Would he? Could he? How Netanyahu might delay Israel’s next election

Israeli democracy is on borrowed time. After years of incremental erosion, the democratic backslide is no longer theoretical. It is happening. And if we do not confront this moment with the seriousness it demands, we may soon find ourselves waking up in a country where elections are no longer free, fair, or guaranteed.

Benjamin Netanyahu has shown the world that he will do anything to stay in power. He has attacked the judiciary, undermined the press, demonized civil society, and attempted to hollow out the checks and balances that keep authoritarianism at bay. He is now trying to fire the last gatekeepers of Israeli democracy. His judicial overhaul plan ignited mass protests in 2023 because millions of Israelis understood something fundamental: democracy does not disappear overnight. It dies slowly, often at the hands of elected leaders who chip away at its foundations while claiming to defend it.

As political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt make clear in How Democracies Die, democratic erosion does not begin with tanks in the streets. It begins with the incremental normalization of anti-democratic behavior, with leaders who exploit institutions for personal gain and test how far they can go before the public or their peers push back. Netanyahu has been testing those limits for years. Now, even though Israel’s next general election is not due until 2026, we must ask an uncomfortable but necessary question: would he try to delay the vote? And if so, could he?

The question is deeply tied to the ongoing war. The conflict, triggered by Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attacks on southern Israel, has become the justification for a prolonged state of emergency, with Netanyahu refusing ceasefires and declaring a commitment to indefinite warfare. The longer the war continues, the more he can argue that now is not the time to hold elections.

It may sound alarmist. But it is not implausible. In fact, it is already being floated.

Scenario One: The Hebrew calendar loophole

Netanyahu’s allies have already explored the idea that the next election might not need to happen until 2027. How? By exploiting a quirk in the Hebrew calendar.

According to Israel’s Basic Law: The Knesset, elections must be held at least every four years. The law specifies that elections should take place not later than the third Tuesday of the Hebrew month of Cheshvan in the fourth year following the previous election. The last election was held on November 1, 2022 – which corresponded with the 7th of Cheshvan, 5783.

Following this rule, the next scheduled election would fall, at latest, on the 16^th of Cheshvan 5787, according to the Jewish calendar – namely, October 27, 2026. However, since the Hebrew calendar year is shorter than the Gregorian year, some members of Netanyahu’s coalition have argued that the law could be interpreted differently – that elections should take place only after a full four Hebrew years have passed from the previous election. By that logic, the next election would not be held in Cheshvan 5787, but rather in Cheshvan 5788, pushing the vote to as late as November 9, 2027. This reading of the law would effectively grant the current government a fifth year in office.

This interpretation was so audacious that the Knesset’s legal adviser had to issue a formal opinion rejecting it. The law, she said clearly, does not allow the government to extend its term to five years unless it passes a special law with an 80-MK supermajority and justifies the move based on extraordinary circumstances, like war.

But the fact that Netanyahu’s camp even floated the idea is telling. It is a signal. A test balloon. A reminder that when power is your sole objective, the calendar is just another obstacle to manipulate.

Scenario Two: Wholesale overhaul of election laws

Netanyahu’s coalition controls 64 seats in the 120-member Knesset. To extend the term of the Knesset beyond four years, a supermajority of 80 MKs must agree to rewrite the Basic Law: The Knesset to redefine how often elections need to be held. That is a high bar – one designed to prevent abuse. But it’s not insurmountable.

Netanyahu could seek to cobble together a legislative coalition – including parts of the opposition – by invoking a national unity narrative or warning that a leadership change during a time of crisis would be reckless. And here is where the ongoing war becomes central: Netanyahu could argue that as long as the war continues, Israel cannot afford the disruption and uncertainty of an election. He could also use carrots and sticks: political appointments, budget allocations, or threats of early dissolution to pressure parties into compliance. This would be controversial and could provoke a constitutional crisis, but Netanyahu has already shown his willingness to push Israel into such crises to preserve his rule.

Importantly, none of this requires the use of emergency powers or the official declaration of a state of war. This scenario hinges on legislative gamesmanship and political incentives – and on the continued framing of the conflict as an ongoing national emergency that precludes democratic turnover.

Scenario Three: Wartime justification for legal extension

Unlike the previous scenario, this route involves a direct legal extension of the Knesset’s current term under Article 9A of Israel’s Basic Law: The Knesset. This clause permits delaying elections in “special circumstances” such as war  – but again, only with the approval of 80 MKs and, in this case, only for a strictly limited period. The precedent is clear: during the Yom Kippur War of 1973, Knesset elections were delayed by two months following the surprise attack on Israel. A special law was passed, supported by both coalition and opposition.

More recently, in October 2023, municipal elections across the country were postponed following the Hamas attacks and the beginning of Israel’s war in Gaza. The government justified the delay as necessary given the security and logistical challenges posed by active warfare.

The danger now is that Netanyahu will apply this same logic to the national level. By prolonging the war against Hamas indefinitely – by ensuring no clear plan for postwar governance in Gaza, rejecting ceasefires, and keeping the country in a constant state of mobilization – he creates the very “special circumstances” needed to justify delaying elections. The longer the war continues without a defined end, the stronger his argument becomes that Israel simply cannot change leadership at such a delicate time.

This is not merely theoretical. It is already part of his rhetoric. Netanyahu has insisted again and again that the war must continue “until total victory,” with no timetable, no off-ramp, and no endgame. If the public and the Knesset accept this framing, then the conditions for legally delaying the election could fall into place.

Scenario Four: Emergency powers and technical delays

A fourth and more subtle avenue involves the use of emergency powers. Under Israeli law, the government can enact emergency regulations during a time of national crisis. While these regulations cannot override Basic Laws directly, they can influence election logistics: delaying voter registration, limiting political gatherings, or postponing the vote for security reasons.

This is a more indirect form of electoral delay, one that would likely begin as a short postponement – a matter of weeks, perhaps justified by localized fighting or missile threats. But once the precedent is set, it becomes easier to repeat. A second delay could follow. Then a third. All the while, Netanyahu could insist that he is acting not to subvert democracy, but to protect it.

What differentiates this from the prior scenarios is its incrementalism. No sweeping legislation. No dramatic announcements. Just a rolling crisis and a government that continues to govern without voter consent. And once again, the linchpin is the war. As long as it continues, the justification remains intact.

The time to prepare is now

This is not paranoia. This is preparation. Netanyahu has shown, time and again, that there is almost no line he won’t cross to hold onto power. He has attacked judges, rewired ministries, and bent laws to delay his own corruption trial. It would be naive to believe he would suddenly become a guardian of democratic tradition when the stakes are highest.

We must not wait to see if he tries to delay the election. We must actively prepare to stop it. Civil society must be alert and vocal, ready to mobilize against any legislative attempts to delay the vote. Opposition leaders must declare now that they will not support any such effort, under any pretense. Legal experts, retired justices, and former heads of the Central Elections Committee must speak out clearly about the constitutional red lines. And the international community must watch closely. If Israel’s democratic character is to mean anything, its elections must happen on time.

The clock is ticking. The infrastructure for democratic erosion is already in place. The question now is whether we will act in time – or whether, like so many others in history, we will only understand what we’ve lost after it’s too late.