Gadi Eisenkot is not known for outstanding communication skills or for a political style resembling that of Benjamin Netanyahu. With the appearance of a stern general who also carries the pain of family losses during the war in Gaza, he presents himself as a figure entirely different from the leader he seeks to replace.
The former chief of the Israeli military, who lost his son and two grandchildren in Gaza, has entered the race for prime minister with the aim of bringing an end to Netanyahu’s long era. His seriousness, reserve and lack of political flamboyance may prove to be his greatest advantage.
Të lidhura
None found
Behind the image of a moderate opponent of Netanyahu, however, stands a military man with a controversial past and links to some of Israel’s harshest operations.
Gadi Eisenkot is 66 years old.
The road from Tiberias to army command
Eisenkot was born in Tiberias. His parents had emigrated to Israel from Marrakesh and Casablanca in Morocco, while he grew up in Eilat, the port city in the south of the country.
He joined the army at the age of 18 and built a long military career that eventually took him to the position of chief of the General Staff. He held that post from 2015 to 2019.
His social background is an important part of how he is perceived publicly. While Netanyahu comes from a privileged Ashkenazi Jewish family, Eisenkot is of Mizrahi origin, a term encompassing Jews whose roots are in the Middle East and North Africa.
For some voters, he is seen as a more authentic representative of this community. Netanyahu has sought to use the discontent of Mizrahi Jews politically, while Eisenkot is perceived as a direct part of this social group.
After retiring from the military, he followed the path of many former senior Israeli officers and entered politics. Following Hamas’s attacks on October 7, 2023, Eisenkot joined the national unity government, but later became one of Netanyahu’s main opponents.
Three family losses during the war
The war in Gaza directly affected Eisenkot’s family. In December 2023, his son, Gal Eisenkot, was killed in Jabalia, in northern Gaza, while taking part in a military operation.
Just one day later, he suffered another loss: his grandson, Maor, was also killed. In November 2024, around eleven months later, his other grandson, Yogiyev Pazi, lost his life in Gaza.
These three deaths have had a powerful impact on Eisenkot’s political identity and have reinforced the perception of him as a man who has personally experienced the cost of war.
Many Israelis associate his tired appearance and restrained manner with the tragedy he has endured. This portrait contrasts with the relatively luxurious lifestyle of the Netanyahu family, which critics regard as disconnected from the difficulties facing Israeli society.
Both his supporters and his opponents use two Yiddish words to describe him. “Menschy” refers to an honest person with integrity, while “schlumpy” is used for someone with an untidy and not particularly elegant appearance.
The Dahiya Doctrine and the record of military operations
The portrait of a moderate politician does not encompass his entire past. Eisenkot is considered the architect of the “Dahiya Doctrine,” a strategy associated with the use of disproportionate force and the large-scale destruction of populated areas and infrastructure in order to pressure the opponent.
The doctrine takes its name from Dahiya, a neighborhood in the southern suburbs of Beirut that was heavily destroyed during the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah.
In that conflict, for which Eisenkot is credited with devising the strategy, Israeli operations caused the deaths of 1,109 people in Lebanon. Around 860 of them were civilians.
During the period when he led the Israeli military, Eisenkot oversaw operations in Gaza and the West Bank, extensive airstrikes against Iranian targets, as well as the supply of weapons to rebels fighting the regime in Syria.
Distance from the far right and political difficulties
Although he served in the same government as Netanyahu, Eisenkot was reportedly deeply dissatisfied with sharing power with far-right ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.
However, opposition to the far right does not automatically mean that he possesses the political flexibility needed to form a broad government.
He took charge of the opposition coalition only a few days before the October 27 elections, at a time when the alliance was suffering from unclear messaging and a lack of coordination.
Today, his political challenge is even more complicated.
The coalition he must build
President Isaac Herzog gave Eisenkot the mandate to form a government. He has 28 days at his disposal and may also receive a 14-day extension to secure a parliamentary majority.
To achieve this objective, Eisenkot may be forced to negotiate with ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties, which have traditionally been Netanyahu’s allies. Another possibility is securing outside support from Arab political forces.
United Torah Judaism, the ultra-Orthodox party that refused to support Netanyahu, is expected to demand, as a condition, the preservation of the de facto exemption from military service for ultra-Orthodox young men.
Parties representing Israel’s Palestinian citizens are expected to demand measures against crime in their communities and an end to settler violence in the West Bank.
Aida Tuma-Suleiman, a lawmaker from the left-wing Hadash party, believes Eisenkot may choose a compromise with the religious parties rather than be seen as dependent on Arab votes.
“He appears much more willing to compromise with the ultra-Orthodox religious parties, particularly on the military service law, than to risk being seen as dependent on Arab support,” she said.
Relations with Washington and Netanyahu’s legacy
Even if he forms a government, Eisenkot will face one of the most difficult moments in Israel’s relations with the United States.
Following the war in Gaza and the conflict involving the United States, Israel and Iran, Israel’s image in American public opinion has been significantly damaged. Netanyahu is accused of exerting decisive influence on Donald Trump to initiate the conflict with Iran.
On the eve of the U.S. midterm elections, in which Republicans suffered historic losses, Trump announced that he would cut off the annual $3.8 billion military aid to Israel after the end of the year.
Several Republican officials, including Vice President J.D. Vance, attributed part of the electoral defeat to the war with Iran.
Aaron David Miller, a senior fellow at the independent Carnegie Endowment, says negative attitudes toward Israel have now become entrenched in American society.
“Essentially, since 2023, the public has been looking at the region as though it were presented with two images on a split screen. On one side is the massacre caused by Hamas on October 7, and on the other are the deaths and destruction caused by Israel in response,” he explains.
“In the eyes of many people, Israel is no longer David, but Goliath,” Miller adds.
For Eisenkot, who does not feel particularly comfortable during public appearances and avoids speaking English, restoring trust in relations with the United States will be an extraordinary challenge.
“Eisenkot is perhaps facing the most difficult American political environment any Israeli prime minister has ever had to deal with,” Miller says.
Will policy change, or only the leader?
Eisenkot is running for prime minister at a time when a large part of Israeli society is seeking a different figure to lead the country.
His personal history, profound family losses and restrained public demeanor have shaped his profile as “anti-Bibi”—a politician seeking to move away from Benjamin Netanyahu’s style and practices.
But the divide between the two becomes less clear when the issue shifts from domestic politics to Israel’s military approach.
Eisenkot is not a figure who has followed wars from government offices. He is a general who took part in planning and carrying out operations that caused a high human toll.
This part of his career raises questions about whether the political change many Israelis expect will also be accompanied by a change in the way Palestinians are treated.
Ultimately, Eisenkot may be Netanyahu’s political opponent, but he comes from the same military system that has helped shape Israeli policy for decades.
