Benjamin Netanyahu put forward the case for deepening ties with India and Latin American nations, arguing that shifts in US leadership could reshape the diplomatic landscape in ways that affect Israel's standing. Those comments came as he laid out his security policy framework, with a vote set to take place nine days later.
The remarks came only hours before Donald Trump declared his support for Netanyahu's bid to remain in office. Netanyahu separately raised the question of how Israel should respond if a future president — of any gender — adopted a policy stance less aligned with the country's interests than the current one.
Addressing the audience, Netanyahu argued that the years ahead under the current US administration represented an opening that needed to be exploited to bolster Israel's standing, adding — in his own words — that every effort had to be made across both the near and subsequent two-year periods within the American arena, through favourable conditions and difficult ones alike.
Addressing reporters, Netanyahu outlined a two-part strategic vision: broadening ties with a wider range of international partners while reducing reliance on any single country for support. Engagement with counterparts across the region and beyond it, he said, forms the focus of present efforts.
"The population and geopolitical weight of that nation leave room for partnerships with a range of other countries," he noted. Netanyahu pointed to political developments across Latin America as an area where expanding diplomatic ties warranted attention, and told those present that Brazil stood on the verge of a potentially substantial electoral transformation within days — a shift he said underscored the case for widening Israel's network of partnerships and building capabilities that other nations would find worth engaging with.
On multiple occasions, Netanyahu has pointed to India's expanding role in global affairs and his personal rapport with Prime Minister Narendra Modi as indicators that Israel retains meaningful diplomatic partnerships. With global attention fixed on the ongoing conflict, Netanyahu told fellow leaders in May that the relationship with India occupied a distinct place, citing what he described as widespread warmth toward Israel among ordinary Indian people.
Those remarks reflect an inclination, as Netanyahu has expressed it, to cultivate relationships beyond Washington's political orbit, at a time when divisions along party lines within the United States have raised questions about how reliably Congress will continue to back Israel. A number of analysts based in Israel have pointed to Netanyahu's long-running political decisions as a factor behind what they describe as a drift away from the Democratic Party.
Tensions marked his dealings with Democratic presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden on a recurring basis. According to some political observers, Netanyahu framed those clashes for his base as proof that he had been willing to push back against American presidents in order to protect what he described as Israeli national interests. Observers who track his political messaging note that the tactic has woven itself into the fabric of his electoral campaigns over time, reinforcing how he is perceived among those who support him.
No other individual has held the office of Israeli prime minister for as long as Netanyahu.
Gadi Eisenkot, who is expected to run against Netanyahu in the upcoming election, challenged the security doctrine's presentation on the grounds that it served electoral purposes rather than constituting a genuine national security policy — noting that it was unveiled nine days before voters go to the polls and three years after what he characterised as the worst intelligence failure in the country's history, with several active fronts still unresolved. He contended that the document contained little beyond slogans and left the country's security needs unaddressed, adding that its two pages exposed what he described as a strategic void at the heart of Netanyahu's leadership and an indifference toward the safety of Israeli citizens.
Eisenkot, a former chief of staff of the Israel Defence Forces, alleged that Netanyahu was deploying pre-election messaging to heighten public unease and influence how voters see the political landscape — conduct he framed as a pattern of misrepresenting facts, amplifying anxiety, and directing attention away from what he described as a campaign grounded in falsehoods and prejudice.
With the October 27 vote drawing near, the exchange lays bare a widening rivalry over how the country should handle its defence posture, foreign ties, and who ought to be steering them.
