The conventional left–right political spectrum in many countries is principally about economic policy. In Israel, however, the dividing lines are dominated by positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: whether to accept a Palestinian state, withdraw from territory occupied in 1967, and how to address settlements and military control.
Historical shift in priorities
For much of Israel’s early history the dominant parties combined nationalist aims with social-democratic economic policies. The watershed moment came after the 1967 war, when Israel’s control of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem forced political debate to focus on questions of territory and occupation. Over subsequent decades those questions — about land, security and the rights of Palestinians — came to shape party identities and voter loyalties more than tax or welfare policy.
What defines the 'right' and the 'left' now
Parties and politicians described as 'left' in Israel tend to favour negotiations with the Palestinians, support territorial compromise and are more willing to countenance the creation of a Palestinian state as a way to end the occupation. Those cast as 'right' generally oppose large-scale territorial concessions, back the expansion or retention of settlements in the occupied territories, and prioritise security measures and Israeli sovereignty concerns. Religious and nationalist movements have pushed the political centre of gravity on these issues toward the right in recent decades.
Economics and other issues play a secondary role
Economic policy — debates over markets, regulation and welfare — still matters in Israeli politics, but it does not neatly map onto the left–right labels as it might elsewhere. Parties that are socially conservative and nationalistic can embrace varied economic platforms, and coalition politics mean fiscal positions often adapt to pragmatic needs. Other cleavages, such as secular–religious divisions and attitudes of Israel’s Arab citizens, also intersect with the occupation question and further complicate simple left–right categorisation.
Consequences for elections and governance
Because the occupation and the future of the territories are central to political identity, election campaigns and coalition building often pivot on security and diplomatic stances rather than traditional economic arguments. That makes the left–right axis in Israel particularly fluid: a party’s economic programme may change to accommodate partners, but its stance on Palestinian statehood and the occupied territories tends to be the enduring marker of where it sits on the spectrum.