A change in Israeli government will not stop settlements, but voting and elections still matter for Palestinian representation
Source: Diana Buttu. "A New Israeli Government Won’t Stop the Settlements." October 24, 2026. jacobin.com
The Gist
Buttu argues that swapping Israel's prime minister won't end settlements, because the whole political mainstream backs them. Still, getting rid of the most extreme figures could lessen the harm, and voting is worth it for the representation it gives. She makes a similar case for Palestinian elections: they can't produce real democracy under occupation, but they can challenge Abbas's unchecked rule and let Palestinians choose their own leaders.
Conclusion
Replacing Netanyahu's government is unlikely to end the settlements or change the structural system of Israeli control, but it is still worth pursuing, and Palestinians should still vote and hold their own elections, because representation matters even without real democracy.
Premises
- Israel's main political parties, not only Netanyahu's government, broadly oppose Palestinian statehood and have supported policies toward Palestinians, so a new prime minister would not stop the settlements.
- Figures such as Ben-Gvir, Smotrich, Netanyahu and Eliyahu have pushed especially harmful policies, including normalizing torture, arming civilians, killing Palestinians and rhetoric about making Gazans suffer, so removing them could reduce the harm, even if only slightly.
- Israel is not a true democracy: it gives Jews worldwide the right to immigrate while denying Palestinian refugees return, and Palestinian citizens are not fully equal (for example in land purchase), so the right to vote does not remove the state's racist or apartheid character.
- Voting is still worthwhile because it gives Palestinian citizens a representative of their own, and representation supports sumud (steadfastness), meaning the ability to remain on the land rather than emigrate.
- Palestinian elections matter because Abbas has ruled by decree for years beyond his term, and elections could challenge unchecked presidential rule and let Palestinians choose their leaders instead of Israel or Abbas choosing them, even though real democracy cannot exist under occupation.
Assumptions
- Participation in a system one regards as illegitimate can be pragmatic and does not amount to endorsing it.
- Marginal reductions in harm are worth pursuing even when structural change is unlikely.
- Representation, even symbolic or limited, helps Palestinians remain on their land and resist emigration.
- Removing the most extreme figures would reduce the harm done to Palestinians in practice.
- Leadership renewal in the PA is valuable even though the PA has little power on the ground.
- Israel benefits from Abbas's weakness and opposes Palestinian elections.