusion from Gaza's perspective is that absolute reliance on change through the Knesset is a structural mirage. Palestinians in Israel and Gaza share a geography of Israeli erasure and oppression, albeit with different tools and circumstances. While daily necessity compels Palestinians within Israel to engage in a struggle for survival under a dominant system, the true compass of Palestinian struggle remains outside the Knesset's walls, rooted in shared blood, destiny, and historical confrontation with the entire colonial project, rather than attempting to beautify the conditions of living under it or reforming it from within.